The fear, according to people close to Google, is that as Facebook users index the web through their Likes and shares, Google’s algorithmic indexing of the web will become less relevant. “Search is a business that will be pretty profoundly disrupted by social media,” said Augie Ray, an analyst with Forrester Research. “Ultimately, what matters to you is not what Google thinks is important, it’s what your friends think is important.”
What ultimately matters to you is what you think is important. Whether Google's algorithms or Facebook's social graph better predicts what's important to you remains to be seen.
Actually, what really matters is what you will pay for. Google's algorithms are currently winning at figuring that out.
The entire concept of 'like' and 'share' via the open graph has been badly misread.
What OG gives Facebook is the ability to classify and index (not sure if they are doing this) 'active' pages on the internet. Look at it as a cheaper and more efficient way of classifying pages on the web that are being accessed by users. The OG metadata identifies the page content in a structured manner, thus offloading a lot of the classification pains to the content publishers.
It is a smart way of attacking the subset of active pages, but it can't compare to the indexing and classification of a larger web - which is what Google does.
In terms of profiteering:
What's strange about FBs promotional way of advertising is that stores almost get into a price war to get the customers. In the end, only the customers win and stores will simply struggle to make more profit, impeding them to offer better services. Google's way of advertising is a lot more interesting because it simply announces what a service provider has to offer without it having to change it's product price.
Comments
The fear, according to people close to Google, is that as Facebook users index the web through their Likes and shares, Google’s algorithmic indexing of the web will become less relevant. “Search is a business that will be pretty profoundly disrupted by social media,” said Augie Ray, an analyst with Forrester Research. “Ultimately, what matters to you is not what Google thinks is important, it’s what your friends think is important.”
What ultimately matters to you is what you think is important. Whether Google's algorithms or Facebook's social graph better predicts what's important to you remains to be seen.
Actually, what really matters is what you will pay for. Google's algorithms are currently winning at figuring that out.
The entire concept of 'like' and 'share' via the open graph has been badly misread.
What OG gives Facebook is the ability to classify and index (not sure if they are doing this) 'active' pages on the internet. Look at it as a cheaper and more efficient way of classifying pages on the web that are being accessed by users. The OG metadata identifies the page content in a structured manner, thus offloading a lot of the classification pains to the content publishers.
It is a smart way of attacking the subset of active pages, but it can't compare to the indexing and classification of a larger web - which is what Google does.
In terms of profiteering: What's strange about FBs promotional way of advertising is that stores almost get into a price war to get the customers. In the end, only the customers win and stores will simply struggle to make more profit, impeding them to offer better services. Google's way of advertising is a lot more interesting because it simply announces what a service provider has to offer without it having to change it's product price.