Details Revealed: Google OpenSocial To Launch Thursday
Michael Arrington
301 comments »
Details emerged today on Google’s broad social networking ambitions, first reported here in late September, with a follow up earlier this week. The new project, called OpenSocial (URL will go live on Thursday), goes well beyond what we’ve previously reported. It is a set of common APIs that application developers can use to create applications that work on any social networks (called “hosts”) that choose to participate.
What they haven’t done is launch yet another social network platform. As more and more of these platforms launch, developers have difficult choices to make. There are costs associated with writing and maintaining applications for these social networks. Most developers will choose one or two platforms and ignore the rest, based on a simple cost/benefit analysis.
Google wants to create an easy way for developers to create an application that works on all social networks. And if they pull it off, they’ll be in the center, controlling the network.
What They’re Launching
OpenSocial is a set of three common APIs, defined by Google with input from partners, that allow developers to access core functions and information at social networks:
- Profile Information (user data)
- Friends Information (social graph)
- Activities (things that happen, News Feed type stuff)
Hosts agree to accept the API calls and return appropriate data. Google won’t try to provide universal API coverage for special use cases, instead focusing on the most common uses. Specialized functions/data can be accessed from the hosts directly via their own APIs.
Unlike Facebook, OpenSocial does not have its own markup language (Facebook requires use of FBML for security reasons, but it also makes code unusable outside of Facebook). Instead, developers use normal javascript and html (and can embed Flash elements). The benefit of the Google approach is that developers can use much of their existing front end code and simply tailor it slightly for OpenSocial, so creating applications is even easier than on Facebook.
Applications can have full functionality on profile and/or canvas pages, subject to the specific rules of each host. Facebook, by contrast, limits most functionality to the canvas page, allowing a widget on the profile page with limited features.
OpenSocial is silent when it comes to specific rules and policies of the hosts, like whether or not advertising is accepted or whether any developer can get in without applying first (the Facebook approach). Hosts set and enforce their own policies. The APIs are created with maximum flexibility.
Launch Partners
Partners are in two categories: hosts and developers. Hosts are the participating social networks, and include Orkut, Salesforce, LinkedIn, Ning, Hi5, Plaxo, Friendster, Viadeo and Oracle.
Developers include Flixster, iLike, RockYou and Slide.
What This Means
The timing of OpenSocial couldn’t be better. Developers have been complaining non stop about the costs of learning yet another markup launguage for every new social network platform, and taking developer time in creating and maintaining the code. Someone had to build a system to streamline this (as we said in the last few sentences in this post). And Facebook-fear has clearly driven good partners to side with Google. Developers will immediately start building on these APIs to get distribution across the impressive list of hosts above.
And they’ll do it soon, too. It’s clear that the developers who arrived early to the Facebook Platform party won easy customers. Those that came later had to fight much harder. Developers found their new gold strike, and they will soon all be there, mining away.
Expect to see this stuff live later this week in the new Dynamic Profile pages just launched this afternoon in Plaxo Pulse.
I get all the other shops listed in the post - but can someone explain what the Oracle angle is here?
Wow this is awesome!
I was thinking that SOME company would eventually build such a product… I think it’ll be a pretty awesome move in the long run, especially for us developers.
If Google was to just make their own social network, I’d laugh hard. But of course, Google is yet to fail us. They’re not that dumb.
Michael,
Great story!
Oh My!!! ……….”Google wants to create an easy way for developers to create on application that works on all social networks. And if they pull it off, they’ll be in the center, controlling the network.”
Well enough said. No wonder why Google did not “WIN” the bidding war for the Facebook investment - They don’t have to when they are the toll booth at the bridge. On the other hand ALL the social networking sites will now have to open up otherwise they will lose members.
Just recently I was having this conversation with a technology guy who uses Facebook and I use MySpace. He sent me an Facebook invite and I told him that was the last thing I needed another “network”.
Scary stuff for Google competitors! Google wins AGAIN
@Saumil,
Oracle is there because they bought a company named “Five Across” earlier this year. Their product is “Connect Community Builder”, a social media platform.
Good scoop Michael, looking forward to learn more about this.
@5
actually Five Across was acquired by Cisco
good article and you might get something good stuff about technology from my blog http://lapnol.blogspot.com
@Alex, you are right, thank you, sorry Saumil, forget my post
Five Across was bought by Cisco:
http://www.fiveacross.com/
its makamaka from google
What will be interesting is seeing if or how Facebook responds. None of the partners alone is a threat, but combined in this manner they would be bigger than Facebook (traffic wise at least). Cool for companies such as Ning as well: could we see cross network interoperability?
Ok guys, my second chance, Oracle is there because they developed a social network, more details here:
“Oracle is doing an amazing job building enterprise social networking tools that are being deployed and leveraged in short periods of time.”
http://blogs.oracle.com/otn/2007/08/15
http://knowledgeinfusion.typep.....-soci.html
So what should we as business owners look forward to and how can we prepare to best use this as traffic drivers to our sites?
Corrections: FBML is only used for profile boxes and canvas pages rendered by Facebook. FBML is little more than a theme engine, and renders in HTML to the user. Canvas pages can be rendered in iframes hosted by the developer, which allow full HTML. Also, developers can access Facebook data on third-party web sites completely separate from Facebook via the API.
I wonder how Google/hosts will address security issues in rendering canvas and profile content.
This all sounds like a good idea, but I still have questions as both a developer and user about its execution… ’twill be interesting to watch.
This does nothing to counter facebook - there will now basically be three networks - Facebook, Myspace, and Everything else. Just like in computing, there’s Windows, Mac, and everything else, and on TV, there’s NBC, CBS, and ABC as the major networks.
This is a good thing for Google if they can make it work - it puts them in a good position to benefit or counter and social targeting innovations that actually pay off for Facebook.
Continuation of the grand theme: Google doesn’t do content, they make it easier for you to find it, create it, share it. They don’t do social networks, just make the ones you already use better/easier. Don’t (won’t) make a phone, but will hopefully make mobile web apps (and OS) better and also makes carriers nervous. Cool, cool, and cool. Of course, I’m still nervous about all the data they have on me, you, and him.
Sensacional
@Dheeraj: I think that all depends on whether or not users start to demand interoperability between different applications. Sure, there will be MySpace, Facebook, and everything else, until people realize they can choose one of the everything elses and seamlessly shift between them without skipping a beat.
I think then you might find MySpace and Facebook are the elses…
I keep seeing visionary dream three years ago. There’s real fist fight between facebook and google. I saw Facebook punch Google engineers face.
I saw Mike Arrington got nosebleed. I don’t know if it’s real or not.
Oracle is there because they are the largest database provider on earth. Oh and they own lot’s of companies, hmm. CRM, Financial, HRIS ….
@17
Agreed.
Interoperability is where its at! Closed platforms/technologies will die.
@18
What the hell are you saying? Lay of the crack pipe. It’s really making you dumb
Are they planning more host partners or is that it? What if someone comes up with a better site say for example, better than LinkedIn?
I don’t know… if my dream is real…
If you built application for Google. Facebook will take revenge that’s what I think.
@ Dheeraj: For the current hegemonial power distribution, I agree with you that there are some major players on the market. Although I would emphasize the user distribution of Facebook and the others: While orkut is mainly covering the South American market and some other networks have other markets, Facebook and MySpace are competing in the USA, UK and Canada. These markets are big but don’t have to power to make the world leader in social networks. The biggest language of this world is Chinese (Maybe Xiaonei) and there are many other non English speaking countries that have quite a bit of market potential for social networks. In my opinion, with this invention, Google will become the sole leader when it comes to diversity, because every country-based social Network may be too small to attract application developers. By just participating in the Google OpenSocial program they will have the most famous social network application developers enhancing their functionality - from a business perspective this makes total sense and - at the moment - is the only solution.
Maybe you want to read a little bit about Netlog’s success in Europe to get a feeling of what I’m talking about.
Good to see Ning in there .
This sounds like playground bully. Are you sure this is good idea?
Suddenly Facebook looks smaller….! and Microsoft …..stupid.
@Duncan: Let’s hope we see cross network interop. That would be my dream come true. OpenAPI for all! Standards!!!!!
I would like to see how deep applications can be integrated in the different platforms with OpenSocial. Facebook did an awesome job on creating tons of channels where an application could be integrated (own profile, friends’ profiles, canvas page, message attachment, wall…). It would be crazy if Opensocial was able to reach that far on all platforms and not just limited to profiles.
Big aspirations! I’d like to see this in effect first before i give it any thumbs up
The better analogy is Yahoo IM, AOL and Trillium. And look where we are 3+ years later.
oracle is there because the have a (internal only??) social network.
http://blogs.oracle.com/otn/2007/08/15
I too like to see how they allow to integrate application with OpenSocial.
The post lists the developers (rockyou, etc.) - will this platform be available to other developers to start with or tested by the developers listed and then rolled out to others?
$15bln valuation = PWNT. My opinion.
It seems that together they can and they will make a difference . To me, it feels that iGoogle will also play a role here. ‘All your social network on one page’. Doesn’t that seem to be a big damn attraction
google suckS! So greedy.
The key line in the story:
“Applications can have full functionality on profile and/or canvas pages, subject to the specific rules of each host.”
It would be a massive about face for LinkedIn to let anyone launch an app on their network.
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/.....rt-of-way/
That blows!
It’s a pitty Google didn’t manage to invest in Facebook. Now Facebook wont join the list of sites supporting OpenSocial
The developer scratching his head.. is that a graphic from Techcrunch?
I don’t think Facebook will open their platform to this initiative.
Their growth rate alone guarantees that they’ll be the Google of social networks in a couple of years.
Why let users easily migrate to other networks?
Instead, they will (or should) make sure their platform is the one with the wow factor.
This isn’t the actual launch it is just the announcement. I guess improperly wording blog post titles is an acceptable practice in this industry. That’s why I do it as well! Gotta play hardball with the rest of ‘em.
The actually platform won’t be launching until December 1st. Additionally, I said the announcement was on Thurdsay earlier today:
http://www.allfacebook.com/200.....pr-pickle/
This is ominously similar to the false MySpace platform launch date (which is now weeks away according to a number of my sources).
“Launch” is not equal to “Announce”
Hey
great post!
I am looking forward to seeing all of you in Boston (well, if I will be quick enough to get an invitation )
The social network roller coaster has just started. Tomorrow, you get yet another perspective to this.
Grumph. As a founder who is spending a massive amount of time on facebook at the moment, i’m both excited and maddened by this. I’m of a few minds here:
1. I can’t imagine any way that this wouldn’t be slow and clunky. It sure sounds awesome, but the thing is that the platform that Google is creating doesn’t in and of itself have any users to start with; as such, it won’t be immediately useful. Facebook succeeds as a platform because they give us huge access to user data from the get-go. I can’t imagine parsing through all of the revised privacy agreements that will come with this platform, for each of the networks mentioned above.
2. Facebook Platform is a mess at the moment. It happens to be a beautifully ambiguous mess, of course, but it is a mess nonetheless. Right now I have about 40 different app invitations on my sidebar and I wish they’d all just go away. And I myself am building apps and hoping people will use them. The Platform and User Experience will continue to be crazy because there’s nothing that adds an element of discernment on behalf of anyone, nor are the metrics that fb uses for promotion all that interesting. Daily active users isn’t really a valuable metric.
3. LinkedIn blows has people too old to really embrace this. Friendster is too fringe and there are too many aliases. Orkut is foreign. Ning is amazing, but still has too many aliases and not enough useful info for developers. In short, Google is partnering with ‘everyone else’ but sadly I, as a developer, could care less about building apps for those guys.
Ok so great - I think I just convinced myself it’s worth it to hire a couple more Facebook Developers.
What about YouTube?
If in fact Facebook does not participate, I will wonder whether it is the really the decision of the FB executive team, or whether Microsoft’s investment might have a had non-google (non-compete) clause — at least for a bit
http://www.heightsmediagroup.com/blog
this sounds like OpenID concept extended to applications…..adoption of this concept by partners (hosts & developers) is more important than technology itself….infact technlogy is nothing more than set of common APIs
if this takes off, hosts will shred their own platforms, and implement these APIs…it is good news for hosts who do not have resources to launch their own platform….and soon people do not value press releases we are seeing everyday on new platform launches!!
i have my own doubts on how this thing pans out though….we will wait and see before jumping on developing our own OpenSocial event ticketing application
Can you say $720/share tomorrow? Excellent news!
This is a great step forward for the web.
1994: Microsoft “embraces and extends” Netscape’s Big Idea (the browser) with Explorer. This basically killed Netscape, over time.
Nov 2007: GOOG “embraces and extends” Facebook’s Big Idea (the social graph) with OpenSocial.
It’s amazing to me how quickly the tides of innovation (creative destruction) wash back and forth over companies and business models now. Zuckerberg will not sleep well tonight. Facebook reached its high-water mark with the Microsoft investment and is now in decline.
I think large companies will be built on OpenSocial.
wayt
@45 Interesting observation. But, for clarification you mean you are spending lots of time building onto the Facebook platform, rather then Poking” your friends, eh.
@47 No way 2% investment gets you much say in the term sheet when people are lining up at the door to give you money. MSFT would be lucky to receive board observer rights and quarterly financials.
@#51 You maybe correct. Though this is assuming that GOOG delivers on the offering. But, perception is reality…..and yes I’m calling one nail in the coffin. As the song from Jim Morrison from The Doors goes …”this is the end…my only friend the end….”
@#49 You maybe correct. Let’s see if the street picks up the magnitude of this news tomorrow.
@ Varun and others
“‘All your social network on one page’. Doesn’t that seem to be a big damn attraction”
And what if all your social networks are connected to a Google Virtual World? Now that would be cool.
It’s an interesting thing for the trend of social network.
We do need a “common” platform for consuming all APIs from different social network, but will it happen? will other social network join this program?
And if it’s true, then Google will have the control of all social networks again.
THE1000LINKS.COM
The open social web will make the walled gardens open up. Watch as the pace of innovation outside the walls overtakes that inside the walls. More of my take on this here: http://therealmccrea.wordpress.....things-up/
Google strategically builds upon what others have done and has the power to unify. They have definitely been an exciting company as they help so many and provide useful tools for everyone.
hey everyone. wipe the brown lipstick off… this is vapor ware. it’s a concept not a product right now. and I have a feeling everyone is going to be disappointed with the results. it’s a tactical response by google to make developers think twice… it’s buying google some time. that’s it.
hey, i’m no facebook fan either, but what facebook does is make sense of web and they have got a lot of mojo. These aggregation sites never do well and have been tried before. but what you say it’s an api. We’ll see… trying to aggregate a bunch of sites is going to be a technological nightmare.
Frankly I ain’t buying the fruit juice…
Well, let’s see how much control Google is willing to give up over it’s *own* open API. How open can a vendor API be? Or is it a busy move to quell the runaway success of other social networks and Google’s conclusion that they cannot catch up the direct route with Orkut?
Could it be the signaling that the pace of changes in the social networking space will soon make them commodities?
Another thought: Meta search engines did not knock off Google as the search king!
okay, i am impressed, and i am glad they have made the mental leap in realizing that N companies with N apis is a dead-end
yahoo should just dump mash and jump on this. jerry, just drop your ego and realize google might just create a legit “platform” that can help you
Very interesting indeed. User data, social graph and activities.
- All Google needs to do is use their Gmail address list and tap into the $20M, 5% AOL stake and integrate with AOL IM’s buddy list to have the world’s largest social graph.
- Now if Google could allow developers to tap into the API’s and embed social data on any website, there would be no walls, the entire web would be a social network….which it is already. (ie alert all your friends that this blog is a good read…which I already did via emailing them)
- So in the end, I guess we learn that openness always prevails….
No Facebook participation? Was it because they were bought by MS just recently? If so that’s BS.
This is what was expected from Google.
Keehun,
They were not bought by Microsoft. They just made a contribution to Facebook’s funding. Facebook is likely not contributing because they have their own platform to concentrate on.
I wonder how does this affect (or is it in any way related) to Brad Fitzpatrick’s (creator of LiveJournal) own undertaking in this area:
http://bradfitz.com/social-graph-problem/ (did a quick check, nope, Google isn’t mention anywhere the page…)
This begs the question if all of these social networks share the same information why use one over the other?
I’m surprised Google took so long to get around to this.
I’ve been banging on the idea of a WebSwarm, transcending WebSites, for a couple years now.. But I am just one dude, with strange terminology
And Google Strikes Back….
http://tinyurl.com/2ew3mw
Taking back @64: Ok, Brad Fitzpratick works at Google now…
gmail is the next social network/graph.
i’d love to leverage opensocial at gmail.com via my address book.
Everyone is leaving Myspace, Hi5, Bebo and Friendster for Facebook. Will they turn around and join Linked-In or Orkut? The old farts probably, but not the Tweens, Teens and Young adults. lol
@60,69: Yahoo! Mail is at least an economy of scale bigger than GMail. Should Y! ever do something along these lines, they would be positioned in a much, much better place than Google not only due to the stickiness of their portal, but also due to sheer breadth and popularity of their services.
There is this weird fallacy here in the Valley that the things that we (read: Valley types; white make, 18-40, affluent) use are the industry leaders. They’re not.
Y! Mail > GMail
Myspace > Facebook
and so forth..