Apple should dump Ping (which is garbage) and start over with a new Social Network baked right into iOS. Make it super simple to use, super simple privacy controls with defaults to total privacy, and keep the advertisers out. Google+ is actually a great model. Build it just to make Zuck crap his pants.
Is it so hard to understand that FB sees itself as a new OS? Of course they want their own phone. And on their phone FaceBook won't be an app. Apps will run in Facebook. You'll make calls in Facebook. Your friends are your contacts. You'll take photos IN Facebook. Your photo stream will be Facebook. Your music will be IN Facebook. Of course they want their own phone. And they'll probably give it away.
By the way, THAT'S how you make money in mobile. Control all the info, give away the hardware. Drop in ads as "features" throughout. Is it genius? No, it's obvious, really. It's what they have to become to be successful long term.
I'd say they better get cracking. I give them less than a year to make this work. Otherwise all inertia will be working against them. If they fail, I see Apple buying them for a song - maybe - in 2014 or 2015.
I don't think FB sees itself as a new OS. That's the opinion of the NY Times writer. Nick Bilton even wrote that Facebook has "an entire OS" already, which is of course all wrong. Messaging, contacts and photo-sharing are features of an app, not an OS foundation. That's what happens when reporters without a tech background pretend to understand tech.
Apple should dump Ping (which is garbage) and start over with a new Social Network baked right into iOS. Make it super simple to use, super simple privacy controls with defaults to total privacy, and keep the advertisers out. Google+ is actually a great model. Build it just to make Zuck crap his pants.
Facebook and Apple should patch up their differences so that Ping becomes integrated into FB, and FB becomes integrated into iOS.
Apple should dump Ping (which is garbage) and start over with a new Social Network baked right into iOS. Make it super simple to use, super simple privacy controls with defaults to total privacy, and keep the advertisers out. Google+ is actually a great model. Build it just to make Zuck crap his pants.
Yeah, the new Google+ app is very beautiful and very Apple-ish. Only if Google hadn't screwed up its relationship with Apple... /sigh
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
I don't think FB sees itself as a new OS. That's the opinion of the NY Times writer. Nick Bilton even wrote that Facebook has "an entire OS" already, which is of course all wrong. Messaging, contacts and photo-sharing are features of an app, not an OS foundation. That's what happens when reporters without a tech background pretend to understand tech.
Why are you so narrow-minded? Maybe he's talking about an Android fork that Facebook has been working on, like Amazon's Kindle Fire.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
Facebook and Apple should patch up their differences so that Ping becomes integrated into FB, and FB becomes integrated into iOS.
Umm, no. The day that Facebook invades iOS...dear lord I can't even imagine.
Apple should dump Ping (which is garbage) and start over with a new Social Network baked right into iOS. Make it super simple to use, super simple privacy controls with defaults to total privacy, and keep the advertisers out. Google+ is actually a great model. Build it just to make Zuck crap his pants.
Apple is already a leader in social networking. Apple's social network "just works" so well we forget we use Apple's social network everyday. Why would Apple change their position and copy less successful companies in order to directly compete with those companies?
Apple
Facebook
Google
Twitter
User Base
125 million (based on unique iCloud users)
900 million
170 million
140 million
Persistent
Yes on Apple Hardware
No
No (can be circumvented on hardware)
No
Cross Platform
OS X, iOS, Windows
HTML based
HTML based
HTML based
Personalized Page
No
Facebook Pages
Google+ Pages
Yes
Contacts or Friends List
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Social Groups
No but Contacts may be grouped
Yes
Yes
No
Hashtags
No
No
Yes
Yes
Email
Mail and iCloud
Messenger
Gmail
No
Instant Messaging
Messages
Facebook Messenger
Messenger
Tweets
Video Chat
FaceTime
Yes
Hangouts
external video chat links
Real-time Feeds
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Location Sharing
Find Friends
No
No
No
Location “Check-in”
No
No but update could include location
No but update could include location
No but update could include location
Reminders for Events (i.e. birthdays)
Yes, if information added to Contacts
Yes
via Google Calendar
No
Digital Photography Sharing
Yes but not released on all hardware
Yes
Yes
Yes
Web Page Recommendations
No
Like button
+1 button
Tweet button
App Recommendations or Links
Link Maker
Like button
+1 button
Tweet button
Book Recommendations or Links
Link Maker
Like button
+1 button
Tweet button
Movie Recommendations or Links
Link Maker
Like button
+1 button
Tweet button
Music Recommendations or Links
Link Maker & Ping
Like button
+1 button
Tweet button
TV Show Recommendations or Links
Link Maker
Like button
+1 button
Tweet button
Multiplayer game Matchmaking
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Social Gaming
Game Center
Yes
Games
No
Game Achievements
Yes
Yes via Facebook Updates
?
No
Leader Boards
Yes
Yes via Facebook Updates
?
No
Trending
Via iTunes Store “What’s Hot”
Yes
Ripples and Sparks
Yes
Revenue Model
Hardware, iTunes Store
Ad supported B2B & B2C lead generation
Ad supported B2B & B2C lead generation
Ad supported B2B & B2C lead generation
Apple social networking users invest in Apple products and services because they like those products and services thus they purchase more products and services which furthers vendor lock-in. We know that users invest in Apple products and services due to the well documented customer satisfaction rates, customer retention rates as well as the market share of Apple products and services, especially the iTunes Store. The key to the success of Apple's social networking is the persistent, ubiquitous but non-intrusive nature of the interactions. For example, Messages was simply integrated into the existing SMS/MMS app, multiplayer matchmaking is offered within many games via API. The concept of logging into a website or opening an app specifically to send an update or tweet doesn't exist, instead the interaction is part of the typical workflow for using a feature or accomplishing that function.
Furthermore, Apple could quite easily extend Ping to include app developers, book authors, as well as movie and TV show actors and directors. Ping is not a priority for Apple thus Apple doesn't force customers to use Ping. If Apple so desired they could easily link Ping to your contact data (which they could mine from your Apple products). Rather than fighting for your attention in social networking Apple has chosen to provide the best source for direct consumer payments for digital media content while other companies fight over advertising dollars. The advertising revenue will only continue as long as the companies can continue to drive customer interaction. Thus far, consumers have demonstrated that social networking must be engaging and said engagement should preferably be other users.
Conversely, we might speculate that many users of typical social networking services use those services to easily and quickly contact family, friends and associates as well as "because everyone else is using" the service. (http://people.bath.ac.uk/aj266/pubs_pdf/p1027-joinson.pdf). Users seem to resent this to some degree since Facebook customer satisfaction has been as low as 64% according to one study (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook#cite_note-133).
My apologies for not posting sources extensively but I will credit Wikipedia for much of the data as well as FAQs about the services themselves unless otherwise specified.
I hear people say this all the time but I never hear them back it up with any rational arguments.
Ping is not even really a social network, it's just a "like" button in iTunes. There is nothing wrong with Ping, it just has no users because there is no reason to "like" something on Ping when you'd only have to like it again on Facebook later, or stream your like to Facebook, etc.
Social networks are a popularity game. Most are ugly, trashy, and boring, just like the general public that populate them.
Apple is not good at any of those things and probably never will be. The day any Apple social network exists that is wildly popular, is the day after the day you should have sold all your Apple stock.
Furthermore, the whole point of creating a social network, is to whore out your users for cash. Facebook, MySpace, Google+ etc. are al horrible things made by soul-less companies with no morals. I'd rather Apple stayed out of that. If a company really cares about it's customers, it wouldn't be in the social network business.
So there will be another (like this http://bit.ly/K2oMdh) copy of iPhone? :-) ...fortunately there is no need to buy other phones than phones with iOS...
Oh, and Zuckerberg's recent quote about Facebook existing to only "make the world more open and connected" is perhaps the biggest pile of crap ever.
He is NOT that altruistic.
Neither are his new shareholders.
He is so full of it.
Props to that. I think this whole social thing is making us all communicate less. FB to me is more of a 'show the world what you have' rather tha communicating more. See this speaker at Ted.com
(...) Furthermore, the whole point of creating a social network, is to whore out your users for cash. Facebook, MySpace, Google+ etc. are al horrible things made by soul-less companies with no morals. I'd rather Apple stayed out of that. If a company really cares about it's customers, it wouldn't be in the social network business.
Luv it! 'Whore out your users' That is a great way to put it.
I think this whole social thing is making us all communicate less. FB to me is more of a 'show the world what you have' rather tha communicating more. See this speaker at Ted.com
If you cancel your weekly lunch date with your best friend and instead post messages on their Facebook wall... then yes... you're doing it wrong. That really is a shame... and I feel sorry for those kinds of people.
I do agree that Facebook is a "show the world" kinda thing. That's kinda what it's good for.
Example: I just saw my friend's wedding pictures on Facebook. She lives 2 states away. I wouldn't have seen those photos otherwise. Is that so bad?
As for communicating less... you have to look at the various way to communicate: Face-to-face, phone, email, text, Skype, etc.
Is any one of those ways the best way to communicate?
On Facebook you can communicate via messages, chat, video chat, posting on a wall, commenting on a photo, etc.
I posted a picture I took at a concert over the weekend. I got 8 comments and 15 likes. I don't think there's anything wrong with that: post once... seen by many.
I never thought of Facebook as replacing other forms of communication. I see it as a way to communicate in ways you couldn't do before.
I still go out and meet with people face-to-face... and talk on the phone all the time. But I'm not gonna call someone and describe a photograph over the phone.
That's better left to Facebook to "show the world"
Yeah, the new Google+ app is very beautiful and very Apple-ish. Only if Google hadn't screwed up its relationship with Apple... /sigh
Why are you so narrow-minded? Maybe he's talking about an Android fork that Facebook has been working on, like Amazon's Kindle Fire.
If you read his article, you would know that is not what he is talking about. Shouldn't you do that before criticizing someone for being narrow-minded?
Given that this comment is baseless and there a fail, the rest of your comments can also be considered fails, making you a total fail. Good thing your parents are still paying for your education. Hope remains with you. Make the best of what you have.
If you cancel your weekly lunch date with your best friend and instead post messages on their Facebook wall... then yes... you're doing it wrong. That really is a shame... and I feel sorry for those kinds of people.
I do agree that Facebook is a "show the world" kinda thing. That's kinda what it's good for.
Example: I just saw my friend's wedding pictures on Facebook. She lives 2 states away. I wouldn't have seen those photos otherwise. Is that so bad?
As for communicating less... you have to look at the various way to communicate: Face-to-face, phone, email, text, Skype, etc.
Is any one of those ways the best way to communicate?
On Facebook you can communicate via messages, chat, video chat, posting on a wall, commenting on a photo, etc.
I posted a picture I took at a concert over the weekend. I got 8 comments and 15 likes. I don't think there's anything wrong with that: post once... seen by many.
I never thought of Facebook as replacing other forms of communication. I see it as a way to communicate in ways you couldn't do before.
I still go out and meet with people face-to-face... and talk on the phone all the time. But I'm not gonna call someone and describe a photograph over the phone.
That's better left to Facebook to "show the world"
Agree totally.
Also, anyone who has used Facebook events (80-99%?) would know that FB is also helping people get together. Photo-sharing after the event also enhances the experience. Those who criticize FB for being an anti-social tool are just looking for an excuse to criticize anything.
I am certainly not. As long there are kids growing up and no other new innovations created elsewhere or in the near future, there always be some idiotic decisions will be made in regards to buying this kind of thing. Just ask Androids/BB about iOS users, and vice versa.
They are worried that FB will become just an app but when they make their own phone, inevitably, they soon going to close it up. In the end, it is going to be just another phone in a saturated market.
And they cannot do anything about it. Mark is owns the controlling interest in Facebook.
Only partially true. If he does something illegal or something which is clearly not in the interests of the shareholders, he can be sued or subject to an SEC investigation.
I am certainly not. As long there are kids growing up and no other new innovations created elsewhere or in the near future, there always be some idiotic decisions will be made in regards to buying this kind of thing. Just ask Androids/BB about iOS users, and vice versa.They are worried that FB will become just an app but when they make their own phone, inevitably, they soon going to close it up. In the end, it is going to be just another phone in a saturated market.
I personally think there is a high chance a Facebook phone eats most of Samsung's lunch. I'm sure not worried about them being a threat to Apple.
Fingers crossed anyway, I'm not a Huge Facebook fan, but I sure would laugh to see Samsung given a thrashing. Samsung have little to offer in terms of software, whereas Facebook could provide unrivalled Facebook/social integration.
Lets take a deep breath here. Mark now has to make FB into a money, grubbing company. As of now FB doesn't have any intellectual products as I know, correct me if I'm wrong. So, in order for them too break into the big leagues as far as smart phones go they will have to acquire technologies you know they ain't got.
It takes years and billions of R&D money to make the stuff that powers these gadget today. So FB will have to license technologies; then put that finish product on the market. A market that is crazy saturated.
Aside from the phone, which I believe would fail, they will have to start charging people to use non basic FB.
What us non basic FB? I don't f**** know cause I'm making this sh** up as I write but you feel me.
There would be a FB Lite. Free. Then there would be other variants of FB that will come at a cost.You'd get more storage, more features. You know how this sh** works.
Hey, FB is now the sole interest of stock holders.
Every quarter Mark will have to face those folks on Wall Street and tell them how the business is going and how he plans on making more money all the time.
The honeymoon is over!
We'll see if he can actually be that "MAN" like Ballmer, Cook, Whitman, Ellsion etc.
I hear people say this all the time but I never hear them back it up with any rational arguments.
Ping is not even really a social network, it's just a "like" button in iTunes. There is nothing wrong with Ping, it just has no users because there is no reason to "like" something on Ping when you'd only have to like it again on Facebook later, or stream your like to Facebook, etc.
Social networks are a popularity game. Most are ugly, trashy, and boring, just like the general public that populate them.
Apple is not good at any of those things and probably never will be. The day any Apple social network exists that is wildly popular, is the day after the day you should have sold all your Apple stock.
Furthermore, the whole point of creating a social network, is to whore out your users for cash. Facebook, MySpace, Google+ etc. are al horrible things made by soul-less companies with no morals. I'd rather Apple stayed out of that. If a company really cares about it's customers, it wouldn't be in the social network business.
Excellent comments about Ping.
What is Apple "not good at?" Apple does have a social network although we can discuss whether or not "wildly popular" is a valid description.
The point of creating a social network isn't to "whore out your users," that is the revenue model (for many social networks) although the difference is functionally indistinguishable to consumers. Apple has demonstrated that social networks need not "whore out your users," they simply need an alternative revenue model such as Apple has.
The point of creating a social network isn't to "whore out your users," that is the revenue model (for many social networks) although the difference is functionally indistinguishable to consumers. Apple has demonstrated that social networks need not "whore out your users," they simply need an alternative revenue model such as Apple has.
Absolutely. The only reason Facebook (and the rest) "whore" out users is because that is the main method of generating income. Whereas, if Apple were to ever create a proper social network, they wouldn't need to whore out the users, it would exist ultimately to sell more hardware.
Comments
Apple should dump Ping (which is garbage) and start over with a new Social Network baked right into iOS. Make it super simple to use, super simple privacy controls with defaults to total privacy, and keep the advertisers out. Google+ is actually a great model. Build it just to make Zuck crap his pants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shogun
Is it so hard to understand that FB sees itself as a new OS? Of course they want their own phone. And on their phone FaceBook won't be an app. Apps will run in Facebook. You'll make calls in Facebook. Your friends are your contacts. You'll take photos IN Facebook. Your photo stream will be Facebook. Your music will be IN Facebook. Of course they want their own phone. And they'll probably give it away.
By the way, THAT'S how you make money in mobile. Control all the info, give away the hardware. Drop in ads as "features" throughout. Is it genius? No, it's obvious, really. It's what they have to become to be successful long term.
I'd say they better get cracking. I give them less than a year to make this work. Otherwise all inertia will be working against them. If they fail, I see Apple buying them for a song - maybe - in 2014 or 2015.
I don't think FB sees itself as a new OS. That's the opinion of the NY Times writer. Nick Bilton even wrote that Facebook has "an entire OS" already, which is of course all wrong. Messaging, contacts and photo-sharing are features of an app, not an OS foundation. That's what happens when reporters without a tech background pretend to understand tech.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada
Apple should dump Ping (which is garbage) and start over with a new Social Network baked right into iOS. Make it super simple to use, super simple privacy controls with defaults to total privacy, and keep the advertisers out. Google+ is actually a great model. Build it just to make Zuck crap his pants.
Facebook and Apple should patch up their differences so that Ping becomes integrated into FB, and FB becomes integrated into iOS.
Why are they using ex Apple engineers when they can buy a used ready to go mobile phone company from Google for $15 billion...
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada
Apple should dump Ping (which is garbage) and start over with a new Social Network baked right into iOS. Make it super simple to use, super simple privacy controls with defaults to total privacy, and keep the advertisers out. Google+ is actually a great model. Build it just to make Zuck crap his pants.
Yeah, the new Google+ app is very beautiful and very Apple-ish. Only if Google hadn't screwed up its relationship with Apple... /sigh
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
I don't think FB sees itself as a new OS. That's the opinion of the NY Times writer. Nick Bilton even wrote that Facebook has "an entire OS" already, which is of course all wrong. Messaging, contacts and photo-sharing are features of an app, not an OS foundation. That's what happens when reporters without a tech background pretend to understand tech.
Why are you so narrow-minded? Maybe he's talking about an Android fork that Facebook has been working on, like Amazon's Kindle Fire.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
Facebook and Apple should patch up their differences so that Ping becomes integrated into FB, and FB becomes integrated into iOS.
Umm, no. The day that Facebook invades iOS...dear lord I can't even imagine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada
Apple should dump Ping (which is garbage) and start over with a new Social Network baked right into iOS. Make it super simple to use, super simple privacy controls with defaults to total privacy, and keep the advertisers out. Google+ is actually a great model. Build it just to make Zuck crap his pants.
Apple is already a leader in social networking. Apple's social network "just works" so well we forget we use Apple's social network everyday. Why would Apple change their position and copy less successful companies in order to directly compete with those companies?
Apple
Facebook
Google
Twitter
User Base
125 million (based on unique iCloud users)
900 million
170 million
140 million
Persistent
Yes on Apple Hardware
No
No (can be circumvented on hardware)
No
Cross Platform
OS X, iOS, Windows
HTML based
HTML based
HTML based
Personalized Page
No
Facebook Pages
Google+ Pages
Yes
Contacts or Friends List
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Social Groups
No but Contacts may be grouped
Yes
Yes
No
Hashtags
No
No
Yes
Yes
Email
Mail and iCloud
Messenger
Gmail
No
Instant Messaging
Messages
Facebook Messenger
Messenger
Tweets
Video Chat
FaceTime
Yes
Hangouts
external video chat links
Real-time Feeds
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Location Sharing
Find Friends
No
No
No
Location “Check-in”
No
No but update could include location
No but update could include location
No but update could include location
Reminders for Events (i.e. birthdays)
Yes, if information added to Contacts
Yes
via Google Calendar
No
Digital Photography Sharing
Yes but not released on all hardware
Yes
Yes
Yes
Web Page Recommendations
No
Like button
+1 button
Tweet button
App Recommendations or Links
Link Maker
Like button
+1 button
Tweet button
Book Recommendations or Links
Link Maker
Like button
+1 button
Tweet button
Movie Recommendations or Links
Link Maker
Like button
+1 button
Tweet button
Music Recommendations or Links
Link Maker & Ping
Like button
+1 button
Tweet button
TV Show Recommendations or Links
Link Maker
Like button
+1 button
Tweet button
Multiplayer game Matchmaking
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Social Gaming
Game Center
Yes
Games
No
Game Achievements
Yes
Yes via Facebook Updates
?
No
Leader Boards
Yes
Yes via Facebook Updates
?
No
Trending
Via iTunes Store “What’s Hot”
Yes
Ripples and Sparks
Yes
Revenue Model
Hardware, iTunes Store
Ad supported B2B & B2C lead generation
Ad supported B2B & B2C lead generation
Ad supported B2B & B2C lead generation
Apple social networking users invest in Apple products and services because they like those products and services thus they purchase more products and services which furthers vendor lock-in. We know that users invest in Apple products and services due to the well documented customer satisfaction rates, customer retention rates as well as the market share of Apple products and services, especially the iTunes Store. The key to the success of Apple's social networking is the persistent, ubiquitous but non-intrusive nature of the interactions. For example, Messages was simply integrated into the existing SMS/MMS app, multiplayer matchmaking is offered within many games via API. The concept of logging into a website or opening an app specifically to send an update or tweet doesn't exist, instead the interaction is part of the typical workflow for using a feature or accomplishing that function.
Furthermore, Apple could quite easily extend Ping to include app developers, book authors, as well as movie and TV show actors and directors. Ping is not a priority for Apple thus Apple doesn't force customers to use Ping. If Apple so desired they could easily link Ping to your contact data (which they could mine from your Apple products). Rather than fighting for your attention in social networking Apple has chosen to provide the best source for direct consumer payments for digital media content while other companies fight over advertising dollars. The advertising revenue will only continue as long as the companies can continue to drive customer interaction. Thus far, consumers have demonstrated that social networking must be engaging and said engagement should preferably be other users.
Conversely, we might speculate that many users of typical social networking services use those services to easily and quickly contact family, friends and associates as well as "because everyone else is using" the service. (http://people.bath.ac.uk/aj266/pubs_pdf/p1027-joinson.pdf). Users seem to resent this to some degree since Facebook customer satisfaction has been as low as 64% according to one study (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook#cite_note-133).
My apologies for not posting sources extensively but I will credit Wikipedia for much of the data as well as FAQs about the services themselves unless otherwise specified.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada
Apple should dump Ping (which is garbage) ...
I hear people say this all the time but I never hear them back it up with any rational arguments.
Ping is not even really a social network, it's just a "like" button in iTunes. There is nothing wrong with Ping, it just has no users because there is no reason to "like" something on Ping when you'd only have to like it again on Facebook later, or stream your like to Facebook, etc.
Social networks are a popularity game. Most are ugly, trashy, and boring, just like the general public that populate them.
Apple is not good at any of those things and probably never will be. The day any Apple social network exists that is wildly popular, is the day after the day you should have sold all your Apple stock.
Furthermore, the whole point of creating a social network, is to whore out your users for cash. Facebook, MySpace, Google+ etc. are al horrible things made by soul-less companies with no morals. I'd rather Apple stayed out of that. If a company really cares about it's customers, it wouldn't be in the social network business.
So there will be another (like this http://bit.ly/K2oMdh) copy of iPhone? :-) ...fortunately there is no need to buy other phones than phones with iOS...
Indeed. Read this from Reuters
I thought he has 22% of the shares, so had to look it up. That part is true, but apparently he also has 57% voting shares, which I didn't know.
Yep, by hacking into Hwrvards' computers, stealing photos. Class act this Mark; the guy is a thieve.
Props to that. I think this whole social thing is making us all communicate less. FB to me is more of a 'show the world what you have' rather tha communicating more. See this speaker at Ted.com
Luv it! 'Whore out your users' That is a great way to put it.
If you cancel your weekly lunch date with your best friend and instead post messages on their Facebook wall... then yes... you're doing it wrong. That really is a shame... and I feel sorry for those kinds of people.
I do agree that Facebook is a "show the world" kinda thing. That's kinda what it's good for.
Example: I just saw my friend's wedding pictures on Facebook. She lives 2 states away. I wouldn't have seen those photos otherwise. Is that so bad?
As for communicating less... you have to look at the various way to communicate: Face-to-face, phone, email, text, Skype, etc.
Is any one of those ways the best way to communicate?
On Facebook you can communicate via messages, chat, video chat, posting on a wall, commenting on a photo, etc.
I posted a picture I took at a concert over the weekend. I got 8 comments and 15 likes. I don't think there's anything wrong with that: post once... seen by many.
I never thought of Facebook as replacing other forms of communication. I see it as a way to communicate in ways you couldn't do before.
I still go out and meet with people face-to-face... and talk on the phone all the time. But I'm not gonna call someone and describe a photograph over the phone.
That's better left to Facebook to "show the world"
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh
Who would want to buy a Facebook phone?! Does not compute.
I think you might be surprised.
Quote:
Originally Posted by okungnyo
Yeah, the new Google+ app is very beautiful and very Apple-ish. Only if Google hadn't screwed up its relationship with Apple... /sigh
Why are you so narrow-minded? Maybe he's talking about an Android fork that Facebook has been working on, like Amazon's Kindle Fire.
If you read his article, you would know that is not what he is talking about. Shouldn't you do that before criticizing someone for being narrow-minded?
Given that this comment is baseless and there a fail, the rest of your comments can also be considered fails, making you a total fail. Good thing your parents are still paying for your education. Hope remains with you. Make the best of what you have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip
If you cancel your weekly lunch date with your best friend and instead post messages on their Facebook wall... then yes... you're doing it wrong. That really is a shame... and I feel sorry for those kinds of people.
I do agree that Facebook is a "show the world" kinda thing. That's kinda what it's good for.
Example: I just saw my friend's wedding pictures on Facebook. She lives 2 states away. I wouldn't have seen those photos otherwise. Is that so bad?
As for communicating less... you have to look at the various way to communicate: Face-to-face, phone, email, text, Skype, etc.
Is any one of those ways the best way to communicate?
On Facebook you can communicate via messages, chat, video chat, posting on a wall, commenting on a photo, etc.
I posted a picture I took at a concert over the weekend. I got 8 comments and 15 likes. I don't think there's anything wrong with that: post once... seen by many.
I never thought of Facebook as replacing other forms of communication. I see it as a way to communicate in ways you couldn't do before.
I still go out and meet with people face-to-face... and talk on the phone all the time. But I'm not gonna call someone and describe a photograph over the phone.
That's better left to Facebook to "show the world"
Agree totally.
Also, anyone who has used Facebook events (80-99%?) would know that FB is also helping people get together. Photo-sharing after the event also enhances the experience. Those who criticize FB for being an anti-social tool are just looking for an excuse to criticize anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodlink
Oh, and Zuckerberg's recent quote about Facebook existing to only "make the world more open and connected" is perhaps the biggest pile of crap ever.
He is NOT that altruistic.
Neither are his new shareholders.
He is so full of it.
Perhaps the biggest ...? Since you don't know him, making such a criticism is baseless and a fail.
Besides, he has never claimed that his goal to connect the world was "altruistic". It's just his goal. What's yours?
I think you might be surprised.
I am certainly not. As long there are kids growing up and no other new innovations created elsewhere or in the near future, there always be some idiotic decisions will be made in regards to buying this kind of thing. Just ask Androids/BB about iOS users, and vice versa.They are worried that FB will become just an app but when they make their own phone, inevitably, they soon going to close it up. In the end, it is going to be just another phone in a saturated market.
Preferable to a phone that sends all your data to Google, I suppose.
Only partially true. If he does something illegal or something which is clearly not in the interests of the shareholders, he can be sued or subject to an SEC investigation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash-reverse
I am certainly not. As long there are kids growing up and no other new innovations created elsewhere or in the near future, there always be some idiotic decisions will be made in regards to buying this kind of thing. Just ask Androids/BB about iOS users, and vice versa.They are worried that FB will become just an app but when they make their own phone, inevitably, they soon going to close it up. In the end, it is going to be just another phone in a saturated market.I personally think there is a high chance a Facebook phone eats most of Samsung's lunch. I'm sure not worried about them being a threat to Apple.
Fingers crossed anyway, I'm not a Huge Facebook fan, but I sure would laugh to see Samsung given a thrashing. Samsung have little to offer in terms of software, whereas Facebook could provide unrivalled Facebook/social integration.
Lets take a deep breath here. Mark now has to make FB into a money, grubbing company. As of now FB doesn't have any intellectual products as I know, correct me if I'm wrong. So, in order for them too break into the big leagues as far as smart phones go they will have to acquire technologies you know they ain't got.
It takes years and billions of R&D money to make the stuff that powers these gadget today. So FB will have to license technologies; then put that finish product on the market. A market that is crazy saturated.
Aside from the phone, which I believe would fail, they will have to start charging people to use non basic FB.
What us non basic FB? I don't f**** know cause I'm making this sh** up as I write but you feel me.
There would be a FB Lite. Free. Then there would be other variants of FB that will come at a cost.You'd get more storage, more features. You know how this sh** works.
Hey, FB is now the sole interest of stock holders.
Every quarter Mark will have to face those folks on Wall Street and tell them how the business is going and how he plans on making more money all the time.
The honeymoon is over!
We'll see if he can actually be that "MAN" like Ballmer, Cook, Whitman, Ellsion etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
I hear people say this all the time but I never hear them back it up with any rational arguments.
Ping is not even really a social network, it's just a "like" button in iTunes. There is nothing wrong with Ping, it just has no users because there is no reason to "like" something on Ping when you'd only have to like it again on Facebook later, or stream your like to Facebook, etc.
Social networks are a popularity game. Most are ugly, trashy, and boring, just like the general public that populate them.
Apple is not good at any of those things and probably never will be. The day any Apple social network exists that is wildly popular, is the day after the day you should have sold all your Apple stock.
Furthermore, the whole point of creating a social network, is to whore out your users for cash. Facebook, MySpace, Google+ etc. are al horrible things made by soul-less companies with no morals. I'd rather Apple stayed out of that. If a company really cares about it's customers, it wouldn't be in the social network business.
Excellent comments about Ping.
What is Apple "not good at?" Apple does have a social network although we can discuss whether or not "wildly popular" is a valid description.
The point of creating a social network isn't to "whore out your users," that is the revenue model (for many social networks) although the difference is functionally indistinguishable to consumers. Apple has demonstrated that social networks need not "whore out your users," they simply need an alternative revenue model such as Apple has.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro
The point of creating a social network isn't to "whore out your users," that is the revenue model (for many social networks) although the difference is functionally indistinguishable to consumers. Apple has demonstrated that social networks need not "whore out your users," they simply need an alternative revenue model such as Apple has.
Absolutely. The only reason Facebook (and the rest) "whore" out users is because that is the main method of generating income. Whereas, if Apple were to ever create a proper social network, they wouldn't need to whore out the users, it would exist ultimately to sell more hardware.