Jim Millen Rotating Header Image

Technology

Facebook as portal to Microsoft Cloud?

A recurring theme from TechMarketView has been the possibility that Microsoft could buy Facebook and use it as a portal into their cloud-based computing services. This doesn’t make sense to me for a number of reasons.

What might MS’ Cloud offerings be?

  • Office-as-a-service – Word, Excel etc – apparently planned for Office 14 anyway.
  • Business Stuff – CRM, ERP, etc.
  • Personal Financial Management, pretty much “Money-as-a-service”
  • Online collaboration spaces – “SharePoint as a service”

I can’t think of much else, although maybe others can. I don’t see MS as coming up with anything especially innovative or radical – it’s pretty much business as usual, just delivered through a browser rather than local applications.

So, what’s the problem with “Facebook as portal to Cloud”? The first problem I have with this concept is user expectations & behaviours. What do you go to Facebook for? To stay in touch with friends, organise social events, form groups for issues you care about, share pictures. Where does any of this form a natural lead into using MS offerings? About the only service I can see being relevant is online collaboration, and I don’t see MS adding much over what Facebook already enables with groups, events and so on.

I guess what I’m really saying is that Facebook/MS Cloud integration seems, to me, to be a big context shift. The only way I can see it working is for the two to remain fairly separate, and simply be driven by association – i.e. I’m on Facebook anyway – now I need to edit a document – ah, MS Cloud is right here, I’ll use that.

But Microsoft could do that anyway, right now, by advertising their cloud services on Facebook. So what reason would they have to buy the whole thing?

This is all rather assuming that MS will find a way to make money from increased traffic on their Cloud services – this is a challenge in itself. Maybe they’ll do it through a “Free + Premium” model such as Flickr, but I remain to be convinced… Anyway, let’s stick with this assumption for now.

Therefore MS would be looking to Facebook to drive traffic to their Cloud services. But not so fast! They can’t mess about too much with Facebook’s usability, lest they drive away users. They can’t turn it into an obvious MS portal, for fear of losing its cool, its cachet – again, driving away users. So again, the only real integration I can imagine is simply a link from Facebook through to MS Cloud. As I’ve said above, they could already do this via advertising.

The last point to address is about competitiveness in the Cloud services space. Facebook is all about people connecting with other people, talking and exchanging opinions. If MS Cloud services were in ANY way flawed, or lacking functionality, or weak in comparison with offerings from Google etc., then sure as the sun rising Facebook users would be pointing these flaws out, and suggesting their friends try alternatives instead. If we’re talking freely-available, internet-delivered services, then I can’t conceive of any way MS could lock-in users to their services through Facebook without huge irritation and negative PR – again, driving users away from Facebook and losing any possible benefits.

So anyway, the whole thing doesn’t really add up to me. Maybe there are some nuances to this I’m missing though! I do think it’s an interesting area to explore – monetisation of social networks will clearly be a driving purpose for big companies in the near future. Would love to hear any opinions or further thoughts…

Web 2.0 Netiquette – My take on the matter,,,

On Twitter and over at his posterous blog, Liam’s been asking the question – “If we were to re-write Netiquette for Web 2.0 what would it be?”. Thought this was interesting and a good excuse for a post here!

First thing that occurred to me was that Netiquette is a highly nebulous concept at the best of times, both in the specifics and at a high level. For example, what’s acceptable on the 4chan /b/ board would be wildly inappropriate for a comment on an internal corporate blog. It’s always been hard to pin down exactly what consitutes the rules for good netiquette, and Web 2.0 has only made this harder!

However, I’m going to avoid the temptation to write a lengthy discourse on this and just put down my list of good web – whether 1.0, 2.0, or x.0 – behaviours. Please feel free to jump in with your own suggestions, or add them back to Liam’s original post…

1) Don’t be an idiot. Many people seem to suffer from a disturbing tendency to lose any semblence of rationality or decency when interacting with others online. Don’t do this. OK, so you don’t have to act like you were talking to your mother, but at least show the level of respect you’d give to a stranger you were chatting to in a bar.

2) Attack the argument, not the person. It’s easy to cop out of actually answering points in a discussion by ignoring them and attacking their proponent – it must be, as politicians do it all the time. Show you’re better than that, and if you can’t adress the point in hand, stay quiet. This is sometimes hard when you’re the target for personal attacks, but sinking to their level rarely ends well.

3) Blend in. You wouldn’t go into a pub and expect to jump straight into a conversation with the bunch of regulars at the bar – yet this is what many people seem to try and do online. Wait for a while, read through the archives, lurk. That way you’ll get a better idea of what people expect and won’t sound like such a clueless n00b when you do write that first post.

4) Respect private correspondence. This could be controversial, but I believe that if someone emails, IMs or PMs me, they want to communicate privately. I don’t believe that it’s fair or right to then repeat that correspondence in a public forum, unless the sender has given permission. Posting the contents of an email in public tends to make you look bad, not the sender of the email.

(Caveat – That last one can IMO be excepted for official and impersonal correspondence from public figures, government or companies.)

I probably could go on, but that’ll do for now. What I’ve just realised is that there’s very little there that’s specific to web 2.0 – it’s all pretty recognisable from Usenet days. Does this matter? No, I don’t think so. Basically, it all seems to be about how you interact with other people. Whether this is via Twitter, blogs or face-to-face, it’s always a good idea to be nice, engage your brain and pause before you post.

So apologies Liam – not sure I’ve really answered the question you were asking! But it’s my thoughts on the matter anyway, and as always would welcome anyone else’s input…