tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13575764.post1589733989635498945..comments2007-11-02T16:43:14.815-07:00Anshu Sharmahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16808179818443881370noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13575764.post-19197973810414972972007-11-02T16:43:00.000-07:002007-11-02T16:43:00.000-07:00Interesting post. Your definition of platform <I>"... platform as a set of tools, technology or more broadly any layer that allows new products or services to be built with an order of magnitude less resources than was possible before the platform."</I> is very close to how I see it as well. <BR/><BR/>Platform often reminds me of the Shrek and Donkey conversation "Ogres are like onions... Layers. Onions have layers. Ogres have layers. Onions have layers. You get it?" Similarly to me technology platforms have evolved in such a way that its very difficult to tag any one of them as "the" platform. The internet is a platform that's mainly a layer on another lower level transport based platform and the internet itself supports platforms like Google, Facebook and the AOLs of the past. <BR/>There are other micro platforms that are based on Google or Facebook itself. So platforms could be viable at various levels in such a layering scheme. To me Facebooks equivalent platform from Google would be a mashup of Orkut, Gmail, YouTube, Picasa and Groups. Their latest OpenSocial initiative to me is more of an aggregator move and an innovative and powerful thing in itself.<BR/><BR/>According to me the long term viability of social platforms in todays world depends on how open (in all aspects interaction, networking, plugability, extensibility, personalization etc) they are and how well they can be monetized. A closed platform can evolve as well but only so far, if we look at technology trends from the past its open that always trumps no matter how strong the preceeding trend was. Now open does not always mean free and free can still be monetized but that a different story.<BR/><BR/>After all lets not be naive .. Facebook is defined as a social networking platform and valued this high not because its a good platform that solves the worlds problem of helping folks keep in touch, its more because of the potential to monetize it. However considering how proprietary it is the long term viability is suspect atleast for now.Darayush Mistryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09885449994009125113noreply@blogger.com