20bits: Memo to OpenSocial: It’s about distribution, stupid!
Ryan Boyle
· 2 years ago
Excellent analysis. I agree completely that it's the incredibly low cost of installing apps (in terms of time) on facebook that makes it so viral. you don't hunt for apps on facebook, you stumble upon them, and then you install them with just a few total clicks. without both having something as central to the user experience as the news-feed for spreading word of new apps and without the extreme ease of installing an app once you come across it, no one will be able to compete with facebook for providing eyeballs for your work.
it will be interesting to quantitatively track the virality apps experience on opensocial compared to facebook as opensocial gets going.
Hone
· 2 years ago
I already have facebook notifications/requests blindness. I never check it because its always someone asking me to use some lame application.
Most of facebooks good points, differentiation, and uniqueness are fast disappearing.
Jesse
· 2 years ago
Hone,
Lots of people say this, but the numbers don't lie. Facebook is actually growing faster than the application space, which itself is growing rapidly! Just look at the graph I included.
Jesse
· 2 years ago
Excellent analysis. Google has put their brand behind OpenSocial and that gives them a lot of leverage. They have a ways to go in building the feature-set they want in OpenSocial to make it truly competitive. I think OpenSocial is a game changer, but it ultimately depends on how far they can take it to unify the social network data: http://fishtrain.com/2007/11/01/opensocial-soci...
Daniel
· 2 years ago
I guess it's typical to see someone equating Facebook with OpenSocial, even though OpenSocial is actually an integration of all things social -- meaning, and for the most-part -- the entire Internet. It's a platform of tools provided to anyone, including Facebook (who woulda thunk it?).
The entire Internet itself is a social network -- yet, it's ironic that the WordPress blog in which you, well, Blog -- can be linked in through OpenSocial -- and you make an attempt to pigeon-hole the development as something even remotely equivalent to Facebook?
I'm sorry, but I can't help but laugh.
Jesse
· 2 years ago
Daniel,
Yes, I understand Google is trying to outflank Facebook by playing the "meta" game. But, as O'Reilly pointed out, there's no data portability between networks so right now the most generous thing one could say about OpenSocial is that it's some sort of JVM for social platforms.
As far as developers are concerned they're going to be developing for verticals. Really, of course, this effectively means MySpace, since that's like 90% of OpenSocial's userbase.
We'll see how this plays out -- I'm not convinced.
guyal
· 2 years ago
There's a difference between "Open Social is a good move by Google, MySpace and friends" and "FACEBOOK IS DOOMED! DOOOOOOOOMED!"
MySpace had to come out with some sort of viable API. Google jumpstarted them on that. Smaller, niche social networks (the kind that Ning can help you build) benefit from having a simple way to connect to other networks. Google jumpstarted that. That's all neat. If it doesn't end up as N slightly different implementations of OpenSocial on N different social networks, with N different data policies. Ok, that's a risk, but let's assume that doesn't happen. In the long term, that provides a challenge for a Facebook, but that challenge was coming one way or another anyways. In tech, walled gardens tend to evolve over time towards open systems (vendor-owned network protocols to TCP/IP; app vendor-owned data transport protocols -> HTTP). Facebook needs to be aware of this and work with this curve, rather than, oh, fighting it tooth and nail to some breaking point. But that's a long term challenge that starts with OpenSocial. And they have a partner in Microsoft who has proven adept enough at navigating that type of challenge. This isn't the first time "everyone else" has jumped into a consortium with Microsoft on the other side.
Facebook users are not going to a) run away b) stop attracting their friends as new users just because someone released a new API. Facebook has not been succeeding because the world lacks a cross-platform social networking application API. Facebook has been growing because they provide a good service. As long as they continue to improve like they have in the last year, they have a bright future. More than 99% of Facebook users won't know what OpenSocial is. They'll only know whether they like the Facebook experience and whether their friends are there.
As a Facebook user, I'm not going to run out and get myself a MySpace account on account of OpenSocial. As a Facebook developer, I am going to clean up a couple things in my code to make things a little less Facebook centric except at the view layer, in preparation for a more open social world. After that, we'll see what the future holds, but who didn't think Facebook would face strong competitive moves from the likes of MySpace and Google in any event?
patcito
· 2 years ago
"If you're on MySpace you're not going to be able to switch to another social network and take your MySpace data with you."
Stop spreading FUD about OpenSocial because you can do just that with it, it's called the "People Data API":
"The OpenSocial People data API hasn't been released yet; this document is a preview of the developer's guide that we'll publish when we release the data API. All of the details are subject to change, but this preview should give you a general idea of what the API will be like."
And as O'Reilly pointed out, this is like moving an inch in the direction of real data portability.
Matt
· 2 years ago
Gimme a break. MySpace is only a small part of the pie. Sure they have hordes of users, but look at all the possibilities for distribution outside of MySpace. Facebook apps only work in the Facebook container. OpenSocial apps will, in theory, work in any container that adheres to the OpenSocial API. Sounds like a good distribution model to me.
Jesse
· 2 years ago
Matt,
The proof is in the pudding. My point is that it's not about the size of the networks (which is what the press says), the openness of the data (which is what O'Reilly) says, but distribution.
If OpenSocial can pull it of *then* we have a real fight on our hands. Right now it's a bunch of nothing.
Jesse
· 2 years ago
I'd also add that I'm not anti-OpenSocial, but I think Facebook has solved a real problem, as evidenced by the fact that both their internal and third-party apps on the platform have taken off like a rocket.
If OpenSocial doesn't even address that problem then they're still two steps behind.
HeavyGod
· 2 years ago
Really good and really interesting post. I expect (and other readers maybe :)) new useful posts from you! Good luck and successes in blogging!
Hasan Muhammad
· 1 year ago
I'd really love to see this article "updated" to address the platform and other advancements in the social networking space that have been achieved in the past year.
All Comments
it will be interesting to quantitatively track the virality apps experience on opensocial compared to facebook as opensocial gets going.
Most of facebooks good points, differentiation, and uniqueness are fast disappearing.
Lots of people say this, but the numbers don't lie. Facebook is actually growing faster than the application space, which itself is growing rapidly! Just look at the graph I included.
The entire Internet itself is a social network -- yet, it's ironic that the WordPress blog in which you, well, Blog -- can be linked in through OpenSocial -- and you make an attempt to pigeon-hole the development as something even remotely equivalent to Facebook?
I'm sorry, but I can't help but laugh.
Yes, I understand Google is trying to outflank Facebook by playing the "meta" game. But, as O'Reilly pointed out, there's no data portability between networks so right now the most generous thing one could say about OpenSocial is that it's some sort of JVM for social platforms.
As far as developers are concerned they're going to be developing for verticals. Really, of course, this effectively means MySpace, since that's like 90% of OpenSocial's userbase.
We'll see how this plays out -- I'm not convinced.
MySpace had to come out with some sort of viable API. Google jumpstarted them on that. Smaller, niche social networks (the kind that Ning can help you build) benefit from having a simple way to connect to other networks. Google jumpstarted that. That's all neat. If it doesn't end up as N slightly different implementations of OpenSocial on N different social networks, with N different data policies. Ok, that's a risk, but let's assume that doesn't happen. In the long term, that provides a challenge for a Facebook, but that challenge was coming one way or another anyways. In tech, walled gardens tend to evolve over time towards open systems (vendor-owned network protocols to TCP/IP; app vendor-owned data transport protocols -> HTTP). Facebook needs to be aware of this and work with this curve, rather than, oh, fighting it tooth and nail to some breaking point. But that's a long term challenge that starts with OpenSocial. And they have a partner in Microsoft who has proven adept enough at navigating that type of challenge. This isn't the first time "everyone else" has jumped into a consortium with Microsoft on the other side.
Facebook users are not going to a) run away b) stop attracting their friends as new users just because someone released a new API. Facebook has not been succeeding because the world lacks a cross-platform social networking application API. Facebook has been growing because they provide a good service. As long as they continue to improve like they have in the last year, they have a bright future. More than 99% of Facebook users won't know what OpenSocial is. They'll only know whether they like the Facebook experience and whether their friends are there.
As a Facebook user, I'm not going to run out and get myself a MySpace account on account of OpenSocial. As a Facebook developer, I am going to clean up a couple things in my code to make things a little less Facebook centric except at the view layer, in preparation for a more open social world. After that, we'll see what the future holds, but who didn't think Facebook would face strong competitive moves from the likes of MySpace and Google in any event?
Stop spreading FUD about OpenSocial because you can do just that with it, it's called the "People Data API":
http://code.google.com/apis/opensocial/docs/gda...
"The OpenSocial People data API hasn't been released yet; this document is a preview of the developer's guide that we'll publish when we release the data API. All of the details are subject to change, but this preview should give you a general idea of what the API will be like."
And as O'Reilly pointed out, this is like moving an inch in the direction of real data portability.
The proof is in the pudding. My point is that it's not about the size of the networks (which is what the press says), the openness of the data (which is what O'Reilly) says, but distribution.
If OpenSocial can pull it of *then* we have a real fight on our hands. Right now it's a bunch of nothing.
If OpenSocial doesn't even address that problem then they're still two steps behind.
Good luck and successes in blogging!