4 ms·
That's true, but there's a difference between FB and Friendster/MySpace: Zuck is apparently trying (and succeeding) at managing that risk. Instagram was growin
by beagle3 9y ago
That's true, but there's a difference between FB and Friendster/MySpace: Zuck is apparently trying (and succeeding) at managing that risk.
Instagram was growing quickly and could seed the next big FB competitor. So FB bought them for a $1B valuation almost everyone thought was crazy at the time.
WhatsApp could seed the next big FB competitor. So FB bought them for $20B or so, which again was mostly considered crazy at the time.
Neither of these is crazy in retrospect: FB's dominant position is easily worth what DB paid for these and more.
FB didn't manage to buy Snap, so they started waging war, adding Snap's features 3 times (to FB, WhatsApp and Instagram).
FB management is actively trying to stay dominant. MySpace was, in comparison, passive; and friendster was never as dominant.
- joering2 9y agoOkay, then just wait and see what will kill Facebook, since you already described what killed previous networks. I personally think what will kill Facebook is simply maturing internet and hence maturing people that use it. Most people (family) I had on Facebook deleted all their likes, and pages their follow, and artists they listening to; my brother told me "I have no idea why I added this dude guess I was young". Eventually I bet 30% of Facebook will wake up to privacy abuse FB made its business, and will move on. Disclaimer: my view can be distorted, since I'm building a new social network.
- beagle3 9y agoWhatever kills Facebook won’t look like a social network - they will see and fight it. It will look like something else but turn out to be a social network replacement in retrospect. Microsoft was not dethroned by Linux or free software (cheaper and arguably better) - it was dethroned by mobile phones. And it’s still alive, just not the king anymore.