Rants
Questions
Soapbox
Best Practices
Apply today for a FREE subscription to CIO Magazine!
Tue, Dec 23, 2008 12:25 EST
|
Posted by: C.G. Lynch in Soapbox Topic: ApplicationsBlog: Web 2.0 Advisor
Current Rating: |
In 2009, Web 2.0 technologies such as blogs, wikis and social networks will continue to be used by people both at home and work. But I think most consumer-based social networks will struggle toward profitability, and consolidation in the enterprise Web 2.0 market could hamper innovation around those tools, too.
Let's start with the consumer market. At CIO this year, we've mainly focused on three social networks: Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.
Here's a quick look at how they did, and where they're going:
This year, Facebook got better. It became more useful for end-users, who embraced the service's new design (after a loud minority initially shunned it). It's cleaner, less noisy and navigation-friendly. While I think the current social ad model that Facebook has will prove itself untenable, the social network's explosive growth (in users) is something to celebrate. There's reason to believe it will find a way to make money over time. But based on interviews their CEO has given publicly, that probably won’t happen this year.
Twitter continues to improve. I get the "fail whale" symbol (a cute, cartoonish error message) far fewer times a month than I used to; a sign the site used some of its venture capital to improve service reliability. The intellectual exchange I get on Twitter is wonderful. It begs the service to hit a broader set of users in 2009, moving beyond its core group: techies, consultants, and analysts, as well as the media and PR people who follow them. I want to see more people from other areas of society use it (and in broad swaths, not just the same heralded examples the Twitter fanbois can point to).
This year, I'd like to see Facebook make Twitter a fair offer, and I hope Twitter accepts. Such an acquisition should ensure that Facebook honors Twitter's superior design for posting a status message. But the thought of having the Twitter experience with a broader set of social networking users from a variety of backgrounds (which Facebook has) really excites me. For some of Twitter's hardcore users, there would be a "oh-no-Dylan-went-electric" kind of revolt, but I think it would be better for a great many of us, making naysayer's objections a footnote at best.
LinkedIn was this year's sleeper in the Web 2.0 and social networking space. As demonstrated in an article chronicling LinkedIn's growth, it's less glitzy than the former two social networks, but it has been making money. It shouldn't rest this year. With its founder retaking control as CEO, it should focus on innovating around its existing platform. Releasing an applications platform this year was a start, but a mere nine applications was overly cautious. And while it's understandable why LinkedIn might want to maintain a professional feel--given the fact that Facebook can offer the same things with little development effort if it feels inclined--LinkedIn needs to be more aggressive and avoid complacency.
Now, a word about the enterprise Web 2.0 (or Enterprise 2.0) market: This is the space served by big business software vendors like Microsoft (SharePoint) and IBM (Lotus Connections), as well a bunch of start-ups such as Socialtext, Atlassian, Newsgator, MindTouch, Telligent, Jive Software, and [insert e-mails here from 30 enterprise 2.0 vendors who will write me and tell them I forgot to list them].
This market was built by the above mentioned companies through copying all the cool things that happen in the consumer Web 2.0 space and making them palatable for business use -- an admirable job when
Could someone please invent an application where I only have to upload my status once, and it will automatically distribute through Facebook, Twitter, Linked-in, Plaxo etc.? If it already exists, please let me know. Thanks!
Hi!
Yes, you thought you would receive emails from vendors you did not include, and here is one! I would like to introduce you to GroveSite. GroveSite introduced its first collaborative team site offering in 2003, using the software-as-a-service model. Our major differentiators are our clients' ability to easily collaborate with customers and vendors, to brand their sites, to fully customize their navigation, as well as our powerful feature set. GroveSite has been recognized in Gartner's Who's Who in Social Software, and in the Gartner Magic Quadrant for Collaboration and Social Software in both 2007 and 2008.
We have a stellar list of very satisfied clients including recognized names such as Target, OfficeMax, Tyson Foods, AARP, Realogy (owner of Century 21, Coldwell Banker, ERA, and Sotheby's franchisors), and Texas A&M AgriLife. Of course we have many SMBs as well. You may not be familiar with us because we are a privately-held company. We experienced 25-30% growth in 2008 and expect a great year going forward as well.
So please give me a call if you'd like to learn more!
Jane Hagen
VP Marketing, GroveSite
866-952-9880 x202
Jane,
I'm a bit confused about why you rated the article one star? This seems to be solely motivated by self promotion of GroveSite. The article itself describes broad industry trends and never claims to be a laundry list or comparison matrix of what solutions to go with.
I've yet to encounter or even hear of GroveSite until you mentioned it. You are correct that Gartner included it as one of the 38 solutions they looked at, but most publications based off the Gartner analysis focuses only on the top rated systems. I don't see how it helps the marketing of your product to say you got an honorable mention.
After looking around at GroveSite, I can understand why Gartner picked the leaders they did while leaving GroveSite out of the top of the list. My initial impression of GroveSite is that it attempts to create the kitchen sink. It seems more an effort to be able to check boxes on a comparison matrix rather than create a coherent user experience. Features are great, but if users are not inspired to use them, they are useless and a waste of money.
I would also recommend picking some more visually appealing example screenshots for your marketing site. Web 2.0 encourages simple design, but that doesn't mean they have to remove elegance.
Admittedly, I'm just going off the marketing information on the GroveSite website. However, as someone who has performed numerous enterprise software evaluations, the marketing information presented about GroveSite would cause me to exclude it in the first round of research. The other solutions mentioned in the article seem to at least have a coherent story.
The only thing I see as impressive about GroveSite is the client list, but I've been in this industry long enough to see people duped by good sales reps and broken promises to know not to trust client lists alone.
I never intended to post this comment. I was brought to your unfair blast of this article by viewing the 3 star average which was dragged down by your 1 star rating. I expected to find some great analysis about the article and instead found a poorly disguised sales pitch.