I just read on forbes how Zuckerberg was in NY pimping his advertising platforms. I'm not entirely clear, but it doesn't look good for independent developers that create applications on facebook.
It sounds like a "Facebook Advertiser" is going to have their branded applications all over the place, while indie developers are left in the cold.
If a small application developer is under the illusion that he can win a fight with a big-brand widget, that’s a bad plan, says Gerd Leonhard, chief executive of Sonific, which recently launched a music widget on Facebook.
“Facebook is the place where you cut your teeth and see if you have value on lots of networks and platforms,” he says. “If you want to be number one you’ll be hurt by this development. Facebook is cool and everything, but don’t put all your eggs in one basket.”
Yikes!
I've started to look at OpenSocial, the timebomb Google hopes will knock Facebook of their pedestal.
My initial impression wasn't that great. Mostly.. meh. It wasn't the whizz-bang, socket-to-me punch I have come to expect from MountainView. It may grow on me, but I'll reserve my excitement till it bears fruit.
Tim O'Reilly wrote a nice piece called 'It's the data, stupid'.
He has a great example:
Imagine what would have happened to Google maps if instead of supporting mashups, they had built a framework that allowed developers to create mapping applications across Microsoft, Yahoo! and Google as a way of competing with MapQuest. Boring! That's the equivalent of what they've announced here.
I have to agree with him that data mobility is key. It's great for developers that their applications can now run on platform-x and platform-y, but it doesn't look like they will have access to the same data. Not that great for users.
It's made me contemplate creating a microformat based social network, that goes against the trend of creating closely guarded silo's of data. Hmmm..
No comments:
Post a Comment