Facebook’s insane mobile takeover
calacanis.com
calacanis.com
"They will add Apps to directly compete with Google, like maps, email, and productivity (think: Evernote). As well as cloud storage."
Did we already forget the fail that was FB email?
Maps, storage and productivity are great ideas for FB to expand into. They have the users, and the infrastructure to handle massive amounts of data.
2. If you hit scale, the best practices is to try and build as full of a stack as possible. That's why Microsoft did a search engine, Google did an Office Suite and why Facebook will do both at some point.
2. Interesting that you think of the stack that way. So you think Facebook will encroach onto Search at some point? What exactly is in the full stack?
And an obligatory reference to Apple, is Apple a different full stack or are they a short stack without search?
Now I want pancakes
I get the impression this is very common among people in their twenties.
Alternatives like Google Hangouts, Snapchat, Line, WeChat, etc. don't have nearly as many users, at least among my social groups.
So the split may have produced new use.
So, of the four Apps Facebook is giving numbers for... users on average are using two.
Google has a dozen Apps in the store, and there is some overlap as well. This is the state of the art: one function per App. We'll see a LOT more of this over time.
In fact, Google just made Docs into a couple of different Apps -- instead of just one with sheets, docs, presentations, etc.
Does anyone else here think a 40B dollar offer for snapchat is kinda, lets say, out of the realm of possibilities?
If snapchat grows revenue by 4x they will get that number.
case closed.
What a strange claim.
As an aside, recently the Facebook app (at least on Android) embedded its own web browser, so instead of going to Chrome when you followed a web link, it would open in the Facebook app. You can reconfigure it to use the external browser, but the power of defaults mean many won't.
This seemingly small change has a big impact because if you open a link you want to share, the Facebook app restricts you to sharing it via your wall, versus the traditional Android app where you might share it over hangouts, Google+, email, etc.
The incredible staying power of default behavior being what it is, I'm sure these continued attempts to grow FB's mobile control on Android will be ignored/accepted...but it makes me wonder at what point a normal user will say "enough is enough." What's the threshold for abusive default behavior in an app? Or a network/platform, for that matter?
It says a lot about this market when a prominent angel investor would publicly make such a foolish claim and follow it with "would be interested in seeing some demographic studies on this if anyone has them" when this information is readily available to anybody who knows how to use Google and has 30 seconds.
[1] http://www.digitalstrategyconsulting.com/intelligence/2014/0...
> Now, I would say Twitter’s users are worth 2-5x as much as the average FB users because the product is just much more “upscale.” It draws the more elite, powerful, and intelligent folks (overall).
There's no measurement here. There's no analysis of potential monetization. All we have is a lazy, uneducated argument that a summer analyst at an IB wouldn't get away with.
2. It's not a lazy or uneducated argument -- it's an opinion... that's why it says "I would say..." before the claim.
3. The opinion is based on the face that the FB = "all users" but Twitter = a subset of all users. That subset contains the most powerful politicians, CEOs, technologists, finance, art, celebrities, journalists and writers -- who are addicted to the platform. Those same folks are not spending their time on FB in any major way. Those folks are massively influential, thus my opinion.