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.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
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
-
Does Google prefer YouTube video's embedded on a site or put in a Pop up image class for SEO purposes
Our company is an eCommerce site for aftermarket automotive accessories, we have been posting videos on our site. On some pages we have videos embedded from Youtube and on other pages the videos are embedded but in a Popup Image Class. Below I'll provide an example of one way we put the popup image class on our site <iframe id="vidf" style="display:none;" width="460" height="320" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/MattCutts?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe> Now concerning SEO would it be better just to embed a video the traditional way or use the popup image class? The reason I ask is because the popup image class hides the video on the page with an image on top then once you click that image the video pops up. Can Google still crawl/see the video? What would be best practice for SEO?
Social Media | | WebRiverGroup0 -
Doctors in a Hospital - Setup Google Local or Google+ Profiles?
Hello - I've been running this over for awhile - so I'm curious to see what the community says about it. I'm working with a client who would like to brand the doctors in their hospitals. Many of them do have recognition already - and their associated locations have profiles. Google Local semi-recently said it's OK to brand Dr's names - even if they exist within a single location. So, my question is - is it better to go the Google Local route and create the Local/+ page for them, or to go through the Google+/Google Brand Pages route and create them that way? If each doctor were to decide, individually, to post on their page - would that be possible with the Places route (I don't think so, based on what I've seen)? Also, if a doctor already has a personal Google+ page - would it make sense to just create the additional brand page as well through this interface? Well either of these methods achieve optimal visibility as well as the option to post should they decide to go that route? What it boils down to - is this is a task we can perform from the outside, or is it best handled by giving the doctors best practice for setting up their personal Google+ pages and associated Brand Pages themselves? Thanks for any insight you can provide!
Social Media | | WebTalent0 -
Has anybody else noticed that Google has made a significant change to their SERP? There is a lot of social data reported from LinkedIn, Youtube and Facebook (includes page likes and activity) when you search by company name. Thoughts anybody?
Has anybody else noticed that Google has made a significant change to their SERP? There is a lot of social data reported from LinkedIn, Youtube and Facebook (includes page likes and activity) when you search by company name. Thoughts anybody?
Social Media | | rrad0 -
Where is the Link Site button on Google+?
I want my content authors to be able to associate their work with their Google+ profile. I read about an update rolled out in June that included a Link Site function on the Edit Profile -- About Tab. I don't see where to do this. Can anyone help me figure out how to enable this function?
Social Media | | wlefevre0 -
Why would Google+ send posts as 'messages' to people outside of your circles?
A day ago I uploaded a photo of a US Navy ship mooring at Bell Harbor marina, which is across from my office (near the conference center site of SMX Advanced Seattle). A rude comment was posted by someone from Germany accusing me of sending this to them personally, offended because he's anti-military: "Don't spam people pal." I blocked him. So, since it was uploaded to my public stream and shared to my circles, I have no explanation as to how this could happen. If someone in my circles shared it to him, I suppose it could look like I sent it to him, but I haven't seen that happen before. Anyone else see behavior like this? UPDATE: because this person was within one of the circles to whom I shared this photo, he received a notification that I'd shared it "directly" with him. See comment below.
Social Media | | BrianCrouch0 -
Simple google plus question
Hi, My client www.nlpca(dot)com wants to know if we can just place the google plus button on their website or do we have to have a profile and such and share things regularly? Thanks!
Social Media | | BobGW0 -
Google Games
Following a thread here thought I'd login to G+ only to notice the new Google games tab, lol you've gotta give em A+ for trying ...... Think Google should try to be a little more original, wondered what everyone else thought of this new addition? Lee
Social Media | | LeeMiller1 -
Are Facebook page updates indexed in Google search?
I seem to remember an update where Google said it was going to include Facebook page updates into Google search, but perhaps that was a deal that fell through? If updates ARE appearing in Gooogle search, how do I troubleshoot a Facebook page where they are not?
Social Media | | KatherineWatierOng0