Much has been said about the new social network in town, Google+. With that flow of novelty, a new feature (although it appeared a few weeks before Google+) entered the spotlight as well, Google Takeout, a page that allows you to download all (or most) of your data currently hosted in Google Servers.
Many took this opportunity to praise Google and criticize Facebook for, once again, being a privacy monster and not giving people access to their data. Apparently, what those people don’t know (or failed to noticed when it was unveiled almost a year ago) is that Facebook already has the option to download all of your information currently hosted on their servers.
I already did this a couple of months ago and if you want to do it too just follow these steps:
- Login to your Facebook account
- On the top right corner, click on “Account” and then on “Account Settings”
- Look for the option “Download your information” and then click “Learn more”
- Then follow the instructions on the page
It’s quite simple. They prepare the archive with all the stuff and then you’ll be notified when the archive is ready to be downloaded.
Correct me if I’m wrong but, isn’t the true crux of the matter the fact that, despite allowing you to download your data, Facebook delivers it to you in an unwieldy format (designed to be consumed by humans, not machines, making the job of migrating that data to another social network that much complicated), and incomplete in certain aspects (friends information, like contacts), while Google’s choice sets ground on a *complete* backup in easily portable formats?
Perhaps you’re right about the Facebook downloaded data format not being suitable for migrating to other social networks (although one could argue that someone with enough script-fu skills can easily create an utility or even an app for that), but I don’t think it’s their duty to deliver that. In fact, both giants offer these features as part of a “backup” solution, not necessarily a migration solution.
That is very true, but I also believe that what’s more often than not compared are the overall stances of both these “giants” that permeate through these implementation choices.Facebook’s current openness grows from the pressures of bad publicity generated by users complaining. Google chose to do this by design. Is it a preemptive decision based on Facebook’s mistakes? You bet it is. But despite that, they took the time to go the extra mile and not only allow you the complete access, but also put an effort on data portability.For the geeks and nerds (truly, the only ones making an issue out of this) those details matter greatly, and leave Google with the higher ground from an ethical stand-point. And, in the end, that’s the basis of why people say Google Plus is awesome in it being exactly *like* Facebook, while *not* being Facebook at all.
It’s easy coming second after learning from the mistakes of the first
Don’t forget also: Facebook did it once. Google is on its third try.This time, at least, they’re trying to show they payed attention and learned. And that’s clearly working … so far.
Right again, sir