More generally, I think it can be summed up as "When you expect Google quality, and get a guy's spare-time university project, you'll probably be disappointed." I'm sure Orkut was acceptable when it was Club Nexus at Stanford, and I'm sure Orkut-the-man didn't expect it to end up this big. The spin (and I blame Orlowski at the Register for this -- he's been after the Big Google Scoop for so long that fact-checking has gone out the window, and he broke the Orkut story) was that this was Google's Friendster, and it wasn't. )There's even a good chance that the people that are using it and criticising it were never part of the target audience in the first place, I imagine.)

Orkut doesn't need to be redesigned so much as expanded and fleshed out. And the user experience isn't as bad as most of its competitors. Granted, large portions of the site were copied almost verbatim from Friendster and Match.com. But it is a good start.

Oh, yeah, and there needs to be something to actually do on Orkut (and the rest of 'em) once we've signed on and becomed all networked and shit.

My goodness, it's sunny outside, and my new neighbour is pretty hot...

I hear that electrical engineers make great interface designers.

Indeed it is a good start, but my initial impression is it is trying to be all things to all people.