Redmond's Heavy Guns Go After OpenSocial

jg21 writes "It is probably coincidental, but two responses to OpenSocial from well-respected members of the Microsoft blogging community have each in their own way come out against Google's OpenSocial initiative, Dare Osabanjo because in his view OpenSocial while billed as a standardized widget platform for the Web, actually isn't. And Don Dodge because his claim is that fifty million Facebook developers "don't know what OpenSocial APIs are...and don't care.""

MS talks, Google walks

[HangingChad]

Sure MS employees are going to take shots at Google services. But even if they're not perfect, Google is getting the services out there and putting the tools out there. While MS blogs about it. I'm sure MS will eventually field some Windows-centric competitive product...just as soon as they get done blogging about how bad Google is.

plogs, not blogs

[paiute]

When someone is paid to sit at work and comment on their web log about the competition, it is no longer a 'blog but a paid web log, or 'plog.

Re:fifty million Facebook developers

[DragonWriter]

Sorry, but in order for a social networking application to be useful, [i]lots of people have to be interested in it[/i]

(1) OpenSocial isn't an application, its a set of technologies on which applications are built;
(2) Actually, you need lots of people involved in the social network, which serves as the "database" of the social networking application. They don't have to use the particular application, much less be interested in the particular set of APIs on which the application is built; and
(3) Lots of people can be not interested in something (the supposed 50 million Facebook "developers") and still have lots of other people interested in it. "Lots of people aren't interested in X" does not imply the falsity of "lots of people are interested in X".

You don't need a social networking application to connect to your friends whom you sit around with in the basement playing D&D.

Certainly not while you are doing that; outside of that time, social networking functionality would be useful to just that kind of group, too.

You're not going to reconnect with old friends (which is what I use Facebook for) if none of your old friends use it.

So? What does that have to do with OpenSocial APIs? Your friends don't have to use the OpenSocial APIs, or even applications built with them, for them to be part of the network you access if you use them. You seem to be confusing social networks with social networking applications and with social networking technologies and confusing developers with users.

Did people actually read the articles?

[gaindev]

Did a few people actually read the articles before they commented? I think the two articles raised a few interesting points.

The one from Don Dodge pointed out the most important fact that Facebook's success is based on its users' loyalty to the service. Do they really care about applications? Most of them dont care that much. If one developer leaves, there will be plenty of others who will do same thing, even better.

The second article looks at OpenSocial from technical perspective. It compared the two set of APIs to see whether facebook's or opensocial is better technically. OpenSocial should be seen as FREE APIs rather than "open" (which generally regarded as good, no evil) APIs. These APIs are owned and administered by Google, which they can withdraw anytime they want as with Google Map APIs.

Having said that, it's still interesting to watch the battle bw facebook and "the new microsoft" :D

Re:What social networks are really about...

[acidrain]

the Facebook crowd will care when they see a nifty new plug-in

Many Facebook users are really sick of the apps on Facebook. I get 5 content-free messages every day that would require me to install some juvenile piece of shit just to confirm that I didn't care about it's content, and I'm thinking the mountain of stupid apps could be the death of Facebook. Considering Facebook's initial popularity was based on not being as stupid as Myspace.

Perhaps Google is late to the party on this one. We already have "app fatigue."

Re:Googles hidden motive

[Anonymous Coward]

one reason. All that time you spend on Facebook and MySpace is time that could be better spent looking at ads.

Uh, no, but thanks for playing. If Google was only concerned that these sites don't have Google ads, they'd be concerned about all the big sites that don't have Google ads. Google isn't stupid: they know that there will always be many webpages with no Google ads.

Google's motive isn't hidden at all: Googlebot can't browse Facebook.

While Google is trying to heurstically determine what you're interested in by the content of the page you're looking at, Facebook knows what you're interested in because you've spent all your spare time explicitly adding the links. That's the kind of user data Google would kill for. They want an open social network so they can spider it and figure out what ads to show.

Re:OpenSocial = Google freaking out

[MightyMartian]

I'm so glad Microsoft and Google are responsible corporate entities, and not fueling a new feeding frenzy of irrational investment. It's not like the sub-prime collapse has done any collateral damage to the economy, so heap on more bizarre, nonsensical investment strategies.

It's soooo much like the 1990s that I saw mention of "Web 3.0" a few days ago, as if the comical fluff that is Web 2.0 wasn't bad enough. I think it's time I get on the bandwagon. Know of many brain dead venture capitalists out there willing to give me a few million. If I can beat the bubble's burst, I should be able to pocket a lot of money, live in Hawaii and laugh my ass off at the idiots out there.

How about reading the API?

[Kristoph]

So, you know, before bagging out this person for being a Microsoft shill (which he may be, I don't know) did any poster bother reading the OpenSocial API spec? Because I did, in fact, read it and I have to say, its really very bad. I mean, it reads like some marketroids gathered up some stuff Orkut is doing into a binder (which itself did not have much forethought), did a deal with some partners, and threw it out there with the word 'Open' in the title for the GOOG fanboys.

I am usually a fan of GOOG API's but this is pure competitive play that is weak technically and has little or no merit beyond who is supporting it.

]{