We very well know what MySpace was and where it stands today. Tom Anderson the co-founder of MySpace says something about todays social giant Facebook and newly born Search giant's social baby Google+.
He never spoke before about the failure of his company but he explined about Google+ in his post on G+ and gave some idea why they failed. Check it out.
"
Google+ seems like a "reaction" to Twitter/Facebook. But are you
starting to see the ways that Google+ just makes Google a better, more
integrated set of services? Google already has top-notch products in key
categories--photos, videos, office productivity, blogs, Chrome,
Android, maps and (duh) search. Can you start to see/imagine what
Google+ does for Gmail? Picassa? Youtube? Not to mention search? The +1
system that Google now has control of (unlike Facebook Likes) can really
influence and change the nature of their search.
My original vision for MS was that everything got better when it was social--so I tried to build all the super popular things used on the web (blogs, music, classifieds, events, photos) on top of MySpace's social layer. When Yahoo launched 360, MSN launched Spaces, and Google launched Okrut, I was shakin in my boots. But quickly I saw that it's really hard to layer in social to features after the fact. At MySpace we had the luxury of having social first, and building the products on top of that layer. Then I choked and Facebook realized that vision. ;-)
But Google+ really seems to be primed to make good on that original premise--that everything gets better when its social. And unlike FB, Twitter, or anyone else, Google already has the most advanced set of products. And if I can clearly see where this is headed, then I think what we are getting is a much better Google. Does that kill FB/Twitter? Who cares? I'd use all 3, but more importantly, I'll be using Google products I never used, or use them in new, better ways I never used them before.
My original vision for MS was that everything got better when it was social--so I tried to build all the super popular things used on the web (blogs, music, classifieds, events, photos) on top of MySpace's social layer. When Yahoo launched 360, MSN launched Spaces, and Google launched Okrut, I was shakin in my boots. But quickly I saw that it's really hard to layer in social to features after the fact. At MySpace we had the luxury of having social first, and building the products on top of that layer. Then I choked and Facebook realized that vision. ;-)
But Google+ really seems to be primed to make good on that original premise--that everything gets better when its social. And unlike FB, Twitter, or anyone else, Google already has the most advanced set of products. And if I can clearly see where this is headed, then I think what we are getting is a much better Google. Does that kill FB/Twitter? Who cares? I'd use all 3, but more importantly, I'll be using Google products I never used, or use them in new, better ways I never used them before.
"
He also came up with his views regarding Facebook in a wall post on Facbook itslef....
"
People
seem very confused why I'm on Facebook. I've had a profile since 2005
and a "fan page" since 2009. FB just created a feature where you can
"subscribe" to profiles. They asked me if I wanted to convert my "page"
into a simpler profile. Complicated? I suppose. Why am I not on MySpace?
Because, I left the company in early 2009, and like most of you, I
don't like using it anymore.. not a fan of what the new folks have done
with MySpace.
"
He adds....
"
People
often ask me what I think of Facebook? Put simply, I love it. Facebook
has accomplished what I wanted to accomplish when I started
MySpace--that "everyone" would be online, and "everything" online would
get more fun & useful because its social. To me, Facebook just
keeps getting better & better. Now when they remove that 500
character limit on posting (rumored this week), I'll be able to say
much, much more.