Facebook’s Plans For Expansion Examined

A good amount of discussion has been taking place over the past week or so following Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s declaration of the company’s plans to expand and become, in the words of GigaOM’s Liz Gannes, a “social OS.” The way they intend to do it is to open their doors to lots of Web apps and services. If Facebook is going to make this stunt a success, they’re going to have to be very, very careful.

Sure, it’s true. In order to really strike big in the world of Web 2.0, you need to be bold. Daring.

You also need to be calculating. (In the adjectival sense, not the verbal. Ah, what the hell, verbal too.)

Why Facebook has chosen to open up to others is clear. It’s a heck of a lot easier to be inclusive and incorporate various Web apps and services that have already proven resilient than to start similar projects from scratch.

For the initiative, Facebook constructed a list of “partners,” which will offer the same services on the social network as they do as standalone services on the Net. The addition of said services will encourage Facebook’s users to stay within the network to do much or all of their activities online. If the new features prove to be popular, Facebook will effectively become a hub of applications and services, or, using the phrase that’s being thrown about the blogosphere, an “operating system.”

The biggest problem Facebook will encounter, however, as it gets more deeply immersed in this expansion project, is that it will undoubtedly draw the ire of users who don’t want everything in one place – for a myriad of reasons, not the least of which being security. Facebook will leave it up to it’s partners to decide how their applications are presented to the network’s members, which will help keep things authentic and synonymous on the partners’ side of the aisle, but the inclusion of such a variety of Web apps may end up looking (to the average user) unattractive to many users. In the world of Web 2.0, the GUI plays an integral part in a product’s success. Looks definitely do matter. (Barring, the MySpace phenomenon, of course.)

Also, as Facebook manages a large list of partners, it’s bound to get into disputes. When they’ve got 40+ companies on the outside (as the GigaOM blog alleges they do), it’s logical to assume some won’t be smiling at all times. Having to manage issues raised by its members and its partners simply won’t be an easy task for a fast-moving and fast-growing network like Facebook.

There’s a lot to be said for and against the so-called “Facebook OS.” Ideally, it can be a good move. But when was the last time we’ve seen the ideal present itself in an outcome?