
Why Facebook will never be Twitter - jmonegro
http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/blogspotting/archives/2009/09/why_facebook_wi.html
======
zaidf
Totally disagree.

I really hope Facebook will add a "Public" tab under my profile. More and more
I find myself posting status messages that I would LIKE to make public.

Personally I was very pessimistic about FB when they made status messages the
focus. Months later, I have to applaud them. My engagement on FB has increased
many folds since.

~~~
ujjwalg
I think I agree with you on this one. I used to tweet a lot but for the last
two weeks, somehow facebook is back in business. I have been updating my
status with links more than I tweet.

------
jonknee
The bigger question is will either (or both!) become a lucrative business?

~~~
maxwell
No. Like Flickr, Delicious, and YouTube, their brand will be the death of
them. Flickr can't diversify (at scale) beyond a photo sharing site, so
they'll be killed by a service with really great photo sharing as one feature
among many. Same with the Delicious = bookmarks mapping, and YouTube = videos.
They'll all just be forgotten fads from the twenty-oughts.

Unless they let themselves get acquired, Posterous will beat every other
sharing service. The brand will probably fade into the background though, and
we'll all just have a "page." They seem close to the platonic form of
electronic posts already. They're not there yet, but they're at least moving
in the right direction, toward something like this Model M I'm typing on, or
humanoids or sharks or Lisp.

Edit: Rescinded dumb comparison to telegraph, changed 'niche to 'brand, and a
few slight rewordings. Posterous won't "wipe out" anyone; in fact, that's
exactly why they can win.

~~~
unalone
Jesus, you think Facebook will be forgotten for fucking _Posterous_?

I think the Posterous team is terrific. They add shitloads of features, work
hard, and Garry gave me a ton of useful advice when I applied to YC. But
you're comparing a fairly amateur service with possibly the best-designed web
site of all time.

Posterous still hasn't beat Tumblr, which is rapidly becoming the most popular
blogging service. For all its features, it looks like shit and doesn't have a
rich user experience whatsoever.

Facebook, on the other hand, has struck with the force of a goddamn atomic
bomb. I must think that the people who criticize Facebook either have small
friend circles or have extremely peculiar friend circles, but I've got a
diverse bunch of contacts and the one unifying factor is that they use
Facebook. Some people use it to hook up, some people use it for class
information, some people debate politics on it, some people write long
confessionals, some people waste class time, but they all use it and they use
it _obsessively_.

Facebook has become a medium unto itself. As in, my mother will write friends
on Facebook instead of calling them. My grandfather will comment on photos. I
will create an Event on Facebook rather than calling or emailing people. I
will collaborate using a Facebook message.

Facebook's not Twitter because Twitter's designed for minimal communication.
Facebook's goal was to create private social worlds; Twitter's goal became a
public massing of information. But users on Twitter (not Twitter itself)
developed terrific methods of communication, and Facebook's adding them to its
arsenal of features.

Guess who is killing Flickr? Facebook. Guess what currently has the best
chance of killing part of Youtube's clientele. Facebook (though I wish here I
could say Vimeo). My friends send video messages to one another constantly, or
record video when nothing's going on. All of my public photos are stored on
Facebook, and once it offers public video that's where my videos are going.

Facebook offers one service, and that service is intimacy. It's talking to
friends and only friends. If I had to bet on one service surviving every other
one online, it would be Facebook. It's the only service I've seen where I
can't imagine it being dropped for something else. I thought that within a
week when I joined it in 2005, and since then I've seen nothing to convince me
otherwise. It is leagues beyond anything.

~~~
dasil003
This is why I find comparisons between Twitter and Facebook ridiculous.
Facebook is sticky, and they are delivering tons of value to all kinds of
people. Twitter on the meantime hasn't left fad territory and its growth since
the Oprah spike is significantly comprised of spam. Plus, whatever Twitter
does to monetize is likely to kill the golden goose.

~~~
maxwell
But Facebook encourages/allows behavior that users will later regret. This
will create negative feelings toward the brand by osmosis.

~~~
unalone
"Facebook allows behavior that users will later regret." What _doesn't_? If I
wanted to, I could post on Hacker News right now detailed stories about my sex
life, and I'd regret it later. That doesn't make "negative feelings toward the
brand". That makes "negative feelings toward the stupid shit I said online."
Everybody says stupid shit. Facebook isn't a requirement. Meanwhile, unless
posting photos and writing to people is "encouraging" bad behavior, Facebook
isn't.

Please look up the word "osmosis" and how to use it properly. I hate when
people use words they don't understand.

