4 ms·

Did they? I used both heavily from elementary school through a large portion of college. They constantly added features and it was a time when it was exciting t

Did they? I used both heavily from elementary school through a large portion of college. They constantly added features and it was a time when it was exciting to receive updates. I feel they just went through the natural social network lifecycle. My friends and I didn't try Facebook and others because there was a problem. They were simply new.

zeveb 8y ago
That's where Facebook really has done remarkably well: their users haven't moved on, like the users of AOL, MySpace &c. did. Why not? I don't really know. It could be that Facebook executes well, but it could also be that they got lucky: they were the first truly global social network (approximately ⅓ of the world use their product), and once someone got that big it would be difficult for any competitor to establish a foothold.
- Larrikin 8y ago
  Facebook really hasn't been around that long. Thinking about my AOL usage, I was a regular user for nearly a decade and it continued supplementing my messaging needs for some years after that. I've been on Facebook for nearly the same amount of time, I got in when they opened it up to high school email accounts. It has become pretty common for me to talk to more and more people on services like Hangouts, LINE, Snapchat, even occasionally WeChat. Unlike AIM and Yahoo Messenger theres an ever increasing reason to move away from the Messenger/Facebook platform in the eyes of more and more people. The cycle is starting to play out. I think FB as a company will stick around longer since they continue to buy other popular platforms like Instagram and WhatsApp but someone will eventually decide not to sell.
basch 8y ago
Imagine if yahoo had added web chat to the bottom of every yahoo, yahoo news, yahoo finance, yahoo sports, yahoo fantasy etc page, ala Facebook. No-matter where you go on yahoo, your buddies are on the right, and chat windows on the bottom. Page reloads would not disrupt chat. Imagine. Same goes for AOL. No other company really understands what facebook has done yet. They have a two layer app, that lets you use both parts simultaneously, independently, or together. Its a different form of window management. I can drag from the background news app to the foreground chat app to share a post in a message.
- Larrikin 8y ago
  Honestly sounds terrible and distracting. I miss the dedicated client that would just be another unassuming program unless I was actively chatting. Ive moved over to messenger.com and the dedicated hangouts page because it's harder to have a conversation when so much other stuff is vying for your attention. Still frustrating that I have to remember to open tabs for a bunch of different sites.
empath75 8y ago
After Aol bought time warner and the dotcom crash happened, time warner basically cut the team down to the bone. There were a handful of people working on it when I was at aol. Their big monetization play was selling enterprise AIM to a few brokerages on wall street. AIM could have been facebook, it could have been slack, or skype. The management was just incredibly short sighted and couldn't figure out how to make money from it.
ghostly_s 8y ago
I think so, yeah. The networks were already there; if they had the foresight to see how FB would eat their lunch, they potentially could have integrated customizable user profile features w/ a "wall"-like functionality into the chat platform, and nipped FB in the bud when it was still perceived as a white-collar walled garden (a rep that persisted for a couple years even after they opened it up beyond EDU). "Facebook is for college snobs; Yahoo is for everyone!"

zeveb 8y ago

That's where Facebook really has done remarkably well: their users haven't moved on, like the users of AOL, MySpace &c. did. Why not? I don't really know. It could be that Facebook executes well, but it could also be that they got lucky: they were the first truly global social network (approximately ⅓ of the world use their product), and once someone got that big it would be difficult for any competitor to establish a foothold.

Larrikin 8y ago
Facebook really hasn't been around that long. Thinking about my AOL usage, I was a regular user for nearly a decade and it continued supplementing my messaging needs for some years after that. I've been on Facebook for nearly the same amount of time, I got in when they opened it up to high school email accounts. It has become pretty common for me to talk to more and more people on services like Hangouts, LINE, Snapchat, even occasionally WeChat. Unlike AIM and Yahoo Messenger theres an ever increasing reason to move away from the Messenger/Facebook platform in the eyes of more and more people. The cycle is starting to play out. I think FB as a company will stick around longer since they continue to buy other popular platforms like Instagram and WhatsApp but someone will eventually decide not to sell.

basch 8y ago

Imagine if yahoo had added web chat to the bottom of every yahoo, yahoo news, yahoo finance, yahoo sports, yahoo fantasy etc page, ala Facebook. No-matter where you go on yahoo, your buddies are on the right, and chat windows on the bottom. Page reloads would not disrupt chat. Imagine. Same goes for AOL. No other company really understands what facebook has done yet. They have a two layer app, that lets you use both parts simultaneously, independently, or together. Its a different form of window management. I can drag from the background news app to the foreground chat app to share a post in a message.

Larrikin 8y ago
Honestly sounds terrible and distracting. I miss the dedicated client that would just be another unassuming program unless I was actively chatting. Ive moved over to messenger.com and the dedicated hangouts page because it's harder to have a conversation when so much other stuff is vying for your attention. Still frustrating that I have to remember to open tabs for a bunch of different sites.

empath75 8y ago

After Aol bought time warner and the dotcom crash happened, time warner basically cut the team down to the bone. There were a handful of people working on it when I was at aol. Their big monetization play was selling enterprise AIM to a few brokerages on wall street. AIM could have been facebook, it could have been slack, or skype. The management was just incredibly short sighted and couldn't figure out how to make money from it.

ghostly_s 8y ago

I think so, yeah. The networks were already there; if they had the foresight to see how FB would eat their lunch, they potentially could have integrated customizable user profile features w/ a "wall"-like functionality into the chat platform, and nipped FB in the bud when it was still perceived as a white-collar walled garden (a rep that persisted for a couple years even after they opened it up beyond EDU). "Facebook is for college snobs; Yahoo is for everyone!"