Problems with 2.0 Companies
June 17, 2006
“why should we burn bandwidth and CPU cycles sending stuff directly to their servers?”
TechCrunch » Blog Archive » Why is Flickr afraid of Zooomr?
It would seem that there is a serious problem with some people within ‘Web 2.0′ companies this example being Flickr, i really cannot see the logic behind this, the service is created for the user it is the user that supports the services and makes them money. If a user wants to move or just try another service they should be able to, because it is not the companies choice.
By creating an API Flickr allows people to add there photo sharing functionality into there programs much like I do with Flock right now, but there is now reason this should be held from a person developing a similar system to the company in question, sharing is what started all this web 2.0 stuff off and it would seem it may just kill it before it has started.
technorati tags:Flickr, Flock, Photosharing, Sharing, web2.0, internet, Development, API
Blogged with Flock
June 17, 2006 at 5:03 pm
Hi Jack, thanks for picking-up the debate.
I’m still puzzled why a company that is all for its users denies them the very comfort of leaving when they want to.
That’s essentially like driving into a dead-end and then having a huge gate close behind you with a toll-man wanting his take to get you out.
I hope that Flickr and other more popular Web 2.0 companies adopt and embrace the general idea that has come-about from all of this — sharing information.
Kristopher Tate
cto & founder — bluebridge tech / zooomr
August 24, 2006 at 8:19 pm
I agree with Jack that Flickr is created for the user and it is the user’s content that supports the services and makes Flickr money. However, I do not agree with Christopher’s analogy about the dead-end, nor do I think withholding the API is denying users the comfort of leaving.
Yes Flickr does make money from users’ content, but they are also spending money to provide this service. A user’s content is not only creating revenue for Flickr, it is also creating cost. When the revenue is higher than the cost, Flickr profits. When the cost is higher than the revenue, Flickr loses money.
If Flickr opens its API to zooomr so that they can retrieve images from Flickr and display them directly on their site, then there would be no revenue for that content. You can’t expect Flickr to provide a service at cost but without revenue. If Flickr were to allow it, they would still have to pay for storage and bandwidth, but zooomr would be reaping the profits.
I do not see how this “denies them the very comfort of leaving”. They can leave whenever they want. All they have to do is delete their photos and upload them to their new platform of choice. There is no so called “huge gate” stopping them from leaving. There is no toll-man wanting his take to get you out. There is only you demanding that the landowner tow your car out! (at his expense, too!)
June 19, 2008 at 6:47 am
Somehow i missed the point. Probably lost in translation
Anyway … nice blog to visit.
cheers, Briery.