• http://www.superrankings.com Kerr

    I think that despite the number of Google sign ups it will be hard to over take Facebook. I see even technically challenged friends of mine on Facebook, who have no idea to set up a Google account and then a profile and use all their features. The have no desire to move to Google.

    I see most of the people on there so far are using it like a more user-friendly Linked In to network for business purposes. I think they will have a hard time prying the personal side of Facebook away from Facebook.

  • http://nicopretorius.wordpress.com/ Nico Pretorius

    Google+ should not try to compete against Facebook or Twitter, they are too entrenched and it will take a LOT more than what Google+ can offer for people to move. They should rather incorporate Google Docs into Google+ as soon as possible and aim it at companies where project groups can use Google+ to work together on a project. It will give them a nice niche market to play in, and in time will give it the same active user count as Facebook. Don’t try and be a social network, try and be something else.

  • dirk

    Yes, statistics are tricky. Numbers are flying around. It is not simple to select the correct ones, especially in a case like this where huge financial interest are playing.
    Google has certainly a need to present Google+ as a fast growing success, while the completion has an interest in presenting it as a total failure.
    I don’t know about active user, but if this is correct
    there was a spectacular traffic increase not long ago.

  • http://AboutUs.org/KristinaWeis Kristina Weis

    The thing that’s always made me think less of Google+ sign up numbers is how easy it is to “sign up” for it if you already have a Gmail account. I think I just got an email that said someone had added me on Google+, I clicked a link to see what was up, and voila! I was now on Google+ without going through the normal sign up process that you have to do on Twitter or Facebook. These unintentional sign ups don’t feel as credible, and those people are probably less likely to be active later on.

  • http://google.com Agam Panwar

    Once again Google team proved that they know how to play with the stats. Being more specific, the time spent per month is more valuable stat then the shared one but then team G might include the login time via GMail there…

    Anyways, I personally felt that Google+ would need more time to develop (if it didn’t failed like the other G projects). Best wishes :)

  • http://www.nathanielbailey.co.uk Nathaniel Bailey

    Well I dont think you can compare G+ with FB anyway as FB is the social network for everyone where as G+ (IMO) is more of a social network for more web savvy people such as SEO’s, webmasters and so on. But then again google clearly dont see G+ this way anymore because they are doing everything FB does such as games.

    As for Twitters numbers, thats a number of active users that login to twitter correct? But does that also count people that dont login to twitter directly to post updates? For example, I have my blog auto post my new blog posts to twitter, so does that still count me as login in? The same question goes for the others I guess, as I use automated submissions for both twitter, FB & G+ just like many others do.

  • http://www.thisisjayslife.com Jay

    Google + has been out for what 3 to 4 months. Facebook for 6 or 7 years? You don’t get 800 million in a couple of months. The active users than check just “once a month” have grown tired of Facebook and only check it to talk to old friends or family. When my mom got on Facebook I then realized this is no longer cool, like when I left MySpace (RIP). I now use twitter and have become hooked on google +. People use their circles in some “interesting ways” and how youtube is connected makes it so easy to share hilarious videos with my circles. Not long before facebook isnt the cool kid in school.