beyond 140 for @lewmoorman

 
« Back to blog

FriendFeed's Path to Relevance

Despite Robert Scoble's constant evangelizing of FriendFeed (we pay him and we don't get half the love!!), it remains a niche service. Since getting to know Robert, I have taken the time to understand FriendFeed. He is right about its potential: it is unlimited. But unfortunately, their current path will continue to keep it marginalized.

 Here is the crux of the issue: is FriendFeed a social network or a feed service that aggregates other social networks?

 Right now they are both. This is a losing strategy. They need to go full force on the latter.

Here is why doing both does not work. In terms of being a social network or microblogging service Twitter and Facebook have won. They are the engines that will drive most of the basic communicating. The good news is there are two (creating aggregation needs). And, they don't own all the relevant content. Blogs, flickr and other services are still very much alive. So, the opportunity is there to help people consume all of these better. FriendFeed tries, but fails. Why? I can't see all my twitter friend updates or all my Facebook friends, only those that have FF accounts. And, when it comes to blogs, the content creator determines if it shows up on Friendfeed, not the consumers. What? Content has to be pulled not pushed.
 
All this said, FF still has a huge opportunity. If they did the following, I would spend a lot of my Internet time on their site:
 
1. Realize your competitor is TweetDeck and Tweetie, not Twitter and Facebook. Kill your actual standalone microblogging engine.
 
2. Import all Twitter and Facebook friend posts - no FF account required.
 
3. Allow users to import their RSS feeds so they come in the steam as well. Potential side effect: become the de facto blog comments site.
 
4. Adjust the user interface to allow multiple streams (as customized) to flow on one screen. We all can't have screens draped across our house a la Scoble.
 
5. Create standalone apps or make it easy for your partners to do it
 
6. Just make the service plain easier to understand and work with.
 
I spend a ton of time on Tweetdeck and my RSS reader. This move would replace all of those. Why? Scoble has the key insight on why FF is so powerful. Their voting, searching and commenting is awesome and hugely powerful to users. The "like" system is much better than retweeting and much more efficient. The searching is highly customizable. I can set up a search to see posts by my friends that have 5 or more "likes." This guarantees I will see the key stories. This is Twitter and RSS with a community filter. Very powerful. And, the commenting means you can have real discussions on point and in real time right below the topic. Much better than the replies concept in twitter. All of this is why you are 10x better than tweetie or tweetdeck. This is a market you can lead. And, it will matter.

Now, there could be technical trades to be made. You might not be able to get the real time stream from twitter. But, updates every few minutes are not bad. There could be other issues. I am not an expert on the technologies and APIs. All I know is FF will remain a rarely visited site for me until it does more with its strengths and abandons its weaknesses.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comments (7)

Jun 01, 2009
Erno Hannink said...
This is an interesting take. Trying to be best of both worlds usually fails. Pick one and become the best. Agree that microblogging has been taken now. The succes for Twitter came with the API, enthusiasts developing great tools like Tweetdeck.
Since microblogging is taken agregrator is a prefect option since the tools we have now are not perfect. Google Reader is nice but for many people still to technical just like friendfeed.

Great points Lew.

Jun 08, 2009
Robert Scoble said...
The weird thing, Lew, is that I've gotten to 40,000 followers faster on friendfeed than I did on Twitter, so it's seeing some success. Friendfeed items are already showing up higher in Google than the same Twitter items. My friends are already seeing more traffic from friendfeed than from their Twitter accounts (turns out that Oprah fans don't engage very much). But to me friendfeed can't do what you ask without giving up the real time feed. If it did that I'd give it up and go back to just using Twitter. So, at some level, your advice isn't good, but as you admit, you don't know the issues with getting access to Twitter's firehose feed. This is why Google hasn't yet figured it out either. It will be very interesting to see what you think of Google's Wave, by the way. Oh, and Building43 has a private room in friendfeed. Something that wouldn't be possible if friendfeed took your advice.
Jun 08, 2009
Elaine Young said...
Interesting points, but I would consider that to declare either FB or Twitter as having "won" anything is premature. The landscape keeps shifting. Also I see that PeopleBrowsr has included FF info. Finally, Twitter has not been (and I would argue still isn't) an overnight success. It takes time to figure out how to engage with the tool -- just as FB has similar issues. I've worked with all of these and have used FF for quite sometime -- and have only recently begun to see the real value in the ability to follow conversations, create groups and stay on top of multiple postings on different social networks from those I follow.
Jun 08, 2009
Uche Ogbuji said...
Point #1 is unnecessarily subtractive (the others I can support). I'm on FaceBook, but not on Twitter. 140 characters is too limiting:

http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2009/04/character-length-restrictions.html

FF's "standalone microblogging engine" (if I understand you rightly) is much less limited, and if it were to go away I and I think a lot of FF users would go elsewhere. If anything, I'd like FF to relax their limits even further. FaceBook is also less limited, but I don't trust them as far as I can throw them, and besides, their distribution policies are even more limiting (I've had a devil of a time just figuring out how to export comments to my FB links as well as the links themselves to other services). The first rule of any blogging platform, micro or otherwise, is trouble-free dissemination. FB gets a FAIL!

And I must agree with Scoble that FF seems to have amazing Google mojo. I wonder if there's any "nepotism" in play there ;) Mind you, I'm not complaining.

--
http://friendfeed.com/uche

Jul 09, 2009
LionelatDell said...
I have to say... I just read Scoble's, then followed up reading through yours. You make a good case as well. Your points may lead to faster growth for FriendFeed, but I kinda think that FriendFeed can be an aggregator and a social network.

That said, after reading your post... will have to think about it more.

Good stuff.

LionelatDell

Jul 13, 2009
justinsail said...
Your 5th point about standalone apps is really the most crucial part of this equation... with a great API that people use, FF would be a killer service overnight.
#1 - I disagree that they should get rid of the microblogging engine... it's a lightweight feature that not everyone will use... but those who do will cherish it.
#3 is VERY interesting. I'm still torn about my choice of RSS client (NetNewsWire/NewsGator) because it seems GoogleReader has more innovation... but I'd drop them both with a FF import feature that... again.... has the portability of good 3rd party apps!

justin

Leave a comment...

 
Got an account with one of these? Login here, or just enter your comment below.
Posterous-login    twitter