Comments for Is Lifestreaming Going Mainstream? AOL Set to Snag SocialThing!

Is Lifestreaming Going Mainstream? AOL Set to Snag SocialThing!

2008-08-15T13:55:06Z

While there are many popular lifestreaming services out there such as FriendFeed and Profilactic, SocialThing! can be argued to be the more mainstream of them all, with a less geekier user interface and a more mainstream service focus. After snagging Bebo earlier this year, word spread that AOL was looking to buy SocialThing! Though it's only being confirmed again, we're wondering if lifestreaming is finally catching on to the mainstream masses.

]]> Acquired Tastes

Earlier this year, AOL acquired Bebo for a hefty $850 million. While the news was huge, we didn't think the acquisition would be particularly beneficial to AOL or Bebo. I don't see this being any different with SocialThing! in the picture now. The acquisition is still coming to a close and no financial details have yet to be released. SocialThing! has published a blog post with more details about the acquisition.

Web 2.0 Going Mainstream?

This acquisition may have other results outside of bringing AOL more consumers. For instance, lifestreaming is definitely picking up in the mainstream arena. We've written plenty of articles about lifestreaming in recent weeks because we're noticing that the trend is spreading. Is it going mainstream? There has definitely been a ton of recent activity to hint at it. First, Facebook integrates the aggregation of popular services such as Twitter and Flickr. Now AOL is snapping up SocialThing!. It should only be a matter of time before bids for FriendFeed start to float around. Outside of lifestreaming, but still in the web 2.0 arena, CBS acquired Last.FM last year for $280 million. So, let me rephrase my question: are different components of web 2.0 going mainstream or is the entire concept finally catching on?

Comment from Peter Dawson on 2008-08-15

2008-08-15T14:06:45Z

" So, let me rephrase my question: are different components of web 2.0 going mainstream or is the entire concept finally catching on?" -I would say different componets. is Beeboo really worh $850M , strong userbase in UK/EU , but is the prodcut really viable comp'ed to other stuff ? Google Friend connector is coming out and then users will rush over there. Property managment and retention in this fast moving platforms is tricky. e.g Twitter, late comers are joining, early adopters have moved on , value of Twitter increases by userbase, but value to commuinity detoriates inversely to new users. so its a catch 22

Comment from Joe Dawson on 2008-08-15

2008-08-15T14:11:22Z

I would say that it is moving mainstream, this acquisition and sites like Facebook offering features it's raising awareness!

Comment from riaz on 2008-08-15

2008-08-15T14:21:40Z

I am not so sure - the tools are certainly crossing over now to mainstream audiences but users will need a reason to use them Sharing photos and videos were already there and they generate conversation; integration of wall posts in facebook into the news stream makes it more like life streaming and will also generate conversation but I am yet to be convinced this is going to spread outside the net addicts and student demographics. I think we are going to need mobile access to achieve mainstream adoption.

Comment from Brandon Titus on 2008-08-15

2008-08-15T15:41:44Z

AOL's just grabbing random stuff up trying to capture something good. (IMHO, of course)

Comment from Thomas Ho on 2008-08-15

2008-08-15T16:03:40Z

Since RSS isn't mainstream YET either, how can we expect lifestreaming to become mainstream?

Comment from Mark Krynsky on 2008-08-15

2008-08-15T16:10:03Z

Lifestreaming, (or the ability to import and aggregate social services) is quickly becoming the must add functionality component for social networking services. It's definitely becoming a commonplace feature that I think will continue to proliferate throughout the web.

I do see a problem though, in that most sites adding Lifestreaming features are just slapping on the features and doing a poor job of educating users on how to use them. I've written about this lately, and I think this is the barrier that will stifle the ability for Lifestreaming to go mainstream if it isn't corrected.

Comment from Corvida on 2008-08-15

2008-08-15T16:11:54Z

Riaz - How do you think mobile access will affect mainstream adoption?

Comment from Clay Newton on 2008-08-15

2008-08-15T16:49:25Z

This begs the question: is AOL still mainstream?

Comment from Corvida on 2008-08-15

2008-08-15T19:43:08Z

AOL has always been mainstream. Who doesn't know about AOL? That was like everyone's first internet provider for a long time.

Comment from Corvida on 2008-08-15

2008-08-15T19:43:32Z

Could be, but the question is: will it work?

Comment from WebDesignMiami on 2008-08-16

2008-08-16T12:42:36Z

The renowned Gartner Group's latest Hype Cycle report places "Web 2.0" in a "Trough of Disillusionment":

http://tinyurl.com/6ycvs8

But for a few good chuckles, I suggest you Google the following and browse the first 20-30 listings:

failures Gartner Group
warnings Gartner Group
Gartner Group expects
Gartner Group predicts

As for "Web 2.0″, like so many tech articles posted since Tim O'Reilly (or was it Dale Dougherty?) first coined the term in 2004 (or was it 2005?), this one references "Web 2.0" as if it were something tangible--or at least a concept with clear, concise definition. It is not. In 2006, Web founder Sir Tim Berners-Lee sagely observed that "nobody knows what it means":

http://tinyurl.com/y6ewzy

In 2007, Michael Wesch put together this video that supposedly "explains what Web 2.0 really is about":

http://tinyurl.com/6pdz2q

It is a cool video. But the message is all about XML and how it can be used to separate form and content. There was no mention of CSS and XHTML, but no matter. I was writing XML parsers in the '90s, and XHTML/CSS web design pre-dates "Web 2.0" as well.

And now in 2008, the most honest thing we can say is that "Web 2.0" means whatever the techno-marketeer (ab)using it wants it to mean. Otherwise, why would intelligent people like Isaac O'Bannon still be writing articles asking "What is Web 2.0?":

http://tinyurl.com/5solok

And, why would McKinsey's just-released best-of-breed report entitled "Building the Web 2.0 Enterprise" ...

http://tinyurl.com/6sxls7

... include no attempt at defining the term other than to list the "Web 2.0 Tools" that comprise or enable it? And even there, the chief ingredient is identified only as "Web Services", adding more mystery to the mix as one ethereal term is offered up to explain another.

As originated in an Onstartups.com website design posting...

http://tinyurl.com/576sgs

... "Web 2.0" is like pornography: Nobody has defined it; you just have to know it when you see it.

Bruce Arnold, Web Design Miami Florida
http://www.PervasivePersuasion.com