
Facebook's Browser is Google's Worst Nightmare - shlomiatar
http://www.smorepages.com/facebook-browser
======
danmaz74
All the user needs that the article lists and that a Facebook browser would
answer to (instant notification, always on chat, etc.) could be just as easily
be answered by a simple toolbar, on top of another browser.

As for the adoption of a FB browser, I would be curious to see how it would
fare. I'm pretty convinced that most early adopters which sustained the
initial adoption of Firefox and Chrome would never use a FB browser, because
they would be worried about Facebook becoming the sole owner of the internet -
and because they're perfectly able to be always on on FB, should they want to.

Could the typical Facebook user become an early adopter? Everything's
possible, but it wouldn't be very easy.

~~~
rbarooah
Why aren't people equally worried about Google becoming the sole owner of the
Internet?

Honest question - is it because people are ok with Google being in that role,
or because they don't think Google is trying to get into that position?

~~~
LaGrange
Because Google spins things better.

Google has a nerd-friendly message, and produces things that are building
dependence and are genuinely useful (like, say, gMail). So, people are less
scared of it, and after some time denial kicks in.

Also, I'm bitter because Google is the one software company that I'm scared of
more than of Facebook :-D

~~~
Joakal
For Gmail, you can withdraw your emails out via IMAP/POP. You can export your
contacts.

~~~
LaGrange
Of course you can. But then you'd be also abandoning the workflow, and I meant
dependance on that. Only relatively recently mail clients supporting a
workflow similar to Gmail show up.

------
rmc
The title of this submission is quite misleading. This article is
_speculating_ that Facebook will make a web browser, not that Facebook is
making a web browser.

It is also not clear that a Facebook web browser would be an overnight
success, as this article presumes. I'd say the opposite in fact. There has
been enough big, old fashioned media interest in Facebook's privacy slip ups,
that any Facebook browser would be negatively talked about in the press.

------
jasonwatkinspdx
_"As Facebook becomes the social platform of the internet, a custom browser is
the next logical step."_

You'll need to explain that, because I don't think it's a logical step at all.
The remainder of the article presents some benefits, but mentioning those does
not make for a clear argument for why facebook should attempt to compete with
their own browser.

~~~
ary
Benefits for Facebook, yes. Benefits for the user? Thin at best.

------
briandear
What a bullshit article. Complete with photoshop mockups. Might as well be
another rumor about the "next" iPad killer or how it would be cool if Vimeo
built refrigerators with built-in video screens. I would certainly not even
consider using or downloading a FB browser. Last thing I need is to be
constantly Zuckerberged.

------
gatlin
> Facebook's Browser _would be_ Google's Worst Nightmare _perhaps_

Fixed the headline to be truthful.

------
Kylekramer
While the envisioned scenario would be a blow to Google, it would require so
many outlandish developments that this is basically impossible. For one,
Facebook would have to create a search engine, something that they have shown
no interest in (they seem happy to farm that out to Bing for now), much less
any capability. More importantly, people would have to use the Facebook
browser. The author really overestimating how much people like Facebook. The
example of iPhone and iPad apps' popularity aren't proof people love Facebook
products (not to mention there is no iPad app), they like accessing Facebook.
They like talking to their friends. If you pay attention to most people, they
hate new Facebook products. I hear constant bitching about the apps, the
interface, etc. The value proposition of a Facebook browser would be basically
annoying the user at all times while all other browsers could do the same
exact thing in a separate tab. Chrome didn't become popular because of tight
Google integration, it became popular because it was faster. I don't see why a
browser that just gives me Facebook updates would be any more popular than
Rockmelt or Flock.

And, of course, Google isn't stupid. Google+ is a fairly competent attempt to
head off even this out there future.

------
orijing
Isn't that what RockMelt is trying to be? I know it isn't developed by
Facebook, but with integrations like notifications, friends, chat, etc, it
basically is the Facebook browser.

~~~
nextparadigms
Yes, and I believe Facebook is an investor in Rockmelt.

~~~
briandear
Rock who?

Exactly. Facebook wasted their investment. That browser will never get above
5% usage. It would be like Camino.

------
patrickk
" _Imagine that, within a year, a modest 25% of Facebook users use their
browser. That would equate to about 200M users; all of which are using their
search._ "

I'd be willing to bet that a significant percentage of Facebook's users don't
know what a browser is. They fire up Internet Explorer and are blissfully
unaware that there are alternatives. This has been my experience with non-
techies.

Those who _do_ know what a browser is are likely to have Chrome, Firefox or
Opera installed and probably see no personal benefit in downloading yet
another browser. They are also unlikely to want to have Facebook invading
their privacy even more.

------
anothermachine
I love that 10 years after Microsoft rolled out IE in an attempt to use the
browser to disintermediate and control the user's experience, we now have
Chrome and Silk and advertisting and everyone is racing to own the browser
again.

------
movingahead
Facebook can make a web browser - or just acquire RockMelt, with which it has
worked in the past. Rockmelt is based on Chromium, so FB won't have to take
care of the browser basics, similar to how Amazon has forked Android for
Kindle Fire. But, a Facebook ad network available off-site will be more
interesting. I don't have experience with FB ads but social ads as imagined by
OP seem interesting.

------
Jabbles
_Imagine that, within a year, a modest 25% of Facebook users use their
browser. That would equate to about 200M users_

The reasoning is backwards. Converting 200 million users to a new browser is
not a trivial task. In what way would a facebook browser allow people to
better access facebook?

------
fjabre
It would be everyone's worst nightmare - a nice shot across the bow of the
open web.

~~~
briandear
Yeah.. maybe they could team up not only with Bing, but they could revive IE
6. Perhaps even get Active X back in circulation. In just a few short years we
can pull the web back into the dark ages. I would likely code all of my pages
specifically to display a blue screen if the visitor were using an FB browser.
If enough people did that, any Facebook spyware-laced browser would die on the
vine.

------
wicknicks
I would imagine that Facebook's phone would be a much bigger nightmare.

------
thechangelog
>> People try Facebook’s stuff all the time—just look at the adoption rates
for their iPhone and iPad apps

An otherwise interesting article, but there is no iPad app.

~~~
rmc
This slip up does not make me confident that the author of this article has
done their homework.

------
rudiger
I think a Facebook search engine would be Google's worst nightmare. Nothing
else directly challenges their top-line revenue.

------
cyrus_
This could work for personal browsing, but I'd imagine few people would want
to be seen using the Facebook browser at work.

------
jmount
I feel it will have about as much impact as the AOL browser or "Explorer from
Yahoo" had.

------
spoiledtechie
This is pure speculation. They aren't actually making a browser.. "Not yet"

------
wavephorm
Flagged. This is article is entirely fabricated.

