×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Facebook Opens Pages to Outside Developers

CowboyNeal posted more than 6 years ago | from the rolling-your-own dept.

Programming 76

prostoalex writes "Facebook is now allowing third-party developers to create pages within the site. Developers can use a combination of the Facebook API and a subset of HTML to create interactive pages accessible from within Facebook. Users retain complete control over which applications they want to have installed, and which applications they want to see on other people's profile. Developers can build on top of Facebook's social grid, and in case of a popular application gain distribution through Facebook newsfeed."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

76 comments

a question of time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19267125)

When will Google buy them?

Re:a question of time (1)

VariableGHz (1099185) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267271)

Google already owns Orkut -- that would be overkill.

Re:a question of time (5, Insightful)

eddan (903540) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267433)

Google already owns Orkut -- that would be overkill.
That's what people said before Google acquired YouTube - and already had Google Video.

Re:a question of time (1)

Babbster (107076) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267675)

True, but I wouldn't be surprised if the creation of Google Video was just an attempt to see if they could pull enough people from YouTube to make buying the latter unnecessary. When they didn't get enough mindshare, they went to plan B.

Just what Facebook needs (2, Insightful)

simong (32944) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267135)

The ability to make home pages look as shitty as Myspace. I hope they've implemented a taste filter that prevents fluorescent green paisley backgrounds is all.

Re:Just what Facebook needs (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19267209)

You cannot change the backgrounds outside of app's own box, i.e. the widget itself.

MySpace, anyone? (5, Insightful)

ninjafirepants (1077233) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267139)

So this is where Facebook takes a stab at MySpace's success. People like MySpace because they can do whatever they want with it. Pink text on red background with four movies and three songs all going at once? Why not make the page blink, too? Yes, friends, it's all possible via MySpace.

Now, it looks as though Facebook wants in on the game, too. What I loved about Facebook was the simplicity of design that it keeps losing with every new feature and redesign. The site slows down and becomes less usable. Time will only tell if it stays clean and modular like the screenshot in the article shows, or if it's one more weapon in Facebook's arsenal of bloat.

At least Facebook still works, unlike the piece of crap they call MySpace. Seriously, Tom needs to learn how to make stuff that doesn't break without fail every time I try to use it. Until then, he's not my friend.

Facebook : MySpace :: Microsoft : Apple (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19267689)

If you don't know what Cmd-Shift-1 and Cmd-Shift-2 are for, GTFO.
If you think Firefox is a decent Mac application, GTFO.
If you're still looking for the "maximize" button, GTFO.
If the name "Clarus" means nothing to you, GTFO.

Bandwagon jumpers are not welcome among real [imageshack.us] Mac [imageshack.us] users [imageshack.us] . Keep your filthy, beige [imageshack.us] PC fingers to yourself.

Re:Facebook : MySpace :: Microsoft : Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19279571)

Macs are PCs. Thread over.

Re:MySpace, anyone? (1)

Aereus (1042228) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267731)

This is exactly why I refuse to ever make a MySpace page. And now it looks like I won't want to be using Facebook anymore either. The type of pages on MySpace look more hideous than personal homepages from 1996. What made Facebook usable and respectable, was that it was devoid of most of the garbage that MySpace had. Oh well.

Re:MySpace, anyone? (5, Funny)

z0M6 (1103593) | more than 6 years ago | (#19268221)

Hideous? nowaii! http://www.myspace.com/soybuddha [myspace.com]

Re:MySpace, anyone? (1)

ubergenius (918325) | more than 6 years ago | (#19269279)

What the shitting shit? Do you KNOW that person? Because if so, you have to kill them... For the good of all mankind!

Re:MySpace, anyone? (1)

Lunar_Lamp (976812) | more than 6 years ago | (#19271579)

If I recall correctly, that was an entry (winner?) in a "design the worst facebook page" competition.

Re:MySpace, anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19273429)

OH GOD NO.

Lukcily Opera PWNed it using Shift-G. (User View, removes most extra stylings)

Re:MySpace, anyone? (1)

deuist (228133) | more than 6 years ago | (#19277697)

I thought I would be protected from that kind of torture thanks to the Geneva Conventions. I surrender! I'll talk. I'll talk!

Re:MySpace, anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19279391)

My computer blew up, you insensitive clod!

Traffic. (0, Flamebait)

VariableGHz (1099185) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267247)

Anything to keep the traffic coming in.

scripting (2, Interesting)

Locklin (1074657) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267917)

So how long before someone manages to get a nice x-site script into their page. This could be rather annoying since facebook doesn't work without javascript turned on.

Hmmm.. (4, Interesting)

Solokron (198043) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267253)

Although MySpace customizations can be very annoying, it is also part of its success. Being able to customize your profile to better reflect your tastes is part of what has helped MySpace skyrocket over competitors. Taking a plain, boring, white background profile and making it your own can be very gratifying. People can spend hours upon hours customizing their own little site testing it out, MySpace banner ads get more and more impressions, that person then in turns shows it off to all their friends (or people they just have on their list as friends), and MySpace continues to accumulate ad impressions. Although there are more crappy MySpace profiles, there are some profiles that really capitalize on dhtml and flash knowledge and even with limitations imposed, are very impressive. Any feature that keeps people coming back to their website is really what they want and Facebooks direction makes perfect sense.

MS-Facebook 2.0 (3, Insightful)

Speedracer1870 (1041248) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267315)

Does this mean that facebook will become as crappy as microsoft or will they just start storing all my info for *undisclosed* purposes? I knew as soon as facebook opened up to the public it would be more than just kids at my own college stalking me...

Re:MS-Facebook 2.0 (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19267395)

You control the information you dislose to the app.

Actually, this will be Facebook's killer app (0, Redundant)

simong (32944) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267321)

If the codebase can be kept clean. I have a couple of ideas for plugins all ready.

Facebook != Myspace (5, Informative)

beset (745752) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267347)

Queue all the "OMG FACEBOOK WILL BECOMES MYSAPCE!!!!1" comments...

Under it's current ownership I can't see that happening. The site is run by developers (which is great in my opinion).

If you don't believe me go and check their blog. Failing that try and change your name and you're presented with...

# Your Facebook profile must be attached to your real name.
# You must include your full name.
# Celebrity names, nicknames, or other fake names are not allowed and will not be approved.
# Obscenity, curses, and swear words are not allowed and will not be approved.
# ISn't~ ThIs 3 AnN0YiNg 2 ReAd? Non-standard capitalization and special characters are not allowed and will not be approved.
# Do not try to combine sentences into one word; Jane Lookatmysupercoolnewnickname Smith will not be approved.

Re:Facebook != Myspace (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267655)

There's more to the hatred of MySpace than their naming convention. It has a lot to do with hot cluttered and horrible-looking nearly every page is. Facebook seems determined to give people the ability to do that on Facebook as well. Honestly, most people don't care what someone's nickname is on the site. They care a lot more about how the site looks and runs.

Another post here has a quote saying they want to make it more like an OS and let you run applications on the pages... If that isn't the worst idea I've heard since I've worked at Microsoft, I don't know what is.

Either they restrict it to so much that it's useless, or they let people do what they want and the 'omgthatscool' takes over and the pages are horrid.

Ning has tried for quite some time now to attract developers to their social network to make 'apps'. Their API isn't good enough to warrant changing your style to use it, and the apps they already have are the type of things you typical see in those 'rails app in 3 minutes!' tutorials. Facebook has an advantage in the fact that they created the social aspect first, and have it running... But I still can't see the apps taking off.

Disclaimer: I do not, and never have, worked at Microsoft.

Re:Facebook != Myspace (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19271253)

Actually, the restrictions they've put in seem to be, on the whole, fairly well-balanced.

Each app stores any of its own data on its own hosting. However, IP addresses of users are not exposed to the external hosts, as Facebook basically acts as a go-between for all requests of the app. Each app that a user adds to their profile has the option of writing some static markup* to its own section of the profile (any CSS is edited to only apply to that app's section of the page, and no JS except for a few specific calls). In addition, apps can write to the mini-feed of users that have authorized the app to do so, and, with user permission before each e-mail, send e-mails to other facebook users (facebook displays the e-mail that is about to be sent to the user, with an option to send or not send). Apps also have the ability to render their own full pages inside the facebook site, via an apps.facebook.com/appname/pagename URL.

*Markup is done using Facebook Markup Language, which is a subset of HTML + some facebook-specific tags, like <fb:name> along with some more advanced tags like <fb:if-is-own-profile>, which allows rendering different text on a user's page to that user instead of other users, or <fb:friend-selector>, which inserts an AJAX friend selector with type-ahead functionality (like that used in some of Facebook's current applications).

Also, Flash is limited to be click-to-play. This means that on the whole, the look-and-feel of the facebook profile pages will largely stay unchanged, and in order to avoid looking hideous, apps will typically keep with the look-and-feel of the facebook site itself.

Re:Facebook != Myspace (-1, Troll)

Tickletaint (1088359) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267713)

Christ. Seeing the enumeration of those rules does nothing but reinforce my distaste for Facebook. Are they trying to stifle creativity? Is it their intent to appeal only to the blandest, most literal-minded meatheads? At least MySpace gives you room to breathe.

Go ahead then, mod me down for espousing an alternative perspective.

Re:Facebook != Myspace (5, Insightful)

Rudeboy777 (214749) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267789)

Facebook akin to a system where users are provided access to everything needed to do their jobs and nothing more, while Myspace is like giving everyone root access and telling them to run with it. Which would you rather admin?

Re:Facebook != Myspace (1)

Tickletaint (1088359) | more than 6 years ago | (#19270665)

Whatever other analogies you may draw, Facebook is also akin to a world where everyone looks the same, everyone behaves the same, emotive intuition counts for naught, and any expression of nonconformity is greeted by immediate execution. I don't know which I'd rather admin, but I know I'd rather live in a MySpace world.

Re:Facebook != Myspace (2, Funny)

B1ackDragon (543470) | more than 6 years ago | (#19271769)

I don't know man. I don't really understand the analogy. Not enough cars.

Ooh! Facebook is like someone buying their kid a nice dependable car; something decent to get around in, looks ok and might even pick up a few chicks if kept clean and maintained.

Myspace, on the other hand, is like someone buying their kid a car and giving them an unlimited budget to trick it out however they see fit. Come to think of it, haven't I seen a myspace page somewhere with a giant lightning bolt painted on and huge aluminum wing stuck on the back...? ;-)

Re:Facebook != Myspace (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19268973)

Having a ridiculous name is not creativity. It's misusing the name field. You're fishing for karma, as your last sentence indicates. Go away.

Also, GP, work on your English. "cue" (signal that it is time for) not "queue" (get in line), "its" (possessive) not "it's" ("it is"), etc.

Re:Facebook != Myspace (1)

Lurker2288 (995635) | more than 6 years ago | (#19268525)

Rules or no rules, there seem to be a lot of Jack Bauers, Supermen, and Jesuses. And from personal experience, the mail alias system at my alma mater allows you to set up nearly anything as your e-mail name, which in turn makes it possible to call yourself pretty much whatever you want in facebook.

Re:Facebook != Myspace (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19269609)

"Celebrity names, nicknames, or other fake names are not allowed and will not be approved."

Yeah right, like they really enforce those rules. You mean to tell me that the 15 Kirk Hammett's listed are really Kirk Hammett?

Re:Facebook != Myspace (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 6 years ago | (#19269741)

Ok, so rather than facebook=myspace, it's more - Facebook with added OMG PONIES!!1!

Reading those restrictions you've listed for us, actually makes it very easy to see why Facebook is not the success that MySpace is. In fact, my first reaction to seeing that list was, OMG FASCISTS!!!1!

It seems curious that with all the hyperbole about safety, child protection, and privacy on MySpace, that Facebook's primary flaw is it's zealous determination to ensure that you will NOT be anonymous on Facebook. Facebook clearly is not a place to have fun, or to express yourself, or explore your own interests safely. Closet gay? Closet Geek in a Sports Fan clique? Or, indeed whatever you want to explore with a different set of friends. If that's you, then Facebook is NOT for you.

I'm in no way defending MySpace - it's awful for a number of reasons. I don't have an account, and am not looking to get one. But it does look like a lot of people have fun with it, and many people have sent me links to their MySpace pages, I get them all the time, every couple of days even. But, no-one has ever sent me a Facebook one.

The fundamental problem with MySpace, and one that will be exactly the same for the New Order of Facebook, is that design is hard. It's actually very hard. People study it for years at school, but even then you actually have to have talent too. Maybe the freedom of MySpace is a good thing, maybe once people get messages saying "Oh dude, MY EYES!!1!, your page sucks", that at least some of them will take the time to learn how to design properly.

Bad design has been screwing up the Web from the very beginning. I'd be willing to bet that's not going to change in any of our lifetimes.

Re:Facebook != Myspace (1)

RandomPrecision (911416) | more than 6 years ago | (#19271443)

Uh, what? I replaced every vowel in my name with umlauted versions, and the B's with ess-sets. I know people named Pterodactyl, Admiral Ackbar, and Slutface.

And this was before they let in the high schoolers, much less people not associated with a school.

facebook: IM, photos, social music, email, ..etc. (1)

majid_aldo (812530) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267555)

...all in one! think of facebook as an open identity that will connect freely with any web app. this is what i've been waiting for!

Developers? (0)

CRC'99 (96526) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267623)

Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers.

Watch out, if I say it any more times I'll attract the chair-throwing monkey boy and then Facebook has no chance!

Yay, Yet Another Social Network (1)

AlXtreme (223728) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267663)

I've read the Forbes article and it doesn't sound like Facebook will become a MySpace soon... but still, do we still care for all these proprietary social networks merely striving to lock-in users? Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, Orkut, Friendster, localized networks like Hyves (big over here in .nl)... they all want more eyeballs (== more $$$), it's just that their way to generate more pageviews is different.

Maybe I'm just getting old (queue the GOML-quotes), but I don't see the point in investing time into developing for Facebook. In two or three years, a new YASN will have all the kid's attention. Although you might get a short-term boost in eyeballs now by developing using this API, the drawback is that once Facebook goes south you will be sucked down with it. eBay has been here for >10 years and will still be here over 10 years because it has critical mass and doesn't depend on a third party to survive.

Now an open meta-YASN engine, which gives me one page/feed with all my contacts over all these networks, that might be an improvement.

Re:Yay, Yet Another Social Network (1)

windsurfer619 (958212) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267931)

Re:Yay, Yet Another Social Network (1)

Ash-Fox (726320) | more than 6 years ago | (#19268393)

http://www.facebook.com/mobile/?phonebook

You must log in to see this page.
When trying to use bugmenot to get around this crap:

Site Blocked
 
This site has been barred from the bugmenot system.

Re:Yay, Yet Another Social Network (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19268803)

You're onto something. I really see this as the future: non-proprietary access to everything and everyone I am connected to on the net, regardless of where they are or what website they happen to have put their info into. It should be as transparent as doing a google search. Maybe facebook will be that (they seem to at least be ahead of the competition on that front), or maybe it will be something else, but I think that is where we're headed.

Re:Yay, Yet Another Social Network (1)

Stewie241 (1035724) | more than 6 years ago | (#19269965)

That is easily possible... the challenging part is who do we trust to manage such a large database of information?

Sure, we could tie everything in - from SSNs, to birth records, to marriage records, driver records, passports, real estate, phone directories, mailing addresses, employment... you name it - one giant database. But what happens when the owner and maintainer of that information goes bad! And what happens when telemarketers somehow find a loophole?

Re:Yay, Yet Another Social Network (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 6 years ago | (#19271471)

That is easily possible... the challenging part is who do we trust to manage such a large database of information?


Manage? Database? A large, open, meta-social-network sounds like a FOAF [foaf-project.org] . Having a "database" that some central organization "manages" doesn't really seem necessary or desirable.

Sure, we could tie everything in - from SSNs, to birth records, to marriage records, driver records, passports, real estate, phone directories, mailing addresses, employment...


I don't see why you'd want to tie these kinds of official records into a social networking system, but clearly if you did, you wouldn't want it to be a centrally controlled database, you'd want a framework of access controls and interconnections so people authorized for specific information would be aware of links and other users would not; that's a bit more involved, of course.

Re:Yay, Yet Another Social Network (1)

avronius (689343) | more than 6 years ago | (#19274119)

There's no reason that each Social Networking site couldn't write their own widget for facebook...

The widget could have a login window or popup, and show your "other" social network information. Complete with any advertisements associated with accessing that page.

Or not...

Re:Yay, Yet Another Social Network (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19269271)

Now an open meta-YASN engine, which gives me one page/feed with all my contacts over all these networks, that might be an improvement.
I think you mean mugshot: http://mugshot.org/main [mugshot.org]

Begin of the ned of facebook? (5, Informative)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267697)

Facebook has become so popular among us 20-something crowd because it is NOT MySpace. It is a way to connect that is clean and organized, and not full of crap and clutter from tweens who think they know anything about web design. It is simple, slick, and does it's job very well.

I fear that going down this path they may be descending into MySpace-hell. I hope this is not the beginning of the end of the usfulness of facebook.

Re:Begin of the ned of facebook? (2, Insightful)

natedubbya (645990) | more than 6 years ago | (#19273219)

It's this kind of attitude that separates the innovators from us normal people. The easy viewpoint is to isolate the one reason you use service A over service B, and then complain that A is changing their interface. The innovator has the viewpoint that you chose their service A because it was different from B, and hence, another competitor C can come along and make yet another simple change to make the drones move over to C.

Facebook is innovating, they realize they can't stand still. And yes, the large crowd will complain and ask, "why are you changing?" When Facebook released the News Feeds, it seemed like everyone screamed, but sure enough, they've proved successful and have only increased traffic.

Facebook will be replaced by the next guy, and everyone will point out why Facebook sucks, and for that reason, they have to stay ahead of the curve.


Re:Begin of the ned of facebook? (1)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 6 years ago | (#19274037)

I did not care when facebook added news and classifides. In fact I really like the new redesign and all the new features.

What I am saying is the whole concept of a user mucking around with the layout IS THE ANTITHESIS of why we use facebook.

I am all for innovation - but if "innovation" means "copying an attribute of something I hate" I will jump ship, and I am sure many others will jump with me.

Let the viewer disable the themes? (3, Insightful)

Nim82 (838705) | more than 6 years ago | (#19267845)

Myspace, Bebo etc wouldn't be half as bad if you could choose to render all the sites you view in either your own chosen theme, or as a generic preset - overriding the shite. I use ffox extensions (such as stylish) to nerf most crap on these sites currently, but would much rather there were just a tickbox in the user pref's that would provide a similar result.

Alternatively, lock the style and offer some sensible preset colour schemes, like most web forums do.

Re:Let the viewer disable the themes? (1)

johndapunk (844816) | more than 6 years ago | (#19275313)

That seems to be a good idea, but what about individuality? If you ask me, that is one of the big reasons Myspace grew to such enormous numbers (I'm sure others would agree.) Individualism is an important aspect of life, if you have ever read something like Fahrenheit 451, you would see a prime example. If everybody's page is parsed and looks the same, well, what fun is that?

Contrary to what I mentioned above about individuality, I enjoy Facebook because it is bare and elaborate at the same time. They managed to grasp a calm template with minimum graphics. They also have put together excellent standards for how they do everything (in there API, and there CSS code.) They use fairly advanced features, and manage to keep them simplistic enough for anyone to use. If Myspace (and/or Facebook) could grasp something in the middle, not too flashy, not too bare, and yet still personalized, we would see a finite winner.

with all the continuing 'growth' (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19268365)

it's a shame that a social networking site that was actually somewhat useful and cool is becoming a huge money venture instead of just being a good tool for keeping up with people. as it grows more complicated i (and other users too perhaps?) get fed up with all the extra crap everywhere and the extra demand one is placed under to simply maintain a presence there. how much longer is it going to be until everyone who doesnt want a myspace is going to have to leave facebook for that reason?

I think I missed something ... (2, Informative)

openldev (925511) | more than 6 years ago | (#19268659)

They launched the Facebook API months ago.

Re:I think I missed something ... (3, Informative)

macbort (224663) | more than 6 years ago | (#19269427)

This is new [facebook.com] , and quite a bit different than the API that has been around for awhile.

Now, instead of just using the API to integrate Facebook with external apps, developers can use the platform to run their apps right inside of Facebook. For example, a Flickr app could be made that would replace the built-in photo tools.

There are already 30 or so apps [mashable.com] available to add.

Not Like MySpace (4, Informative)

the cheong (1053282) | more than 6 years ago | (#19268807)

The Facebook API was released many months ago, and it does not lead to pages like MySpace. The Facebook pages itself do not change at all; the layout will be consistent throughout the whole networking site, as it always has been. The API allows developers to access facebook's information and create applications OUTSIDE of Facebook. For example, one application might make a powerpoint photo slideshow of all your photos on facebook. Or another application might use information to match up people into relationships.

Re:Not Like MySpace (2, Informative)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 6 years ago | (#19269197)

RTFM. This allows apps with custom HTML, etc., within Facebook pages. I'm not quite clear on who/what/when/how people can develop for this, though. E.g., will it just be a collection of approved and vetted third party components people can select from to put/use, in among other places, on their profile pages? Or will anyone effectively able to develop and deploy custom modules, but where/how they are deployed is a tightly controlled and distinctly separate environment?

See: http://developers.facebook.com/ [facebook.com]

Apps, including custom HTML, will be able to integrate into Profile pages. But you're right...it won't be the abomination that is MySpace.

Re:Not Like MySpace (1)

Bri3D (584578) | more than 6 years ago | (#19277323)

Wrong.
The new API changes give applications "write access" to Facebook which they didn't have months ago.
Applications can publish news feed stories, create a box on profile pages, and create their own Facebook-integrated and Facebook-URLed FBML "canvas" page, or *embed an iframe into the Facebook layout*.
This is a new change that I see going in terrible directions (imagine giant flash-powered ugly userboxes from hell and 10,000 "BOB IS USING FACEBOOK CUSTOMIZER 1.0" news feed advertisments).

Re:Not Like MySpace (1)

the cheong (1053282) | more than 6 years ago | (#19277795)

Ah, I see. I replied too hastily and didn't realize that the API changed in that way. I used the API a few months back and I thought that's what they were talking about.

Has it all gone Wrong? (1)

TP2k (1096999) | more than 6 years ago | (#19270855)

Trying to log in to facebook at the moment give me this response:

Hey, your account is temporarily unavailable due to site maintenance. It should be available again within a few hours. We apologize for the inconvenience.
In the past I have found facebook to be fairly stable, do you think that a rush of 3rd party plugins could of just been too much and brought the site down. Or is it just a strange coencidence?

Re:Has it all gone Wrong? (1)

wolftone (609476) | more than 6 years ago | (#19344025)

I have seen this a few times in the last several months. On the other hand, I've had several of the new apps fail on me upon install (I blame NoScript).

Facebook is evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19271079)

I used to be on there, but i have come to the conclusion its evil and just a front for information tracking! dun dun dun

This is what Microsoft's Popfly is all about (1)

notaprguy (906128) | more than 6 years ago | (#19271755)

Love 'em or hate 'em but Microsoft has a cool idea with Popfly in that they're providing a tool for NON-DEVELOPERS to build applications for "platforms" like Facebook. Drag and drop a few objects written by real developers and connect them and modify them in ways that you want and you have an application. This is markedly different than Yahoo Tubes which is clearly targeted at coders. I'm not sure if Facebook will be a huge success as a platform but if MSFT can make Popfly easy enough for anybody to use then they'll be successful in lots of places including Facebook.

What is it and who needs it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19275399)

Blogging - mostly crap
Myspace - complete crap and makes no sense at all
Facebook - heard of it for the first time a few days ago.

There's too much nonsense on the net nowadays, really. These superfluous sites and the whole blogging thing are bad substitutes for having a real personal homepage.
I can't believe companies are actually shelling out money for this junk.

Oh, I forgot:
Youtube - superfluous site where people can upload videos. Unbeliavable, a simple file sharing site. About as new as a 1980s pirate BBS. With Youtube, PURE crap has been turned into money. Amazing! Although Napster was already great (an irc client with small modifications).
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...