

Ex-Google Engineer Explains Why Google Failed At Social Networking - shashank261
http://www.quora.com/Why-havent-major-companies-like-Google-Microsoft-or-Yahoo-succeeded-at-social-networking

======
mquander
I can't fathom why you linked to some blogspam instead of linking the primary
source. (Interesting thread, though.)

[http://www.quora.com/Why-havent-major-companies-like-
Google-...](http://www.quora.com/Why-havent-major-companies-like-Google-
Microsoft-or-Yahoo-succeeded-at-social-networking)

~~~
tokenadult
Yes, always link to the main source. This comment from there

"Unless Facebook figures out how to increase their per user monetization by
25x, Facebook would not become a Google sized company. At its current and past
monetization rates social networking has not been a very desirable area except
as it affects the strategic interests of these companies."

was interesting.

------
ajays
Oh come on! In 2005, Facebook was barely out of colleges. Memory's fuzzy, but
till about late 2004/early 2005, you could join Facebook only if you had a
.EDU address. So expecting Googlers to be Facebook users is a bit disingenuous
. Plus, 2005 was over 5 years ago; things have changed since then.

Just because it's an ex-Googler it does not make his (her?) statements the
gospel truth.

If there's something to be said, it is that Google underestimated the network
effect: that if most of your social circle is on a social network, then you
automatically have a large incentive to join it.

------
jay_kyburz
I don't think many people understand why Facebook is so popular. I don't think
it's status updates or micro-blogging. Facebook simplifies the internet for
people who don't want to be using the internet. A one stop shop for people who
don't trust the rest of the web or installing software. Photo-sharing, IM,
mail messaging, games. It's all there with a simple interface. Even my mum can
use it.

Google has a huge range of great tools, all available under a single login,
but their presentation is a total mess.

I'd love an opportunity to spend a few months building a better "Google
Portal".

Oh, and I don't think anything they make will just grow virally. If they want
it, the'll have to buy it. They should spend a bucket-load advertising it in
mainstream media.

------
bambax
> I encountered an environment that viewed social networking as a frivolous
> form of entertainment

I don't think Google to this day actually wants to be in social networking;
the problem they have with Facebook is they can't index it, they can't be a
gateway to Facebook as they are to everything else; Facebook in many ways is
the gateway for its users.

------
QuantumGood
(1) Orkut is not a "failure"—so Google didn't "fail." They just didn't compete
well against Facebook. But no one else did, either.

(2) Having just one email address lets you connect with everyone you want to
connect with—it doesn't matter which provider you choose. Social Networks
aren't like that. If there is one that dominates, you can't get on a competing
service and get the same utility—the people you want to connect with aren't
there. Being an existing provider of a large network is a HUGE advantage.

(3) Facebook has crushed previously successful networks. Expecting a company
to create a NEW network to succeed where EXISTING networks lost ground to
Facebook is a ridiculously high bar.

------
erreon
I don't think it's too late at all to get into the game. For a company like
Google who experiments and usually learns from its mistakes. I think it has a
chance to grab a decent chunk of the social networking market. If that doesn't
work, they've also got a lot of cash sitting around to buy a few companies
that do have the right idea.

