Aren’t Social Networking Platforms Supposed To Be Social?

Let me begin by saying I am all for the advancement of social networking, web 2.0, and all the rest. In fact, I fervently support such advances that I find myself writing about everything and everything to do with said topics on a frequent basis. But I think I missed or misunderstood something: shouldn't social media platforms inherently be open to as many users as possible, not limited by issues like users' choices in operating systems?

On this lovely Sunday afternoon, I had every intention of of testing and reviewing a new player on the social networking platforming field, a platform by the name of Nimbuzz . From what I read, it seemed like Nimbuzz had some very interesting things to offer. Nimbuzz offers a platform for PCs and mobile phones that allow users to make free calls to to PCs with free mobile calls forthcoming, free text and file sharing, and ultimately a platform for uniting services like Gtalk, Skype, AOL Instant Messenger, MySpace, Jabber, Facebook, Yahoo! Messenger and Windows Live Messenger.

As the platform is available for both PCs and mobile phones, the offer sounds at least somewhat attractive. Of course, it doesn't offer to hand the moon to you on a silver platter, at least in comparison with other well-constructed platforms; however, Nimbuzz's offerings intrigued me. I was initially skeptical, as all the free services on the mobile Nimbuzz platform are based on having web service available. Though VoIP calling for free mobile to mobile sounds thrilling, what exactly is the point when you have to pay out the nose for an unlimited data plan from your provider?

That aside, I was more than willing to give Nimbuzz a try. I was willing, in fact, until I went to download the platform and was told that the reason I was having trouble downloading was because I wasn't using Windows XP or Vista. I did a double-take. Surely a social platform wouldn't skip one of the most important and primary steps of making a social platform…you know…social?

After all, isn't that like a white-gated community pushing for diversity and cultural values in its homeowners, but only letting realtors show affluent doctors and lawyers properties behind the white gate? That doesn't strike me as particularly social. Beyond that, aren't most people who would be willing to try and adopt social network generally considered to be users of platforms other than Windows? That isn't to say that all social networking geeks are anti-Windows, but aren't many at least users of multiple operating systems?

Of course, when I write a piece condemning any company for creating anything exclusive to Windows (and I am known to do so), inevitably I receive the email from a company representative who says, "Thanks for your feedback. We're working to include other operating systems, and our Windows exclusivity is just for our initial release," or something to that effect. Let me advise all of you would-be Windows-exclusive platform makers: have your product ready to use for anyone and everyone that has a desire to use it, otherwise you run the risk of alienating potential users and ruining the positive feedback you might get if you were truly social at debut time. As it stands, you end up leaving your platform looking rather anti-social and limited. I can tell you I won't be sampling your platform later, either on my mobile or on my non-Windows machine.