In eliminating the Twitterish bare-bones simplicity, Google stepped right splat into the opposite problem: dizzying complexity.
Why aren’t the incoming posts in simple chronological order, as they are on Twitter? (Answer: because every time someone comments on an older post, it pops back up to the top.)
You can connect Buzz to Twitter. but it’s a one-way, passive link: Your Twitter posts appear on Buzz — eventually — not vice versa. And there’s no Buzz-Twitter linkage of followers or replies.
Inconsistencies and poor design choices are everywhere. For example, a new message can be Public or Private (addressed to one particular Buzzer). but you don’t have that choice when you’re responding to a post — only when you’re creating one.
Google’s recommendation system, meanwhile, tries to help you sort through the tidal wave of conversation by automatically promoting or hiding messages according to what it thinks you’ll find useful. So you may suddenly start getting messages from people you’re not actually following (because people you are following have liked it or commented on it).
Conversely, messages that Google thinks aren’t that interesting get dumped at the bottom of the page, collapsed into tabs. unfortunately, they may include messages from your boss, best friend and lover.
Yet because it’s nicely integrated with Gmail and Google chat, because it has powerful and flexible features, Buzz will have its own following. Its complex design is a challenge that Google will have to overcome — but it’s not enough to be a Buzzkill.
Tags: bones, design choices, followers, inconsistencies, tidal wave