Jonathan Davies

There currently seems to be two forms of social networks. The “one” approach, in which the service focusses on one aspect and normally does it very well at it or the “many” approach where they try to cram in as many features and things you can do into one service which can sometimes not be for the better.Each idea has its pros and cons.

For instance if the company where to focus on one aspect of social networking - like Twitter. It can make sure that it is on top and working great, there is nothing else, within the network to compete with another.

While other social networks which try to incorporate lots of features. One massive plus for the user is that they don’t have to go around to all these other sites but instead we can have a place which has everything. They do messaging, pictures videos, etc. For instance Facebook.

But there is one other form of social network, the “consolidator” a social network that brings in everything that our friends are doing on the internet from other popular websites. For instance. FriendFeed - a site that I have just got around to signing up to. Robert Scoble has been raving about it and I can see why. I can stalk people even better then Twitter.

I can see what they are looking at and doing without directly telling me.Personally I think it’s better to have the “one” approach and use the “consolidation” approach with it. It keeps the market going and innovating to get on top of each other and you can change one of the items you use without changing everything. Personally I find that a social network that focusses on one idea or principle tends to not only work better but also has a better community who joined because they wanted to use that feature and not another. So that you can be sure that everyone who joins is there for that and not something else.

Sure, you might not get as many people on the network but you’ll probably find they are a better community then a social network that decides to include everything.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites