My logic:

1. Tens of millions of active users.

2. Lots of interesting and original content.

3. Interaction in topics of interest, not just small talk among friends.

4. A growing network, especially on mobile.

Am I drinking the kool aid?

Devil's advocate:

If Google+ did not have the word Google in it, would it have tens of millions of users? Is the product really that good on its own? With an install base as big as Google's to leverage, as well as Google's muscle, money and Magic, would you say it's level of success is appropriate or disappointing?

They would have benefited from resource constraints.

The product would have grown organically instead of having so many people all jump on it at once.

Organic growth would have led to a better product because it would have been easier to listen to early users and focus the product on those things.

Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, Pinterest, and Tumblr all started as tiny products made by tiny teams.

Google+ minus Google could have walked a similar path.