Dear Google's social overlords,
Google +1 sounds interesting, but who am I doing this for? Currently +1 only links to my "Google Profile." No one looks at Google Profiles. I wasn't completely sure how to even access mine. I managed to find it quickly in the top toolbar across Google/Gmail, but I had to go searching nonetheless. It is still non-obvious.
Because no one looks at these profiles, I have no reason to share, and because I do not share, no one will look at my profile. It's a classic chicken or the egg scenario. Even beyond that, I and many others will question the point of sharing via +1 when everyone I know is already on Facebook.
Don't make the next Zune
Don't attack existing markets with high quality alternatives. Alternatives need compelling forces to alter behavior and existing usage. Case in point: the Zune. Microsoft's Zune was a fantastic mp3 player. By generation 2 and definitely by Zune HD I would argue that it was the best mp3 player on the market. It's too bad that 1) mp3 players were already passe 2) most mp3 consumers were previous iPod owners and were deeply ingrained into the Apple ecosystem. It's not enough to be comparable in an existing state of the market, because while you spent all that effort being comparable, the big and young guns were thinking about what's next, and you'll find yourself playing catch up all over again.
VCs love to abuse the phrase "skate to where the puck is going, not where it is." I don't know why they chose this phrase to express this idea. I thought only Canadians and Detroit/Colorado/Cornell cared about hockey? The "lead pass" is a common principle to almost all team sports. As the thrower, you lead the receiver by throwing the [ball] to where s/he is going. As the receiver you run to where the ball is going to be, you don't stay where you are. Basically, stay ahead of the curve, be a thought leader, and be a visionary. Easy stuff.
The reason this ideology is apt is because the web evolves so rapidly. In the web, invention doesn't just mean new ideas, it means new ideas replacing old ones. It means the supplanting of paradigms. Creative destruction is woven into the heart of the web. Value destruction is just as defining of a characteristic as value creation. By golly, that's exactly why Google is taking social so seriously.
So where is social going?
I repeat, Social wants to be Mobile.
The mobile web and the regular web aren't very compatible. The mobile web loads slower, yes, but it is technically smarter. It understands orientation, proximity and location and it can "see" and capture the world through images and video. And the big difference in interaction is that almost all of the mobile web is tangible [or at least is going to be, and that's what we're doing, remember? We are visionaries]. All of that loveliness that Apple orates to you about the iPad/iPhone can be applied to the mobile web. It's where technology gets out of the way, and you can just interact. Less friction, more social.
Luckily, you share custody of mobile.
If I were in your position and had the soon to be largest mobile OS in the world, I would absolutely take advantage of it. Your social effort should be deeply integrated into Android. When I say take advantage of Android, I do not mean just pre-install an app like Latitude or Places. Social should be a part of Android itself.
Android has a wonderful notification system that can be used to push all of these social notifications to users. Each Android phone is already linked to a google account so everything would already be unified.
The next big social effort should appreciate the beauty that is the mobile web. And should you Google social overlords decide to embark on the next big social effort, then that responsibility is yours.
If you're serious about her, then get exclusive.
You have so many services that are disparately social. Time to merge them all. Don't flirt around with a million different non-compatible implementations of social.
Google Reader, Calendar, Contacts are all examples of your products that contain social elements, that I would claim never took off socially. You can star things and share things in Reader but you can't +1? You can share notes in Reader, but you can't Buzz? It's all confusing and it's all disorganized. If you're seriously tying company wide bonuses into this next social effort, then this "next social" should be a part of all of Google. Actually that's not the reason that it should be. It should be because having different concepts of social is unsightly. Please make my web experience more beautiful.
Create a social experience worth sharing.
Social doesn't just mean being able to share. Social means wanting to share that you are sharing. It has to suck users in. It has to provide enough utility when used by a few, but become decidedly surreal when used by many.
What I think this means is concentrating on a few or even ONE specific thing that you do amazingly well. All the "likes" or "+1s" and data collection comes later. Being tracked online is the consequence that users accept, it's not what drives them to be social. Facebook did this exceptionally well with sharing photos, and Twitter with tracking celebrities. Find a niche, suck us in, and have a ball with our data once we're there.
Let's recap shall we:
- Social wants to be mobile.
- Luckily you have Android.
- If you're serious about social, then get exclusive.
- Create a social experience worth sharing.
Broad strokes, I know. Stay with me, Larry. More specific ideas will follow.
