Google's OpenSocial has caused quite a stir over the past week. With support from MySpace, Hi5, Ning, LinkedIn, SalesForce, Friendster and a number of other large social networks, many have wondered if OpenSocial might deal a large blow to Facebook, or if it might be something Facebook will be forced to join to keep up (something that they appear to be open to). But Facebook doesn't need to worry.
The killer app for any social network is its users, not its developer API. No one joins a social network so they can rate movies, or turn their friends into zombies, or declare allegiance to their favorite sports club. The reason most people join social networks is because their friends are already there, all that other stuff just enhances their experience once they're in. Users are what make social networks go.
Things like open APIs and data portability and cross network compatibility excite pundits and developers, but most users care for only two things: a good experience (apps can certainly help here) and to be where their friends are. OpenSocial is a huge win for developers, who can now create applications or widgets for just two platforms (OpenSocial and Facebook) and have them deployed to most of the largest social networks. That means a lot less work to reach a maximum amount of people. But it's silly to think that app developers are going to shun Facebook's 50 million users if they don't join OpenSocial. It's equally silly to think that any significant portion of those 50 million users are suddenly going to defect from Facebook because popular social apps will likely be available on other networks.
Facebook was growing like a weed long before they announced their platform strategy, and they'll continue growing like a weed in spite of Google's OpenSocial APIs. Facebook still has the two killer features of any successful social network: users and a good experience. Nothing Google announced this week has changed that, and neither will anything Google announced allow any other social network to automatically trump Facebook in either of those areas.
The winners of OpenSocial are Google (who now has hooks into a large number of social networking sites that reach hundreds of millions of people -- whom Google surely hopes will one day be viewing Google ads), users (who now have access to social apps on networks that previously didn't have developer APIs), app developers. If there are any losers -- and I'm not sure there are -- Facebook is definitely not one.
All that said, joining OpenSocial wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea for Facebook. It might make developers happy. It might make users who maintain more than one social networking profile happy. It could potentially expose their users to new applications, and it would ensure that no killer app that everyone needs is developed for OpenSocial but not for Facebook.
Of everything that was written this weekend on OpenSocial, I'd urge you to check out Don Dodge's excellent post, which I think was one of the most clear headed analyses of the news. But what do you think? Is OpenSocial a threat to Facebook? Should Facebook join with Google or does it not matter? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1750
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
Thanks for the kind words. I was amazed at how the tech bloggers went crazy over OpenSocial. They seem to forget that Social Networks are about the user...not the developer of the widgets they create.
I can't think of a single widget that is so good that users would jin a social network just to get it. Said another way, I haven't seen a "killer app/widget" built on top of a social network.
I think there will be some security and privacy issues with the OpenSocial API too. The Plaxo OpenSocial app was hacked withn an hour of release and has now been pulled off the market.
The comments on my blog were pretty insightful as well. See http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2007/11/50m-facebook-us.html
Don Dodge
Posted by: Don Dodge | November 3, 2007 8:22 PM
Ding Ding Ding!
Thanks for trying to bring some level headed perspective to the tech community. I could see why it's hard to have the perspective if you're not on Facebook as part of your normal everyday experience.
One thing though: I think Facebook is the killer app for social networks. It's just so much better in every possible way than MySpace. No one I know uses MySpace or any other social network for that matter. MySpace seems like the sketchy, non main stream, alternative site. I know it's bigger, but I'm not buying that it's going to stay that way.
My money is on Facebook, although MySpace will always have a dedicated and active userbase... I just don't think it'll be for the masses.
Posted by: Boris M. Silver | November 3, 2007 8:35 PM
No one I know uses MySpace or any other social network for that matter.
Doubtless there will be groups of people that say the same about Facebook. People use the same social network(s) that their friends do- which is to say that it is likely for someone to say "all of my friends use X", whatever X might be.
Posted by: Jpfed | November 3, 2007 9:41 PM
Social Networks will be a normal thing in 6 months - just as normal as text files. The clutter it the widgets cause will drown people out.
Posted by: Joseph Pally | November 3, 2007 9:42 PM
Look at it this way. The web is essentially the same for everyone. The one who builds a better, more compelling experience tends to win out. Let's say that OpenSocial becomes a layer that every social networking site uses (including Facebook). Once again, given that you can develop cross network apps, etc, the network with the best experience wins. That would still, at least in my book, be Facebook. And it is for this reason that Yahoo and Amazon should join too and make sure everyone is on a common platform which they could leverage too and not let Google have all the fun
Posted by: Deepak | November 3, 2007 11:12 PM
what would be the impact of open social on social networks like orkut and other small social networks which are not a opensocial container like ibebo.com etc...
Posted by: manish | November 3, 2007 11:29 PM
I think that in case Facebook believes this "OpenSocial VS Facebook" meme it's going to lose. Google's strategy isn't "build a great social network" it's rather "provide great tools to access information", including access to social networks' information.
What if OpenSocial-aware networks get a better exposure in Google's SERP - just because it's easier for Google to index their information and search through it properly?
Google's strategy is right - any information tends to flow to where it's needed - and they are just following that. OpenSocial API is just a step in the same direction. Everyone I believe would agree that if that wouldn't be Google that would be someone else. Recently all the analysts indicated the need for such a thing - and Google has just provided it.
Posted by: alibloomdido | November 4, 2007 1:57 AM
Facebook is doing the right thing, they should wait and see, on OpenSocial. Mark Zuckerberg is still busy countin' all that MicroSoft money, he can address OpenSocial after he finishes!
Posted by: Mark Mayhew | November 4, 2007 2:20 AM
Facebook is doing the right thing, they should wait and see, on OpenSocial. Mark Zuckerberg is still busy countin' all that MicroSoft money, he can address OpenSocial after he finishes!
Posted by: Mark Mayhew | November 4, 2007 2:21 AM
Google is doing the right thing, OpenSocial may not beat facebook, but it will be an important part of google's empire,
with OpenSocial, google will gather informations they need.
Posted by: sea | November 4, 2007 5:17 AM
google doesn't have to fear google for the moment: they don't do the same job. facebook is a sort of universal directory, linking first american students, who have the chance to have an lifetime email address provided by their university. By opening the network to others, facebook allows people to find each other, thing that google is incapable of.
By developping opensocial, google try to create a SSO, where a user could be identified by any affiliated site.
now, the goal appears to create an personnalized ID for each connected people, ID which is for the moment in the States attributes.
Posted by: julienb | November 4, 2007 8:02 AM
I think you lost focus on the actual treat from OpenSocial. Google is a mature company - they think at least ten steps in front of Facebook business-wise. OpenSocial is not another Facebook-killer. They don't care if Facebook dies or not as long as they flashing with the cash. There's a very very very high probability that the OpenSocial protokoll will be used somehow together with AdSense - in other words a huge threat to Facebook's only solid income.
In genereall...if you ask me; we'll laugh at Facebook 5 years from now.
Posted by: grimen | November 4, 2007 8:45 AM
Josh, i started out writing a comment here and ended up doing an entire post on this subject-> http://www.scrollinondubs.com/2007/11/04/opensocial-facebook-orbitz-swa/
bottomline: i agree Facebook has no reason to fear this development
sean
Posted by: Sean Tierney | November 4, 2007 11:15 AM
This is hillarious. Last week when this news first broke I wrote this post (check it out here: http://jburg.typepad.com/future/2007/11/open-social-my-.html) I took a day or two to think it over before posting, but it's great to see some vindication!
Posted by: jon burg | November 4, 2007 12:10 PM
Listen, social networking is not the end game here. Social software is where Google is driving this ship. And, it's further out than that. It's social software on a local basis.
When the mobile web is accounts for my friends, events, ratings and reviews and locations, then we'll see the fruition of countless developers' work.
Posted by: David Ciccarelli | November 4, 2007 2:03 PM
I don't care if this really takes facebook off the chart. There's nothing to lose from a user perspective. It's a good time to take opensocial API and GData API seriously from now on as well.
Posted by: David Tan | November 4, 2007 10:07 PM
I partially agree with the post - with the Users_Dont_Move part. But FaceBook's Ad Revenue may be affected in the long run since Google with its current infrastructure will be able to provide better target Ads.
When Facebook is trying to come into Google's Ad space, Google may attack FB in its home turf.
Posted by: Jeganath V | November 5, 2007 12:43 AM
I agree people go to the blog where their friends are, but thinking that 50 million user base of facebook is mutually exclusive of those on myspace or other sites is definitely not right. If facebook interface is better than other websites, there is no guarantee that it will stay that way. So the widget,apps on these sites may be differentiator, and that's where opensocial comes in which because of it's open nature can provide much richer interface and data (potentially from multiple social networking sites). Due to the simple reason that opensocial has been released after facebook platform, I expect that to be a much better platform. So in my opinion facebook should consider joining opensocial, just based on the merits of the platform if nothing else.
Posted by: liveweb | November 5, 2007 5:26 PM
I agree people go to the blog where their friends are, but thinking that 50 million user base of facebook is mutually exclusive of those on myspace or other sites is definitely not right. If facebook interface is better than other websites, there is no guarantee that it will stay that way. So the widget,apps on these sites may be differentiator, and that's where opensocial comes in which because of it's open nature can provide much richer interface and data (potentially from multiple social networking sites). Due to the simple reason that opensocial has been released after facebook platform, I expect that to be a much better platform. So in my opinion facebook should consider joining opensocial, just based on the merits of the platform if nothing else.
Posted by: liveweb | November 5, 2007 5:52 PM