What is Google working on now? Here’s a partial list.

Eric Cattell, the Technical Lead of the Google+ Social Graph team, recently posted a list of 13 items that they’re considering improving/adding to Google+.  The list is:

  • Some way of having hierarchical or sub-circles or some way of doing set logic (This and this but not that).
  • Easier way of dragging people from one circle to another.
  • Reordering circles
  • Gets a little “clunky” sometimes, freezes up, etc..
  • “Sharing” your circle.
  • Filtering suggestion by high school / employer / etc…
  • Easier to reciprocate relationships
  • Too many random people following me, don’t want to block them, but don’t want to see them either.
  • Out of sync if you add someone from the top bar, they aren’t in the main page.
  • Lots of duplicates in suggestions
  • Inconsistent results in autocomplete.
  • Import groups from gmail, orkut, etc..
  • I want my vanity domain to work.

Of that list, what would you like to see most? I’m thinking that Circle sharing and Vanity URLs are near the top of my list, but all of those sound like solid additions.

Comments

  1. Its just a list, of ingoing Feedback!

    • Very true. However, it was culled from a much larger list, so these are items that they’re quite likely working on for a future release. Could be some good stuff.

  2. The vanity domain would be interesting. For now you can URL forward.

    Also, the idea of concentric circles, placing one circle inside another, was one of the first things I thought of when I joined. It just makes sense. You have your core, closest friends, then other friends outside of that, and finally a loose affiliation of acquaintances in the outer ring(s). Concentric circles is the obvious metaphor for that.

    It would also make sharing to multiple circles easier if such a dependence existed. Rather than manually selecting “best friends” and “acquaintances,” it should automatically post to best friends if you select acquaintances (unless you manually specify otherwise, for whatever reason).

Leave a Reply