How about the new Google Plus cover images?
-
I logged into several accounts this morning and have noticed Google Plus has changed their cover images/layout... again! When I edit the cover image, it only allows me to pick the old ratios.
What do you think?
Here to stay?
Was there an announcement or anything about this?
-
The problem with making it transparent is that you would lose 25% or so of the image which means you would still have to add some design to it (ie. making your picture offset or something) The way it is now you can just add a photo and you're done. No editing or Photoshop skills required. I just think it's too 'blocky' (thanks for the verification on that word) and think the 'info card' should be just a slightly bigger size or something to make it work better. You should be able to customize your background color for the 'text card' too. I think it would work better with branding.
https://plus.google.com/+LaBovick/ has their image fade at the bottom and the 'info card' to the left is a little longer and it looks nice that way. If Google could make this sort of design default I think it would look a lot better. Maybe even have the menu fit in that negative space below the image and to the right of the 'info card'.
Unfortunately I don't work at Google anymore so I'll just build a template to make it work. Either way it's much better then the old style.
-
Oh yah, and blocky is a word according to: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/blocky
-
The blurred background it just confusing. If it was transparent, and the info box showed the background image underneath instead of a duplicate, I think it would be better.
-
Did you also see that Google Places pages that are listed as having "Service Areas" can now be automatically upgraded to Google Plus pages? Its a slow roll-out, but we're seeing it done when we log into accounts! Sometimes we have to go in and delete the old G+ Business page to leave just the G+ Local page.
-
I'm enjoying the simplistic look of the new G+ page. The top image, where we were forced to scroll up to view it was just a horrible experience for all users. That scrolling really never served any purpose than to frustrate people with the "teaser" effect.
Now, it's all right there as it should be. Removing the thinking, confusion and frustrations and going back to what Google says they strive for, improving our experience using their products. In my opinion, this new page stylization has done that for me.
Patrick
-
Yeah maybe "love it" was an overstatement. I'm just so relieved that the annoying cover image is gone.
-
Nothing at Google is here to stay. I can think of at least 5 cover photo changes already. I didn't see any announcements but I now that the Google+ for Android rolled out yesterday.
Here are my thoughts
What I like about it:
- "that giant monstrosity of an image" that Mike Roberts mentioned is gone! I hated having to scroll UP to see all of it. That was just dumb.
- I like the 'info card' on the left side vs the bottom long drawn out text area we had before.
- I like that the 'info card' doesn't cover ANY of the image. We spend a lot of money on photography and I don't want it covered.
What I don't like:
- It looks very blocky (<-- is that a word?). I think a more artistic design would have been better. www.google.com/+vzpro is very boring whereas www.google.com/+labovick, who designed their cover before to allow for the text area to be easily read, looks great. I think making the 'info card' be a little longer and have a little shadowing behind it would make a world of difference as far as design. I know we can design images to do that now but I think it is an easy adjustment for G+ to do.
- I don't like the fact that the background of the 'info card' is the same image as the one to the right and is extremely blurred. I don't know if a solid color would be better but I just know I don't like it very much.
Ok, I'm off my soapbox now. Carry on...
-
Agreed! I'm sure this update will come as a big sigh of relief to many. The giant image was completely incongruous with the rest of the site and quite jarring.
There's a lot of empty space on pages, though - especially the profile page. Don't you think?
-
Can't say I love it but I otherwise agree with Jesse... that giant monstrosity of an image previously was just annoying.
-
I saw it, for some reason I always get overly excited about a Google plus update, couldn't find a mention of it, not sure if I like it yet.
-
Yeah I love it. So much better than the giant cover photo, that was driving me bonkers to be honest.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Google SERP shows wrong (and inappropriate) thumbnail for Facebook videos?
Hello I'm running into a strange issue with at least one of my client's video. The video is posted on Facebook. When searching for the video on Google, the SERP shows a completely wrong, and inappropriate, thumbnail image. (And in one case the preview video starts playing within Google SERP.) It also seems that Google is indexing various countries' facebook page for the same video separately (it-it.facebook.com, fr-fr.facebook.com, etc). Note that only the thumbnail and preview video within Google are wrong; if you click on the link, you see the correct video and page. I hesitate to divulge the actual client video, but there are some reports on Google's search community about the same behavior: Here's one that stargs back in March: https://support.google.com/webmasters/thread/33760205?hl=en and a more recent one: https://support.google.com/websearch/thread/71452151?hl=en It looks increasingly like a bug in some google algorithm, but nobody at google seems to acknowledge that. I've unpublished the original video from FB and submitted an 'outdated content' removal to Google, which is pending. In the meantime, my questions for our group of experts here: Has anyone else experienced this and any other suggestionso n how to fix? If we assume that this is not a google bug: how could a malicious actor or black-hat SEO influence Google's algorithms to cause this? Thanks, mickey
Social Media | | infamia0 -
Is google plus really useful?
Hi guys first of all i am really thankful for such an opportunity to test such a wonderful app and i didnt know there is a Q&A community here 🙂 i was actually searching on google about google plus and end up here but the thread i bumped into is a bit outdated anyway a little background on what i am doing. Our company have a 15 local branches, its a service that we provide on our local clients. I am totally new to SEO like 6 months and i am really learning a lot and i am now learning on how to build my own backlinks and my 1st struggle is on google+ actually i am dismayed that its too confusing (at first) but somehow i manage to understand but still unsure please correct me. So google+ has 2 type 1 is for personal and 1 is for brand am i correct? So since we have 15 local branches what i did is create a personal page and make it as our business page and then claimed all the 15 branches on google maps and all is verified now. You think im correct on creating a personal page and make it as our main business page? I asked because i want to create brands page on each branch or do I even need brand pages for my branches? Was thinking of this custom URLS for our main page (which is our personal page) +OurBusiness for the branch brand page +OurBusinessCity you think it would be cool? 🙂 then on about sections (brand page) where i can add links on tag line description i will put the dedicate branch page of our website www.ourbusiness.com/city, then on that website page i will also put our google plus brand page +OurBusinessCity so its a 2 way link. Please bare with me as i am fairly new to this and i am not really sure if my ideas are stupid so please dont laugh 🙂 By the way my another question is about the ABOUT ME section of google+ personal page, when i add link on the description its a nofollow, i know cause i have this extension on my browser that detects do/nofollow links but on the link section its a dofollow. On the other hand google+ brand page has no links section so if you have a link and want to include it on your google+ brand page easy way to do it is put it on description and i just found out its a do follow HOWEVER it seems like the links on both pages (personal, brand) are not seen by search engines i tried it on several google search simulator and also checked the source code of the pages and i cant seem to find the links so my question is, is google really that useful when it comes to backlink building? Another question is that when i build brand pages i have to use our brand name and so all the branches have the same brand names includes our personal page so all of those 16 pages have the same name, will it be ok? Another question is that is there anyway that i can edit its meta description? 🙂 please i am really new to google so bare with me. Thank you so much in advance and hope to hear from the gurus 😉
Social Media | | Bamservices1 -
Requirement full bleed image share Google+?
Hi everyone, Im sort of a Google+ nutter and I wanted to figure out exactly what is required for a full bleed image to appear for +1 share on the page itself. I got it figured out and I think it requires: canonical url og:image image wider then 506px type article or page (microdata format) But sometimes it seems that pages without a canonical url still show full bleed image when shared as link when I insert the url directly into a google+ post. My question is if this could be a cached version of the page where it had a canonical url? Don't really know if that anyone is interested but I made a simple tool that checks if a page meets requirements for having a full bleed image when share as link on Google+. Think I nailed it pretty close but can't seem to get the full bleed image to appear for the tool itself do:) Please dont ask. It's driving me mad already. http://www.googlewiki.nl/seo-checker/check-fullbleed.php Try it. Take a blog post url, check it with this tool and then see for yourself if it's accurate. If not I would like to hear very much as it would help me pin point it better! Examples of pages with specific no no factors for you to try are:
Social Media | | DanielMulderNL
http://www.copyblogger.com/google-authorship/ (img to small)
http://www.theverge.com/2014/7/14/5896979/gmail-api-isnt-the-end-of-email-its-a-new-beginning (no og prefix but works)1 -
Google+ currently DOES support hidden addresses?
We noticed yesterday that many of our clients with hidden addresses are now able to get a verified G+ page through the Places dashboard. Anyone else have any insight on this? Are they classified as "Local" pages, or just verified "Business" pages?
Social Media | | AvalancheSearch0 -
Gain Access to Google+ Profile
We are having trouble accessing a Google+ profile for a client. We know the profile we want to gain access to, but the client doesn't remember the email or password. The marketing company they worked with before also doesn't know what the email or password is to claim the profile. We have tried contacting Google to gain access to the email, but they were unable to give us the login email due to privacy issues. If you have any suggestions to gain access to this profile, it is greatly appreciated. Please take in mind the following: We do not know the email nor have access to obtaining it We do know the profile we want to gain access to
Social Media | | flowsimple0 -
Google Authorship Not Working
I've had problems with google authorship. I always check to make sure the snippet tool is reporting correctly but my picture appears some weeks and disappears others. I've changed my picture to make it a more recognizable headshot like some posts and blogs suggested. Is anyone else having this problem? My website is www.x4dc.com
Social Media | | ayesroc0 -
Will Google maintain its search engine power?
Reading through the SEOmoz threads, and also other forums, I can't help but notice that the majority of material covered is about SEO & SERP, white hat & black hat linking, social media blogs and articles, etc, etc. Everyone trying to scramble to the top of their market via Google. If Google brought out a release saying that hopping down the street naked & having a neighbour googling that you had, for improved SERP ratings, would produce a weird downtown scenario. What I am asking, is this: Does Google have too much power in determining to the world what is correct and what is not as a corporation. And are they and what they have a passing phase, or will they lose their dominance like Microsoft etc through technical change?
Social Media | | ABCPS0 -
Google analytics now showing social signals
Looking through Google analytics today and noticed that there is a section under top content that shows number of Facebook likes & shares, tweets, diggs, delicious book marks, etc. Anyone else seeing this? [staff note: see answers, this came from a Chrome extension]
Social Media | | prima-2535090