It will be interesting to see what myspace actually come up with.
Gregory Talon
· 2 years ago
Don't you realize that for engaged Myspace user (not a little number) :
Myspace IS FAR MORE BEAUTIFULL than Facebook. It's made by them and don't care about web standarts.
Myspace can't redesign the profiles, cause this is not their role in the game they've set up with users. What they can do is to propose a new version of profiles, but without automatic migration. I'm sure Myspace management is pretty conscious of this.
But for sure they can improve the rest of the site as they're currently doing but it still all about the profile... the user bedroom... would you like someone to change the deco of your bedroom without asking for?
Remember that the main reason why Facebook is making more buzz now is because the press and the bloggers are more likely to be on Facebook than on Myspace, just a social fact...
In short: IMHO to keep up with the Joneses (facebook) they have to re-engineer the whole thing. This is going to be an absolutely mammoth task and goes against the whole business philosophy of aquiring as many users as they can. The more they do things like the dodgy localisation into other languages, the more of a nightmare re-engineering becomes. Then, once they've finished the re-engineering there's the task of migrating the existing user-base over to the new system. Probably one of the greatest issues that they will face is that the legacy of user "stylesheets" is completely linked and dependent upon their borderline-criminal HTML. Of course most of their users neither know nor care about this. But what they will care about is all of their pages reverting to the default style when the switchover happens.
As far as I can tell, the redesign will definitely happen sometime soon - with the caveat that they'll make the profile pages changeover optional - they can't NOT do this. The re-engineering will take a lot longer but this will HAVE to happen sooner or later because their current infastructure will not work well enough for them to compete.
Marcus
Chris Garrett
· 2 years ago
I think you're being a bit harsh saying Vimeo is "Yet Another YouTube clone, with pretty aesthetics". They're geared towards people that create their own content, therefore there will never generate the same amount of content as sites like youtube but it will always be better.
They also support high definition video and yes, the user experience is superior (this is down to more than just aesthetics).
greasyguide
· 2 years ago
I have to disagree with this. If this works for kids then let the kids have it. MySpace has 200mil users and is the #1 social network. So they must be doing something right. They don't seem to have any problems booking major advertisers. A site doesn't have to be everything for every body. If this is the site that the 13-21 year old market likes then let them enjoy it.
If Facebook is for the college set or 30 somethings then let them have that.
Robert Franklin
· 2 years ago
The brilliance of MySpace starts with it's name and the empowerment it's users have to customize their page, trailer trash and all. MySpace will need to tread lightly in this area as it is a key differentiator from Facebook.
MySpace certainly needs to make changes but IMHO they can't try to woo the Facebook audience back as I think this will be a losing cause. They need to innovate and expand on what makes them unique and different from Facebook. They need to be the fun socially connecting bling to Facebooks more serious social networking blam!
Martin
· 2 years ago
Myspace got to the top by being the way it is. What makes you think it should change anything?
So Facebook is growing? Big deal, sooner or later they'll go the way of Friendster.
JP
· 2 years ago
Mark,
no, your rather disjointed and warmed-many-times-over "analysis" of MySpace's supposed problems did not sound like philosophy to me. It sounded like the many other rants on the subject we've heard on this site for the past several years: a self-serving and supercilious screed arising from deep insecurities about the real value of your elitist techno-aesthetic world view. The only explanation for how much time and how many words have been spent on this subject is how deeply you all are bothered by the enormous and continuing popularity of MySpace. It confounds your judgments and it calls to question the likelihood of your own success as would-be entrepreneurs.
In other words, don't be a hater Mark.
Mark "Rizzn" Hopkins
· 2 years ago
No, JP. You're way off.
It isn't elitist to like my pages to load in under twenty minutes.
It isn't elitist to like being able to read what's on a page or have unobscured by glitter.
It isn't elitist to detest spam.
In fact, I question whether your read the article at all, since I actually played *down* the importance of aesthetics in favor of a business plan that favored usability and functionality over form.
Martin
· 2 years ago
"I actually played *down* the importance of aesthetics in favor of a business plan that favored usability and functionality over form."
In that case facebook will definitely go the way of friendster.
harpless
· 2 years ago
I doubt it will, facebook's got too much bounce!!
JP
· 2 years ago
Unfortunately, Mark, I did read your piece.
That you apparently don't see the elitism in your own invidious description of MySpace as a "virtual trailer park" only reinforces my point.
That you apparently don't think an argument for "usability and functionality over form" to be an aesthetic argument suggests a confusion in your subject matter.
The slow-loading pages and "glitter" you so detest on MySpace are the artifacts of users' choices; you would clearly prefer they not have these choices. Are you so sure your choices would be better?
Mark "Rizzn" Hopkins
· 2 years ago
I hate to take you to school, JP, but I'm afraid you leave me little choice.
From the Wikipedia: "Aesthetics is the study of sensory or sensori-emotional values, sometimes called judgments of sentiment and taste. Aesthetics is a subdiscipline of axiology, a branch of philosophy, and is closely associated with the philosophy of art."
Functionality and usability, as opposed to emotional reactions to a design, are not subjective. If a site functions poorly, such as being overloaded with spam and advertising, or taking too long to load so as to induce possible browser crashes: these are not issues of aesthetics. They are, at that point, considered bugs. Show-stoppers. Problems. Issues.
In short, things that do not work.
It is not elitist to want things to work. I'm not sure what sort of mixed-up, liberal, hippy-happy, everything is relative world you come from, but in the real world, broken things need fixing. It may not be a financial problem for MySpace today, and it may not be tomorrow.
Eventually, though, folks that were adolescent and thought that mal-formed HTML, CSS, and twenty slow loading flash slide shows on a page were awesome will eventually grow tired of not being able to load more than a page an hour. JP, they will eventually grow up.
To be sustainable in the market and to remain relevant, MySpace will too have to grow up. That is all I'm suggesting.
Not quite a trailer park. Myspace is more like a vibrant urban area. Facebook is a bit like a boring suburb.
hobie dallas
· 2 years ago
Trailer trash?
Myspace put the idea of people having their own website in the minds of millions of people - people that would otherwise not have an email address for years (kids under 14) and the ability to share photos and ideas through the computer is the great contribution that myspace has given us.
I know my kids and all of their friends are all myspace junkies . . the comment about the "endless pitching of porn and sub-prime messages" must be referring to the little banner atop each page - don't you know to ignore this spot? How else would myspace keep the site free? You don't think people would think about paying for it do you?
I think you can read through the lines and see the authors "I'm better then you" attitude and his jealousy at how big myspace has become, and why his idea pittered out.
All Comments
Despite the superiority of its design, people will go where the content is, though, I suppose (another advantage of MySpace, incidentally).
http://blaklitegraphics.deviantart.com/art/Mysp...
It will be interesting to see what myspace actually come up with.
Myspace IS FAR MORE BEAUTIFULL than Facebook.
It's made by them and don't care about web standarts.
Myspace can't redesign the profiles, cause this is not their role in the game they've set up with users. What they can do is to propose a new version of profiles, but without automatic migration. I'm sure Myspace management is pretty conscious of this.
But for sure they can improve the rest of the site as they're currently doing but it still all about the profile... the user bedroom... would you like someone to change the deco of your bedroom without asking for?
Remember that the main reason why Facebook is making more buzz now is because the press and the bloggers are more likely to be on Facebook than on Myspace, just a social fact...
http://www.baselinemag.com/article2/0,1540,2082...
In short: IMHO to keep up with the Joneses (facebook) they have to re-engineer the whole thing. This is going to be an absolutely mammoth task and goes against the whole business philosophy of aquiring as many users as they can. The more they do things like the dodgy localisation into other languages, the more of a nightmare re-engineering becomes. Then, once they've finished the re-engineering there's the task of migrating the existing user-base over to the new system. Probably one of the greatest issues that they will face is that the legacy of user "stylesheets" is completely linked and dependent upon their borderline-criminal HTML. Of course most of their users neither know nor care about this. But what they will care about is all of their pages reverting to the default style when the switchover happens.
As far as I can tell, the redesign will definitely happen sometime soon - with the caveat that they'll make the profile pages changeover optional - they can't NOT do this. The re-engineering will take a lot longer but this will HAVE to happen sooner or later because their current infastructure will not work well enough for them to compete.
Marcus
They also support high definition video and yes, the user experience is superior (this is down to more than just aesthetics).
If Facebook is for the college set or 30 somethings then let them have that.
MySpace certainly needs to make changes but IMHO they can't try to woo the Facebook audience back as I think this will be a losing cause. They need to innovate and expand on what makes them unique and different from Facebook. They need to be the fun socially connecting bling to Facebooks more serious social networking blam!
So Facebook is growing? Big deal, sooner or later they'll go the way of Friendster.
no, your rather disjointed and warmed-many-times-over "analysis" of MySpace's supposed problems did not sound like philosophy to me. It sounded like the many other rants on the subject we've heard on this site for the past several years: a self-serving and supercilious screed arising from deep insecurities about the real value of your elitist techno-aesthetic world view. The only explanation for how much time and how many words have been spent on this subject is how deeply you all are bothered by the enormous and continuing popularity of MySpace. It confounds your judgments and it calls to question the likelihood of your own success as would-be entrepreneurs.
In other words, don't be a hater Mark.
It isn't elitist to like my pages to load in under twenty minutes.
It isn't elitist to like being able to read what's on a page or have unobscured by glitter.
It isn't elitist to detest spam.
In fact, I question whether your read the article at all, since I actually played *down* the importance of aesthetics in favor of a business plan that favored usability and functionality over form.
In that case facebook will definitely go the way of friendster.
That you apparently don't see the elitism in your own invidious description of MySpace as a "virtual trailer park" only reinforces my point.
That you apparently don't think an argument for "usability and functionality over form" to be an aesthetic argument suggests a confusion in your subject matter.
The slow-loading pages and "glitter" you so detest on MySpace are the artifacts of users' choices; you would clearly prefer they not have these choices. Are you so sure your choices would be better?
From the Wikipedia:
"Aesthetics is the study of sensory or sensori-emotional values, sometimes called judgments of sentiment and taste. Aesthetics is a subdiscipline of axiology, a branch of philosophy, and is closely associated with the philosophy of art."
Functionality and usability, as opposed to emotional reactions to a design, are not subjective. If a site functions poorly, such as being overloaded with spam and advertising, or taking too long to load so as to induce possible browser crashes: these are not issues of aesthetics. They are, at that point, considered bugs. Show-stoppers. Problems. Issues.
In short, things that do not work.
It is not elitist to want things to work. I'm not sure what sort of mixed-up, liberal, hippy-happy, everything is relative world you come from, but in the real world, broken things need fixing. It may not be a financial problem for MySpace today, and it may not be tomorrow.
Eventually, though, folks that were adolescent and thought that mal-formed HTML, CSS, and twenty slow loading flash slide shows on a page were awesome will eventually grow tired of not being able to load more than a page an hour. JP, they will eventually grow up.
To be sustainable in the market and to remain relevant, MySpace will too have to grow up. That is all I'm suggesting.
Myspace put the idea of people having their own website in the minds of millions of people - people that would otherwise not have an email address for years (kids under 14) and the ability to share photos and ideas through the computer is the great contribution that myspace has given us.
I know my kids and all of their friends are all myspace junkies . . the comment about the "endless pitching of porn and sub-prime messages" must be referring to the little banner atop each page - don't you know to ignore this spot? How else would myspace keep the site free? You don't think people would think about paying for it do you?
I think you can read through the lines and see the authors "I'm better then you" attitude and his jealousy at how big myspace has become, and why his idea pittered out.