« Future Technologies | Main | Does the 'e' in ebooks mean easy? »

June 29, 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

AJ Cann

Sadly, Google's track record in this area does not suggest anyone should be confident about their progress.

Alex Posicionamiento Web

This article is very true since the face-off between Google and Facebook is becoming more intense as time passes by. It is true that Google has more visits but people would stay longer in Facebook especially if they already logged in. The face-off would be number of visits against number of hours spent in the site. If any of the site would develop both visits and hours spent in the site, that would be the site that would win the face-off. This is a great discussion and I hope a lot of people would realize this "war" or face-off going on behind the curtains.

Thanks for sharing!

Alex

Ange Fitzpatrick

Great article Phil!

I'm interested in how Google and Facebook are going to link in to the existing location specific social networks, like Foursquare and Gowalla. The temptation must constantly be to crush them and replace them with your own product. This is where Facebook have been pretty savvy. The Facebook 'like' symbol is cropping up more and more on sites across the web, it's there on Foursquare locations at the moment, it's there at the bottom of blogs and newspapers suggesting that you like or share the content with friends. The company who succeeds in making the user feel that all their social media connections are somehow integrated will be the one who succeeds.

Mark@Ephedra

Facebook has a lot of features, games and more enjoyable things like keeping up with friends and such maybe that us why Google is getting a bit envy.

John Kirriemuir

Whoa! Agreed with all this till I got to the "Second Life clone Lively" bit :-)

It's a small point, but Lively wasn't an SL clone. They are - or were, as not surprisingly Lively has gone, both virtual worlds, but there the similarities in so many ways ends. Lively looked deliberately 'cute', for want of a better word, but that's all it was. Functionality was practically zero. Apart from typing in text and moving around a bit, there was little else you could do. Quite a few academics had a look at it and concluded that the potential for educational use was zero.

Second Life, is at the other extreme; it could be argued it has too much functionality, and doesn't look as 'cute' as Lively. Though how it looks is pretty much up to the user.

I could write a long essay pointing out the differences but it would bore most of readers :) If they were forms of transport, think of Google Lively as the Raleigh Chopper bike, and Second Life as a private Learjet. That'll do :)

The comments to this entry are closed.

GoogleAdsense

GoogleAdsense

GoogleAdsense

My Photo

Subscribe!

  • Subscribe!
    Add to any service

My Flickr photographs

  • www.flickr.com
    This is a Flickr badge showing public photos from Phil Bradley. Make your own badge here.