3 ms·
It could be a number of things. Right now, there's a danger that people start thinking of Facebook as the company that's good for status updates and photos. T
by mdasen 16y ago
It could be a number of things.
Right now, there's a danger that people start thinking of Facebook as the company that's good for status updates and photos. That might prove to be a long term facet of our lives, but it could also prove to be fleeting. Another example of this could be users thinking of Google as that search company and ignoring the company's attempts at other products. There's lots of ways to take social software, but there's a potential that people will popularly think of Facebook as the status message and friend-tagged photo company.
Facebook's barrier to entry (its closed social graph) is both its strongest asset and its greatest weakness. A barrier to entry like this means that most of your competition is gone. You can get used to having very limited, if any, competition because if someone's 20% or 50% better than you are, the barrier to entry slaps them down and maybe you even buy them and incorporate them into you on the cheap. But then someone comes along who is a genius and changes things and shoots the moon. A bit of a comparison here could be Microsoft. Apple was weak for a long time. The Win32 API was a huge barrier to entry. Then a lot of forces conspired to really break Microsoft. The rise of the platform-independent web (with Google, Apple, Mozilla, open-source, and others), Apple's resurgence (where they took Microsoft by surprise on handhelds and might have even sent Windows Mobile to the annals of history), and just the changing landscape. I mean, I remember a time when I thought my Mac would always feel like an also-ran platform unless Microsoft was forced to open up the Win32 API. Nowadays, I don't think any of us Mac users feel like we're on an also-ran platform (at least not in the way it felt years ago).
People's tastes might change. Right now, people want a connected, low-privacy social graph. In 10 years, we might feel different. People's preferences change.
Facebook might become generationally limited. A lot of us got on Facebook in college. I remember when you could list your courses and find people in your classes. Some non-Facebook company might hit critical mass in a different generation of users who might see Facebook as lame because their parents are on it.
Those are a few that came to my mind. I'm not saying that Facebook can't rise to the challenges. They've shown themselves to be quite an adept company. However, it's hard to predict the future and social networking is something that everyone seems to be gunning for. Others are trying to out-maneuver Facebook and users can be fickle.
- natrius 16y ago> Facebook's barrier to entry (its closed social graph)... Huh? http://graph.facebook.com http://graph.facebook.com
- mdasen 16y agoThe data is squarely under Facebook's control. They are allowing other people to buy into their platform in the way Microsoft allowed third parties to develop for Windows. Microsoft gave developers the ability to make programs that ran on Windows with the Win32 APIs. They didn't open things up so that developers could write their own Windows-compatible operating system and compete with them. It's still closed in a way that they hope manages and minimizes the competition. "Don't build your own social graph. Use our's which we'll give you a little access to." It is very closed in that you can't friend people across services and it all has to be Facebook mediated. It's a strategy to maintain their control over the barrier to entry and extend their barrier to many applications developed by third parties. Being open means that you're on the same footing as everyone else.
- natrius 16y agoWindows is a bad analogy. There's no data involved. Facebook's data is open. It isn't federated like XMPP, which seems to be what you're requesting. Federation would be a handicap for a product that changes as much and as quickly as Facebook has over the years. Instant messaging is simple in comparison.