

Pros and Cons of Building a Site around FBConnect - ChristianPerry
http://troggerpath.wordpress.com/2008/12/11/32/

======
mdasen
I'm not so sure about FBConnect. The author says that it makes it easier to
launch since you don't have to build a registration system. Well, that's true,
but you do have to hook into FBConnect which (for me) would be just as much if
not more work.

The author similarly leaves out what I think are the most important pitfalls.
Namely, that Facebook can simply decide to end FBConnect at anytime or make it
so much less usable (like they did to applications) that it essentially kills
you. The more users you get, the more valuable that data is, but with
FBConnect you only have that data so long as you're on Facebook's good graces.
Since you don't have any identifier (email, username, etc.) if Facebook
terminates FBConnect, you may still have the rows in the database, but now
they're not mapped to anyone since you no longer have access to Facebook.

Likewise, the more data you give Facebook, the more of a business advantage
you give them should they ever decide that your time is over. They can easily
track what sites are hot, how users use the applications based on what gets
posted to walls, etc. Then they can run you out of business with something
better integrated - like they did with some apps.

Without email addresses, you can't contact users. I hate sites that constantly
spam me, but some email is valuable.

Finally, you're saying that your site isn't good enough for users to spend the
time to open an account there. If you've made something good, your pitch
shouldn't be, "well, it's really only worth using because you don't have to
put in a new password." If you aren't getting an email from that person, then
a registration is no-hassle (like here at HN). I put in a username and repeat
a password twice (nearly as easy as logging in).

FBConnect really just looks like an attempt by Facebook to lock out
competition both in the social network arena as well as the application arena.
They can easily target your users for their own replacement of your site,
they're getting your data on what's popular, they're in a position to shut you
down should you impact their business plans.

~~~
ChristianPerry
You're absolutely right. (I'm the author of the post, btw.) I've brought up
these issues with Facebook in the past, and I've yet to receive satisfactory
answers.

Using FBConnect is a calculated risk for us. It gives us the chance to grow
faster (via News Feed integration), to make our site more social ("15 of your
Facebook friends are on Trogger. Click here to follow them."), and to
streamline the login/signup process.

As an early-stage startup, our top priority is to launch quickly and grow
fast. We feel that FBConnect helps us do both of these things better than any
alternative.

If we establish traction, and get a bunch of users, then we'll be paying a lot
of attention to the points you brought up. I think it makes a lot of sense to
have a contingency plan if Facebook significantly alters or restricts
FBConnect, in a similar way they diminished the prominence of applications not
too long ago.

At the end of the day, though, it comes down to growth. Many startups launch
and fail because no one knows about them. FBConnect gives us the best
opportunity to break out of this mold, and reach the proverbial hockey-stick a
lot faster than would otherwise be possible.

~~~
mdasen
Your post was definitely cool, but I felt you weren't one-sided enough ;-).
Maybe you could provide a link to Trogger? Is it still in development?

As a piece of advice, I would recommend _very_ strongly that you get people's
email even if it makes registration a two-step process. That way, if anything
happens, you can generate temp passwords and email them with an explanation
that Facebook terminated FBConnect, but you're still good!

------
timcederman
Facebook Connect is fantastic if you want to build an app that requires access
to a user's social graph without being obtrusive. Anything else and it feels a
little pointless.

That said, there are a million good reasons to access that social graph. We
wanted to use it so that when you signed up to our site, we could see which
companies your friends had worked at in the present/past, and thus show you
jobs your friends may be able to refer you to. Since FB didn't accept us to
their program, we had to build the connection infrastructure from scratch
which a) sucked up a lot of time and resources and b) will never be as
successful as using an existing network.

------
AndrewDucker
The limited user base is the one that would do it for me. 100million people
may seem like a lot, but that's less than 7% of internet users
(<http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm>).

I'm fairly sure that I wouldn't want to be turning away 9/10 of the people
visiting my site...

You could go with OpenID - or use a third party like RPXNow.

------
flashgordon
The real argument for FBConnect or any other connect mechanism (ie google's
and myspace's connect) is that you suddenly get to use those social networks
as distribution and promotional channels for your apps.

so its not so much about the ease of development/integration (which it
actually is if you already have a registration system) its about user
acquisition and reducing the barriers in doing so.

------
petercooper
facebook built fbconnect. it's okay

