Google isn't actually closed to anyone. And I know Google execs talked about Google Buzz being a model for the open social network. But the intention is clear: Google wants everyone to live, work, play and, most importantly, share from within its services. Sounds a little bit like Google's "frenemy," Apple, doesn't it?
Yet Google's apps don't so much work together as they each provide another link in a chain meant to encircle and enable us. We use Google's search engine to find stuff; Picasa to store, post and share photos (and video); Gmail for, well, mail; Google Chat for real-time conversations; Google Docs to create documents; Google Voice to manage phone calls; Google Reader to control the fire hose of RSS feeds, and other updates; YouTube to share and consume videos and Wave to – well, we're still trying to figure that one out.
Google's catalog of capabilities lack cohesion, even when one app can access another.
Basically, all of Google's services leverage the power its search engine, combining its results with the ever-present AdSense contextual ad integration technology.They never feel like the collection of apps in Apple iLife or Microsoft Office or exhibit the synchronicity of the iPhone OS and iTunes.
Buzz has a bit of this hive-mind mentality, but definitely borrows a lot more from Facebook's somewhat linear approach than it does from the intricate design of a spider's web.Gmail may be Google's most successful invention after Search, and putting Buzz inside of it – instead of making it live on its own like Wave – was a smart idea. Your e-mail inbox is a little like a newsfeed anyway, so having a Buzz tab with a real "newsfeed" of your latest updates from contacts is smart. Google wants people to see Buzz as dead simple to use, so you don't go out trolling for followers (Twitter) or finding friends (Facebook). Instead, they're based on your existing Gmail contacts. It's like a white-listed social network.
Once you have this set up, Google's Buzz tries to keep you in the Google circle of trust by allowing you to preview embedded links. Photos and video that may be part of a link you're sharing show up right inside the Gmail feed. This differs from Twitter, which sends people out of the site to various links. Inevitably, Buzz will look at lot more like Facebook, which also has a habit of bringing in content, whether it be posting on another user's wall, or newsfeeds with integrated photos and video.
Perhaps that's why Google didn't mention Facebook. Unlike Twitter, it's not listed or even shown as an icon on the Buzz intro page. I'd venture that's because Google perceives Facebook, with all of its on-page activity, chummy relationship with Microsoft and embedded chat functionality, as more of a threat than Twitter.
Twitter, despite its loyal following, isn't really given a lot of respect here. I love how Google execs said the "@" reply function is now popular on the web, as if Twitter didn't invent it. It's not that Google dislikes Twitter – they are integrating live Twitter feeds inside search results, after all – but there's something in the way Google introduced Buzz that almost seems to dismiss Twitter.
Not everything you do in the Buzz environment will occur within Gmail. Buzz touches Google's standard search results via the profiles feature. If you've built an official profile in Google Buzz, then people can see your updates by searching on your name. Buzz also extends out into the mobile space. Here Google layered on Latitude's "where you at" functionality, plus Google Maps, to make Buzz a localization powerhouse. People can see where you are, while you can see other Buzz activity in your area – all of it overlaid on a map.
Not surprisingly, user privacy issues have sprung up. Funny how people didn't even bother to ask those questions when they started using Facebook! Instead, they updated like crazy, posting personal and private information for the world to see – then discovered they didn't like it. Google front-loads public and private options in Buzz, helping to distinguish the two. I still expect users to over-share, however.
The larger question is whether or not Google's new paradigm for social interaction can succeed. My gut gives it a 50-50 chance. Google did choose well, putting Buzz inside a familiar app you already use (if you're on Gmail) all the time. But no one is really waiting for you to join them on Buzz. When you first sign up for Facebook, all those old friends and relatives already on it come out of the woodwork to greet you. It's actually kind of creepy. Still, Facebook is too firmly entrenched to be threatened by Buzz. I use Twitter too much to be objective about Buzz's ability to supplant it. On the other hand, most consumers still don't use Twitter, so Google probably doesn't really have to worry about it.
Buzz will roll out slowly over the next few weeks; many people will try it. But Facebook has had the benefit of thousands upon thousands of college students using it before most average consumer ever heard of it. How, exactly, will Buzz collect and energize a similar army of word-of-mouth marketers? Usually the best way is to reach out and engage the Web through various social networks. But then that defeats the purpose of Buzz, doesn't it?
