5 ms·

> Now Facebook is finally dying… Doubtful. Facebook is not just facebook.com, it's the whole package of FB Messenger, WhatsApp, Instagram, etc. People may unin

> Now Facebook is finally dying… Doubtful. Facebook is not just facebook.com, it's the whole package of FB Messenger, WhatsApp, Instagram, etc. People may uninstall the mobile app and limit their Facebook access to their laptops or desktop computers (that's a popular response among my colleagues), but I don't even know anyone who has actually deleted their account — aside from the folk who never had one, like me. I also get the impression that usage of Facebook and related services differs greatly from country to country, and from demographic to demographic. This article¹ from 2014 on WhatsApp usage isn't joking; In countries like mine (the Netherlands) not using Facebook-owned WhatsApp (like me) is rather exceptional. If I had kids they would miss out on basically everything (playdates, birthday parties, changes in schedule for sports/scouts/etc.; not to mention becoming social recluses because all their peers (or their parents when they are younger) are on Facebook/Instagram/WhatsApp) if I kept refusing to use Facebook's offerings. Facebook is not going anywhere soon (although I wish it was). 1: https://www.wired.com/2014/02/whatsapp-rules-rest-world/ https://www.wired.com/2014/02/whatsapp-rules-rest-world/

drawkbox 9y ago
Facebook is also Oculus, React, Onavo, Facebook Live and their video platform is trying to compete with Youtube, and they have bought and consumed lots of technology, developers and data from companies that do analytics, deep learning, tracking, location, development tools (even some good ones they EOL'd like Parse) and more. If the Facebook site/app goes the way of AOL/MySpace, which it won't for a long time, they have already prepared for that.
- d33 9y ago
  It would be enough for me if it declined into the confused and nonelastic state Microsoft was in around the times of Vista. That was enough for Android to appear and take over, forcing a paradigm shift.
  - drawkbox 9y ago
    Yeah competition is good. Temporary monopolies can be sometimes good like AT&T building telco/software with Bell Labs and C++ etc, Microsoft with the desktop and getting people online, early ISPs to get broadband started, but they usually end up abusing that position eventually. Some companies get greedy when they get the market leader monopoly power and it can lead to less innovation if they focus on limiting competition rather than beating the open market. Microsoft started to abuse their position eventhough they had won. Then Microsoft got slowed down both from the anti-trust/monopoly DOJ/EU strainer and the subsequent miss of iPhone/Android mobile market. Microsoft got humbled and returned to innovation and is a better company for it today, but has lost power they once held. That speedbump allowed Google (Android/Cloud/Search), Apple (iOS), Amazon (Cloud), and more to rise. Ultimately slowing down Microsoft even a bit re-opened innovation and bettered everyone's quality of life when they had started stiff-arming and blocking competition rather than innovating. There is a lesson to companies that get the market monopoly or top positioning, stay competitive and don't slow down innovation by attacking others, continue to research and develop and innovate. Resorting to limiting others to get ahead in competition makes the companies forget why they are the market leader, win in the open market and innovate to stay the leader. Companies on monopoly/market leader watch: Google, Apple, Amazon, Facebook and others in tech. Some that have already gone beyond acceptable limitations of stifling innovation include Comcast, Verizon and AT&T and are in need of breaking up again as they turned to favored markets rather than neutral. These companies are not winning with better products but winning with bribes, lobbying and limiting innovation only. As long as companies stay focused on innovations and winning in the fair competitive market, not with limiting others beyond open fair market competition, they will stay ahead and not forget why they are the leader. Market leaders should innovate instead of being the bully.
  - zombieprocesses 9y ago
    > It would be enough for me if it declined into the confused and nonelastic state Microsoft was in around the times of Vista. That was enough for Android to appear and take over, forcing a paradigm shift. What? Android and Vista are on two different spaces. You are comparing mobileOS to a desktop OS? Android didn't compete with microsoft. It competed with apple.
    - BuildTheRobots 9y ago
      Android might have been trying to compete with Apple, but for a decade before the iPhone, Windows CE was the de-facto choice on mobile devices where you actually wanted to accomplish something. I'd be more tempted to say that _both_ of them were trying to compete with Microsoft in the mobile space. Yes, there was Palm and PSION before that, both of which I used heavily, but Windows CE had a massive marketplace for applications and seemed to coincide with WiFi and the web really taking off. This feels very odd to say, but mobile Internet Explorer was impressive - and even supported flash!
    - d33 9y ago
      They cater to the same need, which is computing. I once heard that majority of this planet only browses Internet using a smartphone - if that's the case, Microsoft lost.
Feniks 9y ago
So far there hasn't been any ads in WhatsApp. Dutch people are not known for their loyalty or willingness to spend money so I have no idea how Facebook hopes to monetize it. WhatsApp took the market from SMS (a billion dollar cashcow for telcos) in months. Someone else can take on WhatsApp.
machinehermit 9y ago
Facebook is "dieing" as much horny guys acting inappropriate towards women has been "solved". Basically, not at all unless you live in some strange activist bubble that has nothing to do with the real world. All this really did was create a nice buying opportunity yesterday in FB stock.
- galdosdi 9y ago
  You're probably right, though I'm sad about that. For a lot of people FB use seems almost like cigarettes. I mean, not that order of magnitude, but same idea. Doesn't really matter what bad news comes out because it's so habit forming. The bad news has to be truly existential to make a real difference.
- internetman55 9y ago
  It doesn't seem understood here that for many Facebook is for events, sharing some life updates with friends and family, and messenger, not compulsively scrolling your newsfeed to find articles about Trump's plan or something
galdosdi 9y ago
They'll "Alphabetize" and become more of a holding company, but that doesn't mean the core product is immortal. Berkshire Hathaway is strong as a company, but they haven't produced clothing fabric in a very long time.
jgaa 9y ago
The scary part about Facebook dying - and they will at some time - if not now, then later - is who acquires them. Where will all that very personal data about everyone find a new home?

drawkbox 9y ago

Facebook is also Oculus, React, Onavo, Facebook Live and their video platform is trying to compete with Youtube, and they have bought and consumed lots of technology, developers and data from companies that do analytics, deep learning, tracking, location, development tools (even some good ones they EOL'd like Parse) and more. If the Facebook site/app goes the way of AOL/MySpace, which it won't for a long time, they have already prepared for that.

d33 9y ago
It would be enough for me if it declined into the confused and nonelastic state Microsoft was in around the times of Vista. That was enough for Android to appear and take over, forcing a paradigm shift.
- drawkbox 9y ago
  Yeah competition is good. Temporary monopolies can be sometimes good like AT&T building telco/software with Bell Labs and C++ etc, Microsoft with the desktop and getting people online, early ISPs to get broadband started, but they usually end up abusing that position eventually. Some companies get greedy when they get the market leader monopoly power and it can lead to less innovation if they focus on limiting competition rather than beating the open market. Microsoft started to abuse their position eventhough they had won. Then Microsoft got slowed down both from the anti-trust/monopoly DOJ/EU strainer and the subsequent miss of iPhone/Android mobile market. Microsoft got humbled and returned to innovation and is a better company for it today, but has lost power they once held. That speedbump allowed Google (Android/Cloud/Search), Apple (iOS), Amazon (Cloud), and more to rise. Ultimately slowing down Microsoft even a bit re-opened innovation and bettered everyone's quality of life when they had started stiff-arming and blocking competition rather than innovating. There is a lesson to companies that get the market monopoly or top positioning, stay competitive and don't slow down innovation by attacking others, continue to research and develop and innovate. Resorting to limiting others to get ahead in competition makes the companies forget why they are the market leader, win in the open market and innovate to stay the leader. Companies on monopoly/market leader watch: Google, Apple, Amazon, Facebook and others in tech. Some that have already gone beyond acceptable limitations of stifling innovation include Comcast, Verizon and AT&T and are in need of breaking up again as they turned to favored markets rather than neutral. These companies are not winning with better products but winning with bribes, lobbying and limiting innovation only. As long as companies stay focused on innovations and winning in the fair competitive market, not with limiting others beyond open fair market competition, they will stay ahead and not forget why they are the leader. Market leaders should innovate instead of being the bully.
- zombieprocesses 9y ago
  > It would be enough for me if it declined into the confused and nonelastic state Microsoft was in around the times of Vista. That was enough for Android to appear and take over, forcing a paradigm shift. What? Android and Vista are on two different spaces. You are comparing mobileOS to a desktop OS? Android didn't compete with microsoft. It competed with apple.
  - BuildTheRobots 9y ago
    Android might have been trying to compete with Apple, but for a decade before the iPhone, Windows CE was the de-facto choice on mobile devices where you actually wanted to accomplish something. I'd be more tempted to say that _both_ of them were trying to compete with Microsoft in the mobile space. Yes, there was Palm and PSION before that, both of which I used heavily, but Windows CE had a massive marketplace for applications and seemed to coincide with WiFi and the web really taking off. This feels very odd to say, but mobile Internet Explorer was impressive - and even supported flash!
  - d33 9y ago
    They cater to the same need, which is computing. I once heard that majority of this planet only browses Internet using a smartphone - if that's the case, Microsoft lost.

Feniks 9y ago

So far there hasn't been any ads in WhatsApp. Dutch people are not known for their loyalty or willingness to spend money so I have no idea how Facebook hopes to monetize it. WhatsApp took the market from SMS (a billion dollar cashcow for telcos) in months. Someone else can take on WhatsApp.

machinehermit 9y ago

Facebook is "dieing" as much horny guys acting inappropriate towards women has been "solved". Basically, not at all unless you live in some strange activist bubble that has nothing to do with the real world. All this really did was create a nice buying opportunity yesterday in FB stock.

galdosdi 9y ago
You're probably right, though I'm sad about that. For a lot of people FB use seems almost like cigarettes. I mean, not that order of magnitude, but same idea. Doesn't really matter what bad news comes out because it's so habit forming. The bad news has to be truly existential to make a real difference.
internetman55 9y ago
It doesn't seem understood here that for many Facebook is for events, sharing some life updates with friends and family, and messenger, not compulsively scrolling your newsfeed to find articles about Trump's plan or something

galdosdi 9y ago

They'll "Alphabetize" and become more of a holding company, but that doesn't mean the core product is immortal. Berkshire Hathaway is strong as a company, but they haven't produced clothing fabric in a very long time.

jgaa 9y ago

The scary part about Facebook dying - and they will at some time - if not now, then later - is who acquires them. Where will all that very personal data about everyone find a new home?