6 ms·

Facebook Home suffering from poor Google Play reviews: 48% of users award 1 star

62 points by scholia 14y ago

aeontech 14y ago
When I first read about it, I thought it sounded like something designed and dreamed up by marketing team with little regard as to whether it would be useful in practice.
- TheCapn 14y ago
  That's exactly how it comes across. For people who live Facebook as if its the sole purpose of the internet this app seams fantastic. Until they realize that the issues they've always rallied against on the website (typically UI stuff) will now be part of their device. Facebook is driven by ads and the research into fitting as many ads into a space as users will accept; how was a mobile app expected to be any different?
- taopao 14y ago
  Or a UX designer that didn't want to sit down and study the platform's idioms.
gkoberger 14y ago
Common complaints (after looking through a few pages): * Only useful if you live and breath Facebook; it makes email and texts and phone calls second class citizens * Removes all your widgets * Would be better as a lock screen than a launcher * Hides notification bar * Quick Select only shows Facebook apps (and the most recent app) It seems like a lot of complaints are from people who didn't really understand what they were installing ("Hey, I like Facebook! Let's try it!"), and were surprised when it turned their phone into a Facebook phone. A lot of people seem to really like it, too, though.
- TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
  >Hides notification bar WHAT?! Why on earth would they do that? Knowing my battery and cell tower status is important!
  - druiid 14y ago
    You can have it show you it, but by default it hides it. Stupid default. It's in the settings though.
    - hkmurakami 14y ago
      I sense a pattern here...
  - nuclear_eclipse 14y ago
    It is a configurable option that defaults to hidden.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - fudged71 14y ago
    They did that so that it's a fullscreen experience. But I think this is also the reason that they chose to start with the Samsung platform, because they (my NoteII at least) allow you to swipe from the top edge to display the notification bar (yes, even with Home).
    - clauretano 14y ago
      The "facebook phone" is an HTC.
      - fudged71 14y ago
        That's true, and I don't know what they are doing to keep app notifications, time, and device status on the HTC phone if it remains fullscreen. I think we're all mainly talking about the feedback which the app is getting for people who have installed it on other devices which had their own launchers before installing.
- thezilch 14y ago
  It seems like a lot of complaints are from people who didn't really understand what they were installing ("Hey, I like Facebook! Let's try it!"), and were surprised when it turned their phone into a Facebook phone. To be fair, these complaints -- those you bulleted -- validate the poor star-rating. I can't imagine a majority (Re: 2.5+ stars) being given to an application that more-or-less tucks away all of these smartphone features.
  - prostoalex 14y ago
    >> an application that more-or-less tucks away all of these smartphone features That describes like 1,000+ apps with the word "launcher" in their title, and yet a lot of them are 4+ stars https://play.google.com/store/search?q=launcher&c=apps https://play.google.com/store/search?q=launcher&c=apps
    - billnguyen 14y ago
      Except none of those launchers remove functionality like the Facebook launcher is doing by hiding your status bar and removing widgets. The 4+ star rated launchers add functionality to android.
    - thezilch 14y ago
      I haven't looked through those 1k+ apps; I looked at the first few and would say you're completely wrong -- the apps don't hide the features we've come to expect of a homescreen of a smartphone. As I wrote elsewhere... Oh well, they thought they could simply "take over" the entire, front-facing experience of the phone. They probably would have had better success trying their hand at releasing a better widget, surfacing the same experience without removing the notifications bar, apps tray, etc. Being resizable and able to coexist with other widgets (eg. 1x4 Search, 4x4 FB, 1x4 App tray) would appear to be a lot more welcoming.
    - notJim 14y ago
      What are you talking about? Launchers are just alternate home screens, the degree to which they alter functionality varies greatly. For example, I use Nova Launcher, and when you first install it, it's entirely identical to the default launcher. Most people using my phone don't even know that it's not the default.
- fudged71 14y ago
  It also * Doesn't support folders for apps, so you have to swipe through a limited number of pages to organize your apps, or go to a full listing of your apps * The full listing of apps has a low scrolling speed/momentum, so if you have a lot of apps it takes a lot of time to get to the bottom
  - Pxtl 14y ago
    Not supporting folders for apps seems reasonable. They probably want to simplify things and folders, while handy, aren't really necessary and can be confusing for the lowest-common-denominator. I'm surprised they haven't completely eliminated the desktop/drawer separation altogether like in iOS. Presumably the final Facebook phone will have a very short list, so app sorting/scrolling features would be simplified for convenience and intuitiveness... I mean, what apps do hardcore Facebook fanboys need besides Facebook?
- corresation 14y ago
  Each release of Call of Duty sees the same sort of bizarre behaviour -- people who are not the target market seem simply offended that the product exist, going far out of their way to desperately try to sabotage the product. I have zero interest in Facebook Home. But I can recognize that it is interesting and useful to some.
  - thezilch 14y ago
    FB doesn't deserve to only be told how "FREAKING AWSOME" they are. The criticisms are very valid, outside the FB vacuum, and I expect FB will be making changes based on the feedback. How exactly are these users supposed to echo that they'd enjoy more FB integration their smartphone without hiding or neutering common features of a smartphone (or non-smartphone for that matter)?
    - corresation 14y ago
      Most know of the choices made within the product. Yes, they are "going out of their way", in the same way that most of the inane complaints that Black Ops 2 is a tight quarters shooter are inane. Facebook Home expressly declares that it is about making your device a Facebook experience. Any complaint that argues something not of the Facebook experience is not the target market.
  - cosx 14y ago
    That supposes that the people consuming the product were informed prior to their 'purchase' that the products are not 'intended for them'; both are seemingly marketed as products that all who exist would derive benefit and enjoyment from (edit. not that I am trying to point fingers here - imperfect market and all). Let the seller beware - though, it's not like poor ratings from the get go from a proportion of the users would really hit these giants much.
- Pxtl 14y ago
  Does facebook offer an email system? That would explain making the emails a second-class citizen if you're meant to use your facebook email address instead... after all, making an Android device that moves away from the supremacy of the Google account is actually an interesting idea. It does seem like Facebook skipped a step here... I mean, look at the massive suite of web-applications that MS put together before debuting their WinPhone7 thing. With Facebook's experience in webapps and their gigantic post-IPO warchest, I'd expect to see a Facebook branded answer to the MS's Live/Skydrive webapps and Google's family of products alongside the phone so they could offer a fully no-Google-account Android system. But yeah, that other stuff is pretty damning.
  - fudged71 14y ago
    For many young people, Facebook Messages have mostly replaced the functionality that Email is typically used for. It has also tied in the Chat/IM/IRC functionality with the integration with Groups, as well as getting people to sign up to send their SMS through Facebook Messenger. You can share files and photos. They have replaced a massive chunk of communication for a lot of people.
  - nwh 14y ago
    Yes. You can send emails to people's usename @facebook.com, and they can send them out too.
druiid 14y ago
I installed it just to see what it was 'all about'. I pretty much agree so far with the 1-star reviews. It really would be something better left as a lock-screen. The application list is pretty terrible as well (and honestly other than access to the Facebook app, that seems to be all the 'Home' program is really giving you the ability to see). Also, honestly, do people want to see their 'friends' all that much as the background to their phone navigation experience? P.S: I ended up disabling it. I wanted to play with it for a day just to be able to say that I gave it a fair shot, but it changes the dynamic so far in favor to Facebook that it makes even dialing a phone contact problematic. Sorry Facebook, Messenger is NOT a replacement for my contact list.
gm 14y ago
This is a rehash of the aftermath of pretty much any new UI design. People dislike change itself far more than they dislike the actual change.
- aeontech 14y ago
  That would be a valid point if it was a redesign of the facebook app - you can't say that here though, because it's not a redesign of an existing "Facebook Home" app, it's a completely new product.
  - gm 14y ago
    But how many of the 1-star reviewers actually understand that?
    - aeontech 14y ago
      How many reviewers understand that this is a tool that they have never used before? All of them, I would imagine.
- jonathanjaeger 14y ago
  Very true. While people's concerns might be warranted in this case (too early to tell), the most vocal people are the ones who have the most to complain about. It's the Amazon and Yelp 1 star/5 star problem (in this case.. 1 star).
- druiid 14y ago
  This is pretty separate from a UI redesign. This is a new application and then an integration with the existing Facebook app. I'd say there isn't grouching about the 'redesign' so much as 'Where the eff is my Android?'. I think perhaps there has to be a barrier of some sort between the phone and the user for a Facebook 'phone/home' to really work, but there is so much of a barrier that there is literally no dialer immediately available to you. There IS however direct integration with the Facebook Messenger, which I think is how they want you to interact with contacts... sooo... yeah. I don't think the grouching is similar to when the timeline stuff happened, etc.
Zikes 14y ago
The Facebook and Facebook Messenger apps just updated with new permissions: Other application UI * Draw over other apps System tools * Read battery statistics * Read Home settings and shortcuts Your applications information * Retrieve running apps * Reorder running apps, run at startup Phone calls * Directly call phone numbers The ability to arbitrarily run at startup, read what apps I'm currently running, and draw on top of them all concern me, and I've chosen not to accept the update at this time as a result.
- RandallBrown 14y ago
  Those features are some of the flagship features of Home. Drawing over other apps is core to their new messaging UI because it can show up no matter what app you're using. Running at startup is pretty much required for an always on Messenger type app. Reading your currently running apps is also required for any type of launcher app I would imagine.
  - obituary_latte 14y ago
    I'd guess it needs to know what apps are running so it can draw over them.
    - archivator 14y ago
      This is getting off-topic but no, that's not how it works. Android handles those chat heads as system-level windows, you don't need to know what's underneath them. The running apps list is for that "Last app" functionality (though I've no idea why reordering is needed).
  - Terretta 14y ago
    > The Facebook and Facebook Messenger apps just updated with new permissions Not Home.
- krschultz 14y ago
  I'm vehemently against apps drawing on top of other apps and will not update either. I do not want obnoxious popups to become the new paradigm.
RossM 14y ago
I appreciate that scaling at Facebook must be another world to most developers but do they really have to start with such a small userbase each time? I knew the app was restricted to a few devices, but didn't realise it was US-only as well. With the amount of scaling experience they have by now I'd have thought they had the resources to launch a little bigger.
thezilch 14y ago
Oh well, they thought they could simply "take over" the entire, front-facing experience of the phone. They probably would have had better success trying their hand at releasing a better widget, surfacing the same experience without removing the notifications bar, apps tray, etc, while being resizable and able to coexist with other widgets (eg. 1x4 Search, 4x4 FB, 1x4 App tray).
hkmurakami 14y ago
Do poor ratings even matter for a super-brand-name application like this? I feel that if I want something like, say, Facebook messenger, I'm going to install it regardless of what its rating is on the app store. (though I guess with something as "strange/new" as Facebook Home, ratings might matter in giving "on the fence" people enough confidence to try it out)
- danielrhodes 14y ago
  Sure. Facebook Poke did not receive a lot of positive reviews and has faded into obscurity. Likewise when Facebook was mostly an HTLM5 app and performed poorly, there were tons of negative reviews which prompted Facebook to refactor the app.
mongol 14y ago
Can someone recommend a similar app that shows nice pictures on lock screens and backgrounds, but fetches them from sources such as Flickr?
turshija 14y ago
This item cannot be installed on your device's country.
kevingadd 14y ago
Can't even try the app out. Who releases a big application that doesn't run on flagship Google devices like the Nexus 4 [1]? It's absurd. [1] Google Play insists the app is not compatible with my Nexus 4 phone, so I can't even try to install it.
- slg 14y ago
  Someone who isn't targeting people who own a flagship Google device. There is probably very little overlap in the Venn diagram of people who go out of their way to get the pure Google experience and those who will truly enjoy and use Facebook Home.
samstave 14y ago
So, I don't yet have a Home Phone, however, I'd just liketo point out: when the iPhone debuted - it didnt even have copy paste, video, and many many other features that most other phones had at the time. I love how every product launch of every 1.0 is always "GAH! Why doesn't this debut item have all features that my 10th generation other thing has!!!"
underworld11 14y ago
Unlikely that it will help facebook's monetization problem http://truvoipbuzz.com/2013/04/facebook-home-mobile-monetization-problem/ http://truvoipbuzz.com/2013/04/facebook-home-mobile-monetiza...
- Skibb 14y ago
  Indeed.
eranation 14y ago
Sounds like a "new cola" case... Facebook might be "mobile first" but mobile users are not always "Facebook first"
myko 14y ago
The launcher itself is beautiful, but it is extremely jarring when a function within the launcher opens the actual Facebook app which is a really poorly done app, especially when compared to Facebook Home which is actually rather nice.
OGinparadise 14y ago
the application had received 398 one-star reviews out of 834, or 47.7%, on Google Play, giving it an average rating of 2.3 stars. 1 Billion total users and less than 1000 reviews, of which 400 are really bad ones. But those reviews might set the trend
film42 14y ago
So is anyone actually gonna by the phone now?
Skibb 14y ago
This is completely overshadowing the fact that Facebook, in its befuddled attempt to spark monetization, started charging for messages to people you're not a friend with (unless you don't want it to end up in the Other inbox, most users are not even aware of).

62 points by scholia 14y ago

When I first read about it, I thought it sounded like something designed and dreamed up by marketing team with little regard as to whether it would be useful in practice.

TheCapn 14y ago
That's exactly how it comes across. For people who live Facebook as if its the sole purpose of the internet this app seams fantastic. Until they realize that the issues they've always rallied against on the website (typically UI stuff) will now be part of their device. Facebook is driven by ads and the research into fitting as many ads into a space as users will accept; how was a mobile app expected to be any different?
taopao 14y ago
Or a UX designer that didn't want to sit down and study the platform's idioms.

gkoberger 14y ago

Common complaints (after looking through a few pages): * Only useful if you live and breath Facebook; it makes email and texts and phone calls second class citizens * Removes all your widgets * Would be better as a lock screen than a launcher * Hides notification bar * Quick Select only shows Facebook apps (and the most recent app) It seems like a lot of complaints are from people who didn't really understand what they were installing ("Hey, I like Facebook! Let's try it!"), and were surprised when it turned their phone into a Facebook phone. A lot of people seem to really like it, too, though.

TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
>Hides notification bar WHAT?! Why on earth would they do that? Knowing my battery and cell tower status is important!
- druiid 14y ago
  You can have it show you it, but by default it hides it. Stupid default. It's in the settings though.
  - hkmurakami 14y ago
    I sense a pattern here...
- nuclear_eclipse 14y ago
  It is a configurable option that defaults to hidden.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- fudged71 14y ago
  They did that so that it's a fullscreen experience. But I think this is also the reason that they chose to start with the Samsung platform, because they (my NoteII at least) allow you to swipe from the top edge to display the notification bar (yes, even with Home).
  - clauretano 14y ago
    The "facebook phone" is an HTC.
    - fudged71 14y ago
      That's true, and I don't know what they are doing to keep app notifications, time, and device status on the HTC phone if it remains fullscreen. I think we're all mainly talking about the feedback which the app is getting for people who have installed it on other devices which had their own launchers before installing.
thezilch 14y ago
It seems like a lot of complaints are from people who didn't really understand what they were installing ("Hey, I like Facebook! Let's try it!"), and were surprised when it turned their phone into a Facebook phone. To be fair, these complaints -- those you bulleted -- validate the poor star-rating. I can't imagine a majority (Re: 2.5+ stars) being given to an application that more-or-less tucks away all of these smartphone features.
- prostoalex 14y ago
  >> an application that more-or-less tucks away all of these smartphone features That describes like 1,000+ apps with the word "launcher" in their title, and yet a lot of them are 4+ stars https://play.google.com/store/search?q=launcher&c=apps https://play.google.com/store/search?q=launcher&c=apps
  - billnguyen 14y ago
    Except none of those launchers remove functionality like the Facebook launcher is doing by hiding your status bar and removing widgets. The 4+ star rated launchers add functionality to android.
  - thezilch 14y ago
    I haven't looked through those 1k+ apps; I looked at the first few and would say you're completely wrong -- the apps don't hide the features we've come to expect of a homescreen of a smartphone. As I wrote elsewhere... Oh well, they thought they could simply "take over" the entire, front-facing experience of the phone. They probably would have had better success trying their hand at releasing a better widget, surfacing the same experience without removing the notifications bar, apps tray, etc. Being resizable and able to coexist with other widgets (eg. 1x4 Search, 4x4 FB, 1x4 App tray) would appear to be a lot more welcoming.
  - notJim 14y ago
    What are you talking about? Launchers are just alternate home screens, the degree to which they alter functionality varies greatly. For example, I use Nova Launcher, and when you first install it, it's entirely identical to the default launcher. Most people using my phone don't even know that it's not the default.
fudged71 14y ago
It also * Doesn't support folders for apps, so you have to swipe through a limited number of pages to organize your apps, or go to a full listing of your apps * The full listing of apps has a low scrolling speed/momentum, so if you have a lot of apps it takes a lot of time to get to the bottom
- Pxtl 14y ago
  Not supporting folders for apps seems reasonable. They probably want to simplify things and folders, while handy, aren't really necessary and can be confusing for the lowest-common-denominator. I'm surprised they haven't completely eliminated the desktop/drawer separation altogether like in iOS. Presumably the final Facebook phone will have a very short list, so app sorting/scrolling features would be simplified for convenience and intuitiveness... I mean, what apps do hardcore Facebook fanboys need besides Facebook?
corresation 14y ago
Each release of Call of Duty sees the same sort of bizarre behaviour -- people who are not the target market seem simply offended that the product exist, going far out of their way to desperately try to sabotage the product. I have zero interest in Facebook Home. But I can recognize that it is interesting and useful to some.
- thezilch 14y ago
  FB doesn't deserve to only be told how "FREAKING AWSOME" they are. The criticisms are very valid, outside the FB vacuum, and I expect FB will be making changes based on the feedback. How exactly are these users supposed to echo that they'd enjoy more FB integration their smartphone without hiding or neutering common features of a smartphone (or non-smartphone for that matter)?
  - corresation 14y ago
    Most know of the choices made within the product. Yes, they are "going out of their way", in the same way that most of the inane complaints that Black Ops 2 is a tight quarters shooter are inane. Facebook Home expressly declares that it is about making your device a Facebook experience. Any complaint that argues something not of the Facebook experience is not the target market.
- cosx 14y ago
  That supposes that the people consuming the product were informed prior to their 'purchase' that the products are not 'intended for them'; both are seemingly marketed as products that all who exist would derive benefit and enjoyment from (edit. not that I am trying to point fingers here - imperfect market and all). Let the seller beware - though, it's not like poor ratings from the get go from a proportion of the users would really hit these giants much.
Pxtl 14y ago
Does facebook offer an email system? That would explain making the emails a second-class citizen if you're meant to use your facebook email address instead... after all, making an Android device that moves away from the supremacy of the Google account is actually an interesting idea. It does seem like Facebook skipped a step here... I mean, look at the massive suite of web-applications that MS put together before debuting their WinPhone7 thing. With Facebook's experience in webapps and their gigantic post-IPO warchest, I'd expect to see a Facebook branded answer to the MS's Live/Skydrive webapps and Google's family of products alongside the phone so they could offer a fully no-Google-account Android system. But yeah, that other stuff is pretty damning.
- fudged71 14y ago
  For many young people, Facebook Messages have mostly replaced the functionality that Email is typically used for. It has also tied in the Chat/IM/IRC functionality with the integration with Groups, as well as getting people to sign up to send their SMS through Facebook Messenger. You can share files and photos. They have replaced a massive chunk of communication for a lot of people.
- nwh 14y ago
  Yes. You can send emails to people's usename @facebook.com, and they can send them out too.

druiid 14y ago

I installed it just to see what it was 'all about'. I pretty much agree so far with the 1-star reviews. It really would be something better left as a lock-screen. The application list is pretty terrible as well (and honestly other than access to the Facebook app, that seems to be all the 'Home' program is really giving you the ability to see). Also, honestly, do people want to see their 'friends' all that much as the background to their phone navigation experience? P.S: I ended up disabling it. I wanted to play with it for a day just to be able to say that I gave it a fair shot, but it changes the dynamic so far in favor to Facebook that it makes even dialing a phone contact problematic. Sorry Facebook, Messenger is NOT a replacement for my contact list.

gm 14y ago

This is a rehash of the aftermath of pretty much any new UI design. People dislike change itself far more than they dislike the actual change.

aeontech 14y ago
That would be a valid point if it was a redesign of the facebook app - you can't say that here though, because it's not a redesign of an existing "Facebook Home" app, it's a completely new product.
- gm 14y ago
  But how many of the 1-star reviewers actually understand that?
  - aeontech 14y ago
    How many reviewers understand that this is a tool that they have never used before? All of them, I would imagine.
jonathanjaeger 14y ago
Very true. While people's concerns might be warranted in this case (too early to tell), the most vocal people are the ones who have the most to complain about. It's the Amazon and Yelp 1 star/5 star problem (in this case.. 1 star).
druiid 14y ago
This is pretty separate from a UI redesign. This is a new application and then an integration with the existing Facebook app. I'd say there isn't grouching about the 'redesign' so much as 'Where the eff is my Android?'. I think perhaps there has to be a barrier of some sort between the phone and the user for a Facebook 'phone/home' to really work, but there is so much of a barrier that there is literally no dialer immediately available to you. There IS however direct integration with the Facebook Messenger, which I think is how they want you to interact with contacts... sooo... yeah. I don't think the grouching is similar to when the timeline stuff happened, etc.

Zikes 14y ago

The Facebook and Facebook Messenger apps just updated with new permissions: Other application UI * Draw over other apps System tools * Read battery statistics * Read Home settings and shortcuts Your applications information * Retrieve running apps * Reorder running apps, run at startup Phone calls * Directly call phone numbers The ability to arbitrarily run at startup, read what apps I'm currently running, and draw on top of them all concern me, and I've chosen not to accept the update at this time as a result.

RandallBrown 14y ago
Those features are some of the flagship features of Home. Drawing over other apps is core to their new messaging UI because it can show up no matter what app you're using. Running at startup is pretty much required for an always on Messenger type app. Reading your currently running apps is also required for any type of launcher app I would imagine.
- obituary_latte 14y ago
  I'd guess it needs to know what apps are running so it can draw over them.
  - archivator 14y ago
    This is getting off-topic but no, that's not how it works. Android handles those chat heads as system-level windows, you don't need to know what's underneath them. The running apps list is for that "Last app" functionality (though I've no idea why reordering is needed).
- Terretta 14y ago
  > The Facebook and Facebook Messenger apps just updated with new permissions Not Home.
krschultz 14y ago
I'm vehemently against apps drawing on top of other apps and will not update either. I do not want obnoxious popups to become the new paradigm.

RossM 14y ago

I appreciate that scaling at Facebook must be another world to most developers but do they really have to start with such a small userbase each time? I knew the app was restricted to a few devices, but didn't realise it was US-only as well. With the amount of scaling experience they have by now I'd have thought they had the resources to launch a little bigger.

thezilch 14y ago

Oh well, they thought they could simply "take over" the entire, front-facing experience of the phone. They probably would have had better success trying their hand at releasing a better widget, surfacing the same experience without removing the notifications bar, apps tray, etc, while being resizable and able to coexist with other widgets (eg. 1x4 Search, 4x4 FB, 1x4 App tray).

hkmurakami 14y ago

Do poor ratings even matter for a super-brand-name application like this? I feel that if I want something like, say, Facebook messenger, I'm going to install it regardless of what its rating is on the app store. (though I guess with something as "strange/new" as Facebook Home, ratings might matter in giving "on the fence" people enough confidence to try it out)

danielrhodes 14y ago
Sure. Facebook Poke did not receive a lot of positive reviews and has faded into obscurity. Likewise when Facebook was mostly an HTLM5 app and performed poorly, there were tons of negative reviews which prompted Facebook to refactor the app.

mongol 14y ago

Can someone recommend a similar app that shows nice pictures on lock screens and backgrounds, but fetches them from sources such as Flickr?

turshija 14y ago

This item cannot be installed on your device's country.

kevingadd 14y ago

Can't even try the app out. Who releases a big application that doesn't run on flagship Google devices like the Nexus 4 [1]? It's absurd. [1] Google Play insists the app is not compatible with my Nexus 4 phone, so I can't even try to install it.

slg 14y ago
Someone who isn't targeting people who own a flagship Google device. There is probably very little overlap in the Venn diagram of people who go out of their way to get the pure Google experience and those who will truly enjoy and use Facebook Home.

samstave 14y ago

So, I don't yet have a Home Phone, however, I'd just liketo point out: when the iPhone debuted - it didnt even have copy paste, video, and many many other features that most other phones had at the time. I love how every product launch of every 1.0 is always "GAH! Why doesn't this debut item have all features that my 10th generation other thing has!!!"

underworld11 14y ago

Unlikely that it will help facebook's monetization problem http://truvoipbuzz.com/2013/04/facebook-home-mobile-monetization-problem/ http://truvoipbuzz.com/2013/04/facebook-home-mobile-monetiza...

Skibb 14y ago
Indeed.

eranation 14y ago

Sounds like a "new cola" case... Facebook might be "mobile first" but mobile users are not always "Facebook first"

myko 14y ago

The launcher itself is beautiful, but it is extremely jarring when a function within the launcher opens the actual Facebook app which is a really poorly done app, especially when compared to Facebook Home which is actually rather nice.

OGinparadise 14y ago

the application had received 398 one-star reviews out of 834, or 47.7%, on Google Play, giving it an average rating of 2.3 stars. 1 Billion total users and less than 1000 reviews, of which 400 are really bad ones. But those reviews might set the trend

film42 14y ago

So is anyone actually gonna by the phone now?

Skibb 14y ago

This is completely overshadowing the fact that Facebook, in its befuddled attempt to spark monetization, started charging for messages to people you're not a friend with (unless you don't want it to end up in the Other inbox, most users are not even aware of).