Mobile Messenger Services Are A Mess

The IM sector is red hot again these days, as people turn to these services to replace the ridiculously overpriced SMS services offered by the carriers. RIM have managed to do this very successfully with their BBM messaging service, despite the fact that BBM is limited to Blackberry devices. For many, this is the number one reason to purchase a Blackberry. In the teen market this is currently the phone of choice.

Seeing the success that RIM has had with this strategy, Google and Apple have rushed to bring similar products to market.

Google's strategy is a bit confusing. Google Chat (or is it Google Talk?) has been developed into a great IM package that works across desktop and mobile, and includes video, SMS, group chat and more. Then along comes the Google+ mobile app and now we have Huddle, a very simple group chat app, built into the G+ app. Now I'm not technical, but why didn't Google just incorporate their existing IM package? Huddle has now been updated to include photo sharing, and simultaneously changed its name to Messenger. The problem with this service is that it's mobile only. For me, turning away from my desktop, with it's large ergonomic keyboard, to reply to a message on my phone, with it's tiny keyboard, is very frustrating. It makes no sense at all!

In early October (hopefully) Apple will release iOS5 into the wild, and one of the new features is iMesenger. I believe it will work across mobile and desktop, but will unfortunately be limited to Apple devices, which makes it pretty useless. I understand that the strategy is to turn each iPhone user into a salesperson: "Get an iPhone like mine and we can chat for free!" It hasn't worked with Facetime, and it won't work here. Really Apple, am I only allowed to be friends with people that also use Apple products? C'mon!

I'm not a Facebook fan, but at least they got this right. Well almost. Facebook Messenger works in the browser and in their mobile app, and now Facebook have launched a separate Messenger app for smartphones, which is a great idea, as you don't have to open the main app first. Are you listening Google? The problem: you can only chat with people you have friended on Facebook. I don't want all my work colleagues following my social activities on Facebook, but it would be useful if I could text them!

A number of startups have also attempted to gain some traction in this sector. Beluga was gaining in popularity, but Facebook bought them out, and created their Messenger service. Whatsapp has a big following, and it's not OS specific, but there is no desktop version available, so it's mobile only.

So what's the answer? Currently, I use Google Talk/Chat, Google+ Messenger, Facebook Messenger, Whatsapp, and when iOS5 comes out I'll also use iMessenger. With my Blackberry carrying friends I feel a bit left out, and have to hope they use Whatsapp. Of course, in an emergency, good old SMS is still available, but I would love to be able to move away from SMS entirely. Until one of these companies can build all this functionality into one app, I'm forced to keep using a combination, depending on whom I'm chatting with. What a mess!

And who owns the rights to the Messenger name anyway?

Thanks for reading.

My Take on Google Buzz

Many, many blogs have already commented on Google Buzz since it was unleashed upon the world on the 9th of February. I wanted to wait a while before chipping in with my 2c, so that I could get a feel for what Google might be trying to do with their latest release.

So, by now, most of the people that might read this blog have already tried Buzz for themselves, so I won't go into all the features. Instead, I want to look at what Buzz means to Google, and where Google is perhaps positioning Buzz. This is just my take on it, and is by no means official.

Google may have started out as an internet search company, but "as a business, Google generates the majority of its revenue by offering advertisers measurable, cost-effective and highly relevant advertising, so that the ads are useful to the people who see them as well as to the advertisers who run them." 

This business is dependent on people using the internet. The more page views, the more money Google makes. As simple as that. However, Google have not sat back and let nature take it's course. They are constantly developing new apps to make the internet experience ever more compelling, and they are looking at ways to make the internet an indispensable part of everyday life.

When people complained the internet was too slow for some of the apps Google was developing, they introduced their own browser to speed things up. Foreign languages a problem? Google have invested heavily in translation tools.

So where does Buzz fit in? Well Facebook has grown into the king of social networking, with in excess of 400 million users. Facebook offers the complete intenet experience for many users;  messaging, which is soon to grow into a full email service (if the rumours are to be believed), instant messaging, photo albums, real-time micro-blogging, and thousands of apps for games etc. Oh, and they also have the best system to stay in touch with your real-life friends available today. The problem for Google is that many of these people using Facebook aren't venturing out of it's "walled garden", and are thus avoiding the Google advertising that has infiltrated the rest of the internet. Google needs to be a player in the social networking game.

Of course, they do have Orkut, but that has not taken off in their home market, and the U.S. is where the real advertising dollars are. Google already have apps that compete very admirably against the individual aspects of Facebook, and then some, but currently they are very disjointed. And they had nothing in the real-time micro blogging arena at all.

With this background, Buzz starts to make sense. They took their most popular app, Gmail, and baked Buzz right in there. You couldn't miss it. They immediately had more than 140 million users! Privacy issues aside, straight out of the box, Buzz integrates very well with the other Google apps like Reader and Picasa, but not so well with the likes of Twitter and Friendfeed. There have also been a lot of complaints about the amount of 'noise'. Don't worry, these issues will get sorted out. Google is taking Buzz very seriously!

What excites me is the potential of Buzz. Google will get the real time problem with Twitter sorted out, and will add links to other sides too. Imagine Buzz a few months down the line, when it has become the go-to site for all your social networking needs. You'll link with your friends, both real and virtual, from sites all over the web, in one place. Facebook may resist, and are probably big enough to do it, but I foresee smaller sites agreeing to Google's terms in the hope that it'll drive more people their way.

So what else does Google need to do? Well, a lot of people have complained about the integration with Gmail. I say integrate more! I think that Google should have one main page with Profile, Reader, Contacts and Calendar, all together with Gmail/Buzz. In fact, I don't know why Google hasn't done this - maybe it is a speed issue. I would hate Gmail to slow down to Windows Live speeds! However, I think Profile needs to become an integral part of the Google experience. People maintain their profiles in other apps, why not Google. The Google Profile should be central to your on-line personality.

A lot of people have drawn comparisons between Buzz, Facebook and Twitter. For me, Twitter isn't even in the same league, and I wouldn't be surprised if their numbers dropped off significantly. If you consider what Google offers; email (Gmail), instant messaging (Gtalk) and micro-blogging (Buzz), it sounds very similar to Facebook. Add photo albums (Picasa), and you've got all the main elements. Then if you add Reader, Calendar, Tasks and Docs, you've got (in my mind) a Facebook killer! It may not all be under one roof like Facebook, but gradually we are seeing better integration between these products. The fight for our eyeballs is far from over, and I think that the consumer will benefit from the competition. For me, I love Gmail, I think Buzz compliments it well, and as long as they keep Farmville and the like out, I'll keep Buzzing!

Are You Ready To Do The Google Wave?

I’m a big fan of Google; like most people I use Search, but I also use Gmail, Calendar, Reader and Docs on a daily basis. I also use Picasa for quick viewing my photos, and Picasa Web Albums to share them on the internet. I use Google Maps, Earth and obviously Blogger.

There are other products that do the same thing, and I use some of those too, but I like the way that Google is starting to integrate these services. For example, when you use the face recognition feature in Web Albums, it offers a list of your contacts (just like Facebook’s photo tagging), and if you add someone new, it automatically adds that person to your contacts.

Contacts has now been given its own page, as well as being bundled with Gmail, which indicates Google has bigger plans for Contacts than just email.

Which brings us to Google Wave. If you haven’t heard about Google Wave yet, you can read about it here. In it’s simplest form, Google Wave is described as next generation email, or as Lars Rasumussen (one of the developers) put it, “Wave is what email would look like if it were invented today.”

But it’s so much more than that. Google Wave combines email and instant messaging, and offers them in real time. It also allows drag and drop functionality for adding photos to a ‘wave’, which then immediately become visible to the other participants in the wave. Oh, did I mention that any wave can have multiple participants? All you have to do to add people is drag them in from your Contacts list. If they’re on-line, indicated by a green dot, the wave will pop up in their in-box and they’ll be able to join the conversation. If they’re off-line, they’ll be able to open the wave and read it like an email, and doing so would bring the wave back to live status.

I can imagine that if you had a number of people commenting simultaneously it might become very busy; all this live action might take some getting used to.

So what is Google really trying to do? I see this as Google’s entry into social networking. Consider Facebook. Facebook has  a profile page and a list of Friends, Google also has a Profile page and its Contacts. Facebook allows sharing of photos and the facility to allow friends to comment, Google Wave does the same. Facebook shows which friends are on-line, and allows instant messaging. Google Wave has a dynamic combination of email and IM.

The major difference in their approach is push and pull. Google Wave requires one to ‘push’ the content to one’s friends; on Facebook one uploads content and relies on friends accessing (‘pulling’) it. Which system is better remains to be seen.

One of the common complaints is that there are too many ways to communicate on-line. I would love one communication tool. Facebook has a form of microblogging, photo sharing, IM and is soon going to add email. This must be a worry to Google. They already have email, IM and photo sharing, but Wave combines them into one application, adds Twitter integration, gaming, document collaboration (did I mention those?), and a lot more.

Will people want both services, or will people choose between them. At the end of the day, I think people will go with whichever service offers the cleanest, simplest user interface, and I fear Google Wave might be too complicated and confusing. It’ll certainly gain a lot of attention when it’s released later this year, and I can’t wait to give it a try.

Thanks for reading.

What's Up With Facebook?

I loved the idea of 'social networking'. I tried MySpace very early on, but it didn't do much for me because none of my friends were interested, and my account was inundated by spammers. Facebook is a different story, though. Their growth has been phenomenal, and I soon found a couple of people I know. Now people think you're strange if you don't have a Facebook page.

So what is it I like about 'social networking'. I like the idea of having a page that I can customise to reflect my personality and interests and I want to be able to share photos that friends can comment on. MySpace offers more customisation (colours etc), but Facebook offered these main features. And there was another thing; that little box where you could update your status. Some people hardly ever used this, or updated it once a week, or whenever something really major was happening in their lives.

And then along came Twitter. They took this 'status update' feature on it's own, called it micro-blogging, and created a new phenomenon of their own. And everyone was happy. Well not everyone apparently. The founder of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, saw the growing popularity of Twitter, and decided that that is what people really want.

A couple of facelifts later, and Facebook has changed completely. It used to be that the page people saw when they clicked on your name showed interesting stuff, like what books people were reading, what movies they had seen, or what music they were listening to. Now you see The Wall. All that other stuff is hidden away on another tab. Click on Home on your Facebook page, and what do you see. A very Twitter like stream showing the status updates from all your friends.

So Twitter took one aspect of Facebook, and made it a success. Now Facebook is trying to copy Twitter, and make the stream the focal point. How can they fix it? One of Facebook's faults has always been it's poor use of the available screen space. It has always been a very narrow, vertical website, not even utilising the full width of older 4:3 monitors. The other problem is there are too many tabs, and most just show different variations of the same thing. I say use that width to bring selected applications to the home page. The stream is fine, but include the bio, and apps like music, movies, books etc. Personally, I think there should only be 3 tabs; Home and Photo Albums, visible to anyone (decided by yourself) and Settings. That's it. Clean and simple. Then allow the users to position these frames as they like, around the main stream, and select their own colour schemes, to match their personalities. Oh, one other thing. Make the stream auto refreshing every few minutes. Now that would be a perfect.

Thanks for reading.