????最近，谷歌終于宣布不再向自己的社交網站Google+投入那么多精力。作為搜索巨擘，谷歌為Google+花費了數億美元資金和四年時間，目的是讓后者能與Facebook一爭長短，但一直未能如愿。它做出的調整之一就是用戶登錄YouTube和其他谷歌旗下網站時不必再使用Google+賬號；而Google+中較有價值的業務，比如照片和視頻聊天工具Hangouts，則已被剝離出來并獨立運營。

????互聯網新聞網站Mashable上有一篇很長的文章，詳細探討了此事，其中的內容對谷歌來說多少有些尷尬。文章指出，谷歌試圖打造一個能擊敗Facebook的社交網絡服務，但最終只變成一個帶給它諸多教訓的經典案例，比如谷歌沒弄明白Facebook網絡效應的真正力量所在，而且自大地認為炫酷的功能和強制使用Google+賬號就能說服別人把時間花在自己的社交網站上。Google+的遭遇很像之前的Buzz那款產品，只是投入要多好幾個零，而且谷歌也比推出Buzz時自負得多。

????不過，谷歌絕不會接受數億（甚至數十億）美元以及諸多開發人力和時間只換得一個教訓的局面。它推出Google+的初衷并未消失。如果說情況有什么不同的話，那就是擊敗Facebook這個愿望變得比以前更迫切。但就實現這個目標而言，谷歌并未取得明顯進展。正是出于這個原因，我才認為谷歌決定把重心從Google+轉移，意味著它更有可能收購Twitter。

????谷歌打造一個新社交網站的原因不僅僅是想遏制Facebook的上升勢頭，或者是希望得到可以用來打廣告的社交網絡資產和內容。毫無疑問，所有這些因素都起了作用，但谷歌的主要著眼點一直是通過Google+來獲取用戶的實時行為數據。有了這些數據的幫助，谷歌就有可能微調自己的搜索結果和發布廣告時使用的算法。

????Google+問世后的這些年里，社交分享對內容和廣告的網絡流量的影響幾乎已經變得和搜索一樣重要。有些時候，社交分享的作用甚至更大。在這種情況下，獲取實時社交數據對谷歌的未來而言變得比以往任何時候都關鍵。但Google+在這方面無法提供足夠的信息，而且差得還很遠。

????這就是谷歌最近決定和Twitter言歸于好的原因，它還跟Twitter達成協議，進而可以通過后者的Firehose服務獲得實時用戶數據。在Twitter發展初期，雙方曾攜手合作。然而，不斷壯大的Twitter萌生了上市的念頭，它提出的新條件遭到了谷歌拒絕。最終，Twitter和谷歌分道揚鑣。但就在幾個月前，谷歌的搜索索引里再次出現了Twitter推文的身影，谷歌甚至開始把搜到的推文單列在搜索結果上方，即所謂的“OneBox”區域，以示強調。

????顯然，谷歌可以繼續向Twitter支付Firehose使用費，就像使用其他服務那樣。但既然實際情況已經證明，Google+幾乎不能作為一個社交平臺把它的各項業務結合在一起，谷歌就需要通過其他方法把這些業務跟一個社交樞紐連接起來，并且無限制地獲取實時數據，而Twitter應該說是可供谷歌選擇的最佳途徑。

????無巧不成書，Twitter前首席執行官迪克·科斯托洛離任，用戶增長數據一直不夠搶眼，再加上過渡期CEO、聯合創始人杰克·多爾西表示前景暗淡，Twitter的股價一直承受著相當大的壓力。盡管此前Twitter一直勇敢地表示希望保持獨立運營，但谷歌很可能以200億美元左右的價格將前者納入旗下，這個數字占谷歌搜索業務收入的四分之一。Twitter投資人克里斯·薩卡甚至已經表示，谷歌和Twitter有可能“一拍即合”。

????這幾年，蘋果和微軟等幾家公司一直是傳說中的Twitter潛在收購方（有人認為亞馬遜也有可能收購Twitter，甚至是Facebook）。但就Twitter所能發揮的作用而言，谷歌的需求最大。因此，谷歌很可能成為最有動力的“追求者”，而Twitter財務狀況欠佳也許正好成為谷歌管理層向董事會提出此項建議的契機。（財富中文網）

????譯者：Charlie

????校對：詹妮

????Google GOOG -0.31% finally announced recently that it is scaling back its focus on Google+, the also-ran social network that the search giant has spent hundreds of millions of dollars and four years of its time trying to turn into a competitor to Facebook FB -0.10% . Among other things, users will no longer be forced to sign in with a Google+ account when they log on to YouTube and other Google properties, and the useful parts of the network—such as Photos and Hangouts—have already been hived off and turned into standalone offerings.

????As a lengthy piece at Mashable describes in somewhat embarrassing detail, the quest to build a Facebook-crushing social service is a classic tale with a number of lessons, including Google’s inability to understand the sheer power of Facebook’s network effects, and its hubris in thinking that gee-whiz features or forced signups would convince anyone to spend any time on the service. It’s a lot like the previous failure of Google’s Buzz feature, but with way more zeros and much larger egos.

????Google can’t afford to just chalk those missing millions (or billions) and lost person-years of development time up to experience, however. The reason why it launched Google+ hasn’t gone away. If anything, it has become even more compelling, and Google isn’t much closer to attaining it—which is why I think its decision to move away from Google+ makes it even more likely that it will buy Twitter TWTR 0.41% .

????The search company didn’t just create a new social service because it wanted to blunt the force of Facebook’s rise, or because it wanted social assets and content to advertise against. All of those factors no doubt played a role, but the main focus was always that Google+ would allow Google to tap into real-time behavioral data from users—data that in turn could help the company fine-tune both its search results and its advertising algorithms.

????In the years since Google+ was launched, social sharing has become almost as important a traffic driver for both content and advertising as search is, and in some cases even more so. That makes access to real-time social data even more crucial for Google’s future than it has ever been, but the Google+ network isn’t even close to providing enough of that information.

????That’s why Google decided to bury the hatchet recently and cut a deal with Twitter to get access to the company’s real-time “firehose” of user data. The two were partners in the early years of Twitter, but as the service grew larger and started to think about an IPO, it asked for new terms to which Google balked. Twitter ultimately cut Google off. As of a few months ago, however, tweets are again flowing through Google’s search index, and the company has even started highlighting those results in its “One Box” display.

????Obviously, Google could continue to just pay Twitter for access to its firehose, as other services do. But now that its in-house social network has proven to be mostly useless as a social connector between its various services, it needs some other way to plug social into those services and get access to unlimited real-time data, and Twitter is arguably the best method available.

????As luck would have it, Twitter’s stock is under considerable pressure after the departure of CEO Dick Costolo, consistently underwhelming user-growth numbers and a gloomy outlook from interim CEO and co-founder Jack Dorsey. The company has talked bravely in the past about wanting to continue as a standalone service, but Google could probably buy it for about $20 billion, or one quarter worth of search revenue. Twitter investor Chris Sacca has even said that the two would be “an instant fit.”

????Other potential suitors for Twitter have been discussed over the years, including Apple and Microsoft (some believe Amazon is also a candidate, or even Facebook), but Google has the biggest need for what Twitter can offer—and therefore it is likely to be the most highly motivated bidder. And Twitter’s financial woes may have given it just the opportunity it needs to make that case to the company’s board.