Anyone Want to Check Out Google+? Sorry...

...sorry, you'll need an invite.

It's the tech world's version of the velvet rope. Companies such as Google hope that by limiting the number of people who can join their services -- like Google+, which is seen as Google's answer to Facebook -- they will be able drive up the buzz for those new sites.

A theory of human behavior is at work here: People want what they can't have. It's hard not to at least be curious what the new Google social network is like when every tech blogger on the Internet is writing about it.

There's ostensibly a technical component, too. If not everyone can join at once, there's less chance the site will crash.

But there's a quiet backlash brewing against this cool-kids method to website launches. Not only do people feel left out, but this exclusivity-builds-interest model also has a track record that's far from perfect.

More from CNN Tech.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

stupid answer

if they gave the invites to famous people or some other desirable group, then I could see this having an impact... but ask for an invite and someone sends you one... (or did on Tuesday, until they closed it)..

the appeal of Facebook was that it was really exclusive, college students only, and Ivy leaguers... that's why everyone wanted to join, to see what that select group had... but who is the select group now? just someone just like me, but who got someone to send an invite... the invitation needs to be tied to something I understand to make it something I want.

right now, I don't really care. but tell me that all the first invites went out to 10,000 strippers, and yeah, I'll do whatever I have to to get in.

Not enough people for it to work yet

I got an invite and jumped on it. But I can't invite anyone I would actually want to converse with, so all that sharing and the circles and the like are useless to me. If they take too long, I'll forget I even have it. Rather counterproductive, really.

Problem is ...

'People want what they can't have' but only if they think it's worth having. All I've heard about it so far is that it's trying to be Facebook. I'm already on Facebook, therefore I don't need Google+, Just as I didn't need Buzz, Wave etc.

Facebook works fine for me thank you very much. Not to say I won't sign up but there is the point that if you don't want me now, why should I care about you later on?

Syndicate content