With the recent updates to facebook pages, by facebook, we are reminded that mega companies like facebook and google can do what they want, when they want. This update is far less dramatic that ones in the past but it is a small reminder that if facebook decides to rework a layout and do away with tabs in favour of left navigation, then it will.
More dramatic for developers is all the time some people spend learning FBML only to now be told that they will be phasing it out over time. Stupid idea to start your own markup language really, isn't it. There are open options for this kind of thing which is now apparent as iframes are supported instead.
The thing that is a little unnerving about all this is that after spending $xx on developing things for facebook a company may go under over night because facebook make a change that affects everyone without thought or consequence to anything other than their own agenda.
People developing for facebook you have been warned.
I expect a next post from me will be how facebook and google will probably steal your next big internet idea and do it themselves. And did I mention twitter? I will do that also.
- mark's blog
- 336 reads
Email this page
Post to Twitter
Comments
Customer ownership?
Developers trading off the coat tails of facebook, twiiter, and the likes should not be surprised.
Marketing 101 surely asks: who owns this customer? and in this day and age of price elastic consumers, maybe we need to ask ourselves if there is in fact any customer ownership.
If you're developing a product lineup that is based on another company's product then you either get a very secure partnership, vertically integrate, or expect to get pushed out .. eventually.
I have argued this position for a while around BPOS (Microsoft's Business Productivity Online Suite). The first question out of Microsoft's mouth is "Please give us all the contact details of your customer, we promise not to poach them"
Perhaps this is just a simple customer value proposition statement? why do you customers use your product
a) Because it makes facebook / twiiter / insert website here better?
1) then expect strong rivalry from within your market
2) or, expect to be bought out.
b) Because it is better than the competition.
1) then expect strong rivalry from within your market
2) or, expect to be bought out.
We all fight over the same customer base, and they have no personal relationship with us anymore; relationship marketing is non-existent on the internet. Now we are forced to offer *better* products than our competition.
The failure of most of us, well me at least, is sometimes I forget, facebook does this better than me, I must play by their rules, they call the shots.
But this doesn't stop me trying. One day I might hit the jackpot and get a personal phone call from Zuckerberg, Shuttleworth, or Gabe Newell :) (I live in hope)
analogy: cover bands? they make their fortunes by playing the music of others.
Yes. I agree and some of this
Yes. I agree and some of this leads into the next post regarding why, not only your current idea is pwnd but so is your next idea. Not because you need facebook or twitter to make it happen but because if it is a good idea and they can make it happen without your proprietary IP then they will. e.g. Google wedding websites. http://www.google.com/weddings/ as opposed to something smart like writely which they will buy to save time.
I would say relationship marketing has evolved in that your relationship now exists through the communication channels of facebook, twitter etc. They act as a platform to facilitate this. However, if you are in competition because of this then, yes, your burnt toast.
Price elastic...isn't everything free online?
Post new comment