Making it so that every time you reload Facebook you get new, fresh information should increase the frequency with which people return.
Facebook has been following (and sometimes leading) this trend for a while. Pre-newsfeed how often did you check Facebook? Pre-v2-homepage? Pre-current homepage?
They're trying to turn everyone into hardcore, super-engaged users.
I'm not a Facebook user but from the pictures I've seen, I expect that this is about getting corporate messages in front of users more easily. They've recognised that the threat from Twitter is that people are engaging well by following business accounts and are more receptive to corporate messages as a result - that's incredibly valuable if you're the conduit. Had they not done this, I think they risked losing a lot of business interest to a growing competitor.
As a hardcore, super-engaged user (something of an experiment for me) I disagree. Well, I disagree that this move is successful anyway. We get more Twitter-style but less of what differentiated Facebook from Twitter. The stuff is still there, just hidden which I feel disengages me. Why would I post a link if less people see it?
I know they will tweak things as time goes on so I'm not too disheartened.
As a hardcore, super-engaged user they don't care about you. The point is not to cater to existing hardcore users, but to create new ones. If you're using every facet of the site as it exists, of course redesigns are going to be painful. There is simply no room to add stuff. All they can do is move things around, and this is hard when you have muscle knowledge of where things are.
As a casual user (former developer back in the goldrush days of mid '97), I immediately felt like I was getting more interesting information. That's just one opinion obviously. I'm not sure why you say less people will see a note... I don't see any evidence of that. But clearly it seems things are simplified and content is fresher, these two factors can only benefit them with their target audience.
I will agree with you that the new design needs tweaks. They do need to bring back enough configuration to suit the power users needs. Overall though column arrangement of Filter Buttons, Firehose, Highlights strikes me as a move in the right direction engagement-wise.
Not sure I wuold agree. Certainly I think they made a mistake with the design changes.
Before this update I checked my newsfeed fairly often (4 or 5 times an hour) and it was usually updated.
Last night after the change I saw maybe 2 or 3 new additions in arond 2 hours (even though I was hanging out on specific friends profiles and watching their new content from there). A lot of stuff never made it to my feed. :(
Comments
Why did Facebook do this? One word: retention.
Making it so that every time you reload Facebook you get new, fresh information should increase the frequency with which people return.
Facebook has been following (and sometimes leading) this trend for a while. Pre-newsfeed how often did you check Facebook? Pre-v2-homepage? Pre-current homepage?
They're trying to turn everyone into hardcore, super-engaged users.
Agree, disagree, thoughts?
I'm not a Facebook user but from the pictures I've seen, I expect that this is about getting corporate messages in front of users more easily. They've recognised that the threat from Twitter is that people are engaging well by following business accounts and are more receptive to corporate messages as a result - that's incredibly valuable if you're the conduit. Had they not done this, I think they risked losing a lot of business interest to a growing competitor.
Good point and I agree that this move is at the very least a shot across the bow of Twitter and FriendFeed.
As a hardcore, super-engaged user (something of an experiment for me) I disagree. Well, I disagree that this move is successful anyway. We get more Twitter-style but less of what differentiated Facebook from Twitter. The stuff is still there, just hidden which I feel disengages me. Why would I post a link if less people see it?
I know they will tweak things as time goes on so I'm not too disheartened.
As a hardcore, super-engaged user they don't care about you. The point is not to cater to existing hardcore users, but to create new ones. If you're using every facet of the site as it exists, of course redesigns are going to be painful. There is simply no room to add stuff. All they can do is move things around, and this is hard when you have muscle knowledge of where things are.
As a casual user (former developer back in the goldrush days of mid '97), I immediately felt like I was getting more interesting information. That's just one opinion obviously. I'm not sure why you say less people will see a note... I don't see any evidence of that. But clearly it seems things are simplified and content is fresher, these two factors can only benefit them with their target audience.
I will agree with you that the new design needs tweaks. They do need to bring back enough configuration to suit the power users needs. Overall though column arrangement of Filter Buttons, Firehose, Highlights strikes me as a move in the right direction engagement-wise.
Really? With the old feed it was only updated every N minutes. Say the feed refreshes every hour or two, for the sake of argument.
Users who are more engaged than that see a stale homepage.
Facebook is pretty data-driven, so I'm sure that have a whole suite of metrics that tell them this is a good move. At least I hope so.
Put another way, with the newsfeed there was an engagement ceiling. Letting your hardcore users be as hardcore as they want keeps them there.
Not sure I wuold agree. Certainly I think they made a mistake with the design changes.
Before this update I checked my newsfeed fairly often (4 or 5 times an hour) and it was usually updated.
Last night after the change I saw maybe 2 or 3 new additions in arond 2 hours (even though I was hanging out on specific friends profiles and watching their new content from there). A lot of stuff never made it to my feed. :(