# The New Facebook



## Michael (Sep 22, 2011)

Like it or not the new changes we've all noticed early in the week are just the beginning. But if you are not aware, today Facebook held a big conference to announce the next steps and the future of their social network. The big deal: _Timeline_, a brand new approach to the user profile, which is aimed at increasing the emotional investment of members by telling a "story" through pictures, video, music, and apps. You can take a peek here: https://www.facebook.com/about/timeline

That said, it doesn't appear that there have been any impactful changes to the place that we all spend the most time at: the News Feed. Still no ability to edit posts. Still no rich text like bold or italic. No multiperson video "hangouts". No broadcasts. And FB is still way behind Google when it comes to Search. 

It's a LOT of change though and in a very short span of time. Some users will no doubt be lost. Others, elated. 

My  is that the end result is a good thing. Google+ hit the scene 3 months ago with a very impressive product and forced FB's hand. FB is flexing back. And as these two duke it out the winner at the end of the day will be...*the user*.


----------



## JoannaV (Sep 22, 2011)

Honestly? I'd be perfectly happy if we still had the facebook of 2007.


----------



## Michael (Sep 22, 2011)

Joanna,

You are not alone. And you represent one of the huge core questions: Can they pull this off without further alienating their base? There are more than a few reports out there that are less than encouraging. Here's one from today: You've Decided, We Report: Facebook Users Incensed Over Update | Fox News


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Sep 22, 2011)

joannav said:


> honestly? I'd be perfectly happy if we still had the facebook of 2007.



yes!


----------



## Andres (Sep 22, 2011)

I wonder if it's a coincidence that right around the same time FB rolled out all these new "improvements", Google+ opened up to the public. I've found the new FB not very much to my liking and I am usually the guy that loves new changes. Google+ is superior, it just lacks the users. If people would make the migration over to Google+ and start interacting on there, I think i could give up FB.


----------



## fredtgreco (Sep 22, 2011)

Andres said:


> I wonder if it's a coincidence that right around the same time FB rolled out all these new "improvements", Google+ opened up to the public. I've found the new FB not very much to my liking and I am usually the guy that loves new changes. Google+ is superior, it just lacks the users. If people would make the migration over to Google+ and start interacting on there, I think i could give up FB.


Think about this. It assumes that the average FB user, who does not like the formatting changes of FB, is going to change everything over to a whole new system, with whole new smartphone apps, whole new "friends," whole new formats, and whole new integrated web apps. No way that happens. Google+ may become viable, but there is simply no way that it replaces FB for the average, casual user (that represents the vast majority of FB users).

I like to think that I am computer literate, and I have heard some good things about Google+, but I honestly have not had the time in over a month to learn about Google+.

It is just as likely (maybe more so) that Google+ becomes Wave than it does the FB replacement.


----------



## TimV (Sep 22, 2011)

Yes, I have a Google plus account, and whenever people "friend" me I allow it, but I've really never spent even 5 minutes trying to figure it out.


----------



## Rufus (Sep 22, 2011)

I LIKED facebook because it was simple.


----------



## Michael (Sep 22, 2011)

fredtgreco said:


> Think about this. It assumes that the average FB user, who does not like the formatting changes of FB, is going to change everything over to a whole new system, with whole new smartphone apps, whole new "friends," whole new formats, and whole new integrated web apps. No way that happens. Google+ may become viable, but there is simply no way that it replaces FB for the average, casual user (that represents the vast majority of FB users).
> 
> I like to think that I am computer literate, and I have heard some good things about Google+, but I honestly have not had the time in over a month to learn about Google+.
> 
> It is just as likely (maybe more so) that Google+ becomes Wave than it does the FB replacement.



I agree that we are far away from FB falling off the map but consider this...

Facebook has a bad reputation of how it treats its users. If anything is going to take you down as a business, that's gonna do it. For plenty [dare I say most] of FB's users it's a love/hate relationship. They don't like it but everyone is on it so they just deal with it and begrudgingly adapt. And without viable competition, FB in turn takes their users for granted and repeatedly abuses their trust.

But we are stepping into a new era of social networking now. Big time competition has not arrived but it is well on the way. And if it wasn't serious competition, FB would not be reacting this way. We're about to witness a showdown the likes of which has not yet been seen in the age of the internet. That may sound grandiose but it's true and will have a huge impact on society moving forward. This is not like FB taking down MySpace. This is the king of search and information taking on the king of online human connection--800,000,000 strong.

As far as G+ turning out like Wave...not a chance. Google has invested its entire future in G+. It is the masterplan to integrate every Google product [Email, Documents, Photos, YouTube, Reader, etc.] into one multifaceted social tool. That's not to say that it can't fail, only that it won't fail like Wave which barely scratched anything when it dissolved.

So here's the deal: even if G+ fails, it won't do so without making FB better and more accountable. That's a good thing.


----------



## au5t1n (Sep 22, 2011)

Michael said:


> It is the masterplan to integrate every Google product [Email, Documents, Photos, YouTube, Reader, etc.] into one multifaceted social tool.



If they do that I will delete my Gmail account as I did my Facebook and go elsewhere for email/documents. How insidious.


----------



## Andres (Sep 22, 2011)

Michael touched on it, but for everyone who thinks FB is untouchable, do you remember a little website called Myspace? For a good while, MySpace was one of the most visited sites on the web and then in a few years just about everyone migrated to FB.


----------



## fredtgreco (Sep 22, 2011)

Andres said:


> Michael touched on it, but for everyone who thinks FB is untouchable, do you remember a little website called Myspace? For a good while, MySpace was one of the most visited sites on the web and then in a few years just about everyone migrated to FB.


Apples and oranges. Myspace was driven almost exclusively by teens. The average FB user is in his or her 40s. That means one MAJOR difference: revenue.


----------



## JoannaV (Sep 22, 2011)

Hmm. You all have some good points. Maybe facebook will remain a big player for a generation, with the biggest user base. But the next generation, ie all the young 'uns ie current teenagers, will live in an age where social networking rules and they will happily belong to multiple networks. It will probably be easy to transfer friends and information and the like. Me, I'm too old for that. I'm stuck where I am.


----------



## Edward (Sep 22, 2011)

Social networking? I think I'll just stick to the federal government knowing everything about me, and leave off broadcasting my personal life to the world at large.


----------



## jennywigg (Sep 22, 2011)

Michael said:


> It is the masterplan to integrate every Google product [Email, Documents, Photos, YouTube, Reader, etc.] into one multifaceted social tool.



Something about that just creeps me out.


----------



## LawrenceU (Sep 23, 2011)

I prefer social networking at the local coffee shop, the fishing hole, on a trail run, in the yard, or my favourite place: the front porch.


----------



## BobVigneault (Sep 23, 2011)

I agree with you Lawrence, as long as those places all have wifi.


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Sep 23, 2011)

Having lived in a fraternity house for 7 years in college, I sort of prefer "social networking" with some of my past contacts via a nice, quiet internet connection. Somehow, I just don't see the "competitive retriever subculture" being flexible enough to leave FB en masse for something new. Dinosaurs, us.


----------



## nicnap (Sep 23, 2011)

BobVigneault said:


> I agree with you Lawrence, as long as those places all have wifi.



Give that man the, "Retort of the Year," award. That made me laugh out loud.


----------



## LawrenceU (Sep 23, 2011)

nicnap said:


> BobVigneault said:
> 
> 
> > I agree with you Lawrence, as long as those places all have wifi.
> ...



Yep.

---------- Post added at 08:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:38 AM ----------




GulfCoast Presbyterian said:


> Having lived in a fraternity house for 7 years in college,


Sounds like you went on the ''cram four years into six or seven years'' plan as well.


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Sep 23, 2011)

Naw Lawrence. I just discovered you can get FREE meals AND lodging for law school by not moving out of the fraternity house. You just call yourself the "graduate student advisor." That way during open rush, all the Mommies worried about Jr's potential grades get paraded by your door "See, he will study. That is where the guy on the Law Review lives (when he ain't in the library).


----------



## LawrenceU (Sep 23, 2011)

I wish my six year journey had such honourable reasons. Mine was from course load. I went from Biblical Languages to Biology (pre-med) to English to Biblical Languages as majors. I just couldn't make up my mind. I ended up with a tonne of hours and a few majors and minors. All in all it has served me well. I, however, don't recommend it.


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Sep 23, 2011)

My wife was on that plan! She went from almost done with Pre-Med back to Journalism. What a great career change. Likewise, I don't recommend living in a Zoo for 7 years. If I hear Lynyrd Skynyrd or Guns and Roses songs, I have flashbacks and run in horror!


----------



## ZackF (Sep 23, 2011)

LawrenceU said:


> I prefer social networking at the local coffee shop, the fishing hole, on a trail run, in the yard, or my favourite place: the front porch.



Me too. I've had a facebook account for over three years but I've probably logged no more than 24 hours. I just don't "get it."


----------



## Andres (Sep 23, 2011)

KS_Presby said:


> I just don't "get it."



What don't you get? It's pretty simple. FB is a way to connect/keep in touch with people that you don't/can't see everyday. Sure it would be nicer to get to fellowship with people face to face, but what about relatives that live hundreds of miles away? We don't see all our friends in person everyday so it's a nice way to keep up in touch with them.


----------

