

Why Facebook becoming new Yahoo? - akarambir
https://plus.google.com/113117251731252114390/posts/cmrXCip3uhu

======
rjd
TBH I thought Facebook was innovating like hell, rebuilding itself into a
communication platform instead of a social network.

From what I've seen working on a major news site they are destroying Google in
referral traffic. Seems to me they know what they are doing, and its no
accident they are in the number one place.

He's totally correct about them copying Google+ features, but thats just
reaction to a threat, all companies do this when a competitor comes alone. Its
nothing more than an attempt to undervalue.

He's also wrong about the noise controls on Facebook. They work well, they
monitor interest to those who follow you, and if theres interest the post gets
promoted. If its not getting promoted, chances are that it didn't get initial
traction.

Plus the audiences are completely different, I don't have a single tech
orientated thing on Facebook. Just music, the arts, TV shows, stuff I do to
relax and have fun.

I don't expect to see Scoble articles on my Facebook, I expect to see them in
my special curated RSS feeds which I read when I work. Maybe I'm weird not
wanting to mix pleasure and work, but I kind of think it would be the norm.

Google+ is in a heavy nose dive, except for a few demagogue like figures, and
a very tech orientated control prone to idolisation of said people. I haven't
noticed an inch of innovation on it at all, so this guys entire article seems
like an agenda push, rather than actual analysis or reporting. I've never
followed this guy before, but he's definitely devalued my opinion of him and
gone onto "talk with a grain of salt" list for that piece.

I guess this guy is his little attention bubble and blind to fact that Google+
is a joke to everyone else, is being lampooned very hard on other social
websites. This one from Reddit had me laughing the other day
<http://i.imgur.com/XNkyT.png>

------
Ashoat
Honestly, I'm failing to see how G+ is a "creature of vision". Sure, it has a
couple new and unique features - circles, chat, etc. But most of it is a
direct copy of Facebook! Profile and feed are two examples where Facebook has
innovated to establish itself as a strong identity provider, and G+ blatantly
copied those features.

I'm not blaming Google for doing that. In fact, were I in their position I
would be doing the exact same thing. But it's silly to claim that Facebook
doesn't innovate. I'm not sure if people are just so used to ideas like the
News Feed that they don't see it, but a couple years ago Facebook created that
feature and it led to an explosion of social communication on their site.

It's also worth pointing out that Facebook's mission statement is "to make the
world more open and connected". If you look at their products from that
perspective, I think they start more like "Win!" and less like "Fail!"

------
nod
I think the author goes wrong here: "I think we can all agree that tech
companies can be slotted into the following [4] categories"

This opinion does not reflect reality - it seeks to take a messy
multidimensional spectrum and collapse it into a nice tidy bundle that can
provide a self-satisfying mental model and throw off look-at-me-I'm-so-wise
sound-bites.

This is the failure of punditry, and this is why reading this article (and
parsing out its underlying assumptions) is not worth your time.

------
protomyth
I think Microsoft has vision, it's just more in terms of the customer via one
product (Windows). Their vision is to own the market and do what is needed to
get there. It does help that they have some amazing people working there. It
would help more if they could trim the turf-protecting management down.

