Previous Entry | Next Entry

My tweets

Self Portrait

Tags:

Comments

( 1 comment — Leave a comment )
a_cubed
Feb. 6th, 2013 03:02 am (UTC)
"Twitter v Facebook v Google+ numbers in Superbowl ads? It's open networks v closed. Think URLs against AOL keywords. Open always wins."
Network effects always wins. The Internet won over AOL because AOL charged too much for ecommerce sites to set up a "store front" and gain access to their users. AOL was greedy and paid the price. FB grew so quickly that they never got individually greedy. Now I'm hearing people say "FB me" instead of "email me" and the network effects of not being on FB are creating pressure. I'm an FB refusenik so far, but it's becoming difficult to stay off with the number of resources that are being placed on there. It's like MS Word documents. That was a closed format that only became semi-open due to government action (dictating that their own internal and external comms used standard formats) that it became even semi-open. Network effects reinforced the MS Office monopoly. So long as closed operators don't get too greedy, I think they can thrive if they can gain network effects, until and unless regulators get involved. The new proposals for the EU DP Regulation have an interesting element on SNS, which is the right to get hold of one's data in a usable form (really just a slight expansion of the current right of access). What would really make a difference, though, is a requirement of interoperability of SNS that reach a certain size (FB, obviously but also LinkedIn, Twitter, Skype).
( 1 comment — Leave a comment )