Why Google+ Failed: It Was a Pigpen Product, Not a Lucy Product

lucygoogle-20101112-053016pigpengoogle-20101112-053824Because I’ve blogged a rather long time, I now have the privilege to point back to things written long ago (as history is so prone to repeat itself).

For instance, five years ago, I shared my theory that the products Google constantly releases fall into two categories: the “Lucy Google” product or the “Pigpen Google” product.

I point to that earlier post because of the failure of Google+ as a product (but a failure that contains many products that IMHO, once freed from the social networking shackles of Google+ will be successful),

If you are wondering what I mean when I say, “failure of Google+”, I’m referring to this blog post by Bradley Horowitz, Google VP of Streams, Photos, and Sharing. While it doesn’t say, “Google+” is a failure, I promise, that is what it says. (Note to self: change title to VP of streams.)

Confession: Somewhere, I recall writing about my early belief that Google+ had the feel of a Lucy product. If I find it, I’ll link to it and explain why I was so wrong. And why I changed my mind after using it a few months.

LINK: “There are Two Googles: Pigpen Google and Lucy Google.”