Slashdot Mirror
Flock, the New Browser on the Block
^tamago^ writes to tell us BusinessWeek Online is reporting that a new browser is stepping into the arena. This new competitor, Flock, hopes to change the face of web browsing by turning their's into the swiss army knife of browsers. From the article: "Flock's browser is built specifically for a new, emerging generation of Web users, one that isn't satisfied passively browsing media online. Flock hopes to turn the browser into a dashboard for collaborating, blogging, sharing photos, reveling in a raft of other group activities that have recently caught fire online"
Decrem expects to make money from running Google ads, as well as getting so-called affiliate fees for referring users to commercial sites such as Amazon.com (AMZN ). Moreover, he envisions getting money from other Web services, such as blogging or photo-sharing services, that might pay Flock for sign-ups sent their way from the Flock software.
Is it Opera all over again in terms of its business model?
Or does it sound like a legalized spyware?
What would site owners feel if a browser is competing for Google Ads and referral bonuses with them?
Looks more like a phishing exercise:
Home About Download Extensions Flock has landed.We're introducing the world's most innovative social browsing experience. We call it the two-way web.
Over the next few weeks, we'll be seeding invites to a few lucky folks. Sign up to find out when invites are available:
Thanks for your interest!
Email: And no, we won't spam you, sell your address or do anything else but use this info to let you know when invites are available. We hate spam just as much as you!
Oh and hey, wanna join the flock? We're hiring! So guess what? Send us your resume!
The most innovative thing about Flock is that it's trying to do away with the notion of "browsing." ... Essentially, Flock's software is intended to serve less as a window into static Web content than as a customizable conduit for participatory Web services, from Flickr to del.icio.us to the collaborative online encyclopedia Wikipedia.
Are they trying to turn browsing into browsing here? I think they may have overdone the alliteration, but I don't really understand what they're getting at. 'Browsing' the Internet is probably the best term here, even if it's not static content that is being browsed.
Besides, products that try to change or turn away the norm tend to not get very far - see Opera vs. Firefox and IE, or (more recently) disposable DVDs vs. normal ones.
I don't think this is going to get very far at all, even with the big limelight given to it by Slashdot here.
Guy asked me for a quarter for a cup of coffee. So I bit him.
It looks like it won't be doing anything in terms of functionality that a dedicated FireFox user couldn't get via extensions. That said, it doesn't look like it intends to compete on functionality. The name, page layout, and co-opting of GMail's invite viral marketing all make clear that they're going to go for broke on the presentation and marketing. Hey, it worked for the iPod--there are plenty of mp3 players out there with greater functionality, but people like how the iPod looks and will seek it out.
That said, people will pay through the nose for an mp3 player. Between M$'s bundling and the open-source movement, how exactly does a start-up web browser plan to make money? Honestly, if there's a niche in the market I would think it would be for ultra-secure browsers, not for flashy hip browsers.
"Someone somewhere had to wear pants for the first time. The meek and indecisive do not change our world." -Montville
It appears that their site fails to validate, at least according to the W3C Markup Validator.
k .com/home/
l la.orga .comu eror.org
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.floc
I would have expected the web page of a web browser to at least be standards-compliant. The Mozilla, Opera and Konqueror pages all validate cleanly:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.mozi
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.oper
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.konq
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Wired states (http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68823 ,00.html) that it's based off of Firefox. It is even developed by a member of the Mozilla Foundation. So perhaps a better question to ask would be, Is this browser meant to compete directly with Firefox and Seamonkey?
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
The efficacy of "invite" based marketing is very interesting. Certainly it worked like gangbusters for GMail and for various social networking sites (eg facebook). In a less formal way, for IM clients like ICQ and AIM as well. I think that the common denominator is social interaction. Perhaps that's why they are spouting off about being a social browser that allows better blogging, posting, trolling, flamebaiting, etc. The blogs and forums could be a path to market share.
I also think that social "invite" marketing works much better for free services like e-mail, IM, and web browsing. MCI ran into a bit of a backlash with their aggressive Friends and Family marketing, because it resulted in people pressuring friends and family who were by definition long-distance into subscribing to a commercial phone plan that may not have been a good fit. Then again, Verizon seems to be doing pretty well with its In Plan. Of course, neither of those have the exclusivity element that GMail did initially and that Flock seems to be going for--but realistically, it's not all that exclusive if you can just go to a web site and sign up.
I think Flock looks weak for a number of reasons--ideally Google will buy it out, but outside of the founders and VC's fantasies it seems clear it will die an also-ran. But is invite marketing here to stay? Should it be?
"Someone somewhere had to wear pants for the first time. The meek and indecisive do not change our world." -Montville
I smell imminent, blatant MPL infringement--unless, they are writing their own code to interpret the xpis (and perhaps ActiveX too, if they want some bizarre sort of extra credit or something).
If they do use Mozilla code, certainly they should have the source code available, as per the MPL, Section 3.6, no? Unless Flock has balls of Fire-proof steel and considers such a license naïve and unconstitutional like SCO or something...
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
Actually, that one's new -- if they've done it right. Opera only holds the last 10,000 or so pages, and the last time I checked, Mozilla started getting dog-slow at around six months worth of old addresses.
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
always post about something that isn't out yet so that the entire discussion is not reviews but reduced to mindless arguments and speculation? Just let me know when the damn thing is released
Well thank God we can finally text; and even talk to each other over the Internet. It's about bloody time. Why didn't someone think of this sooner?
KFG
I'll be blunt. I smell a rat. I think those foolish enough to actually give out their emails, or heaven forbid, actually get an installable bit of software are going to have a problem.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I think Flock's going to fail, but I also think that extending Firefox is not able to scale to the kinds of things people will want from the Internet/Web. It'll be able to do it a little, but not as an integrated package. There's going to have to be a new platform at some point.
He's not being clear because there's nothing to be clear about. A group of people that can't even make a plain-text page comply with web standards, and they're working on rolling out the next-generation web browser? A browser which, apparently, is going to revolutionize the way all mankind views digital information. It's so wonderful it's like the first light bulb wrapped in sliced bread.
Flock : Firefox
Bitboyz : nVidia
The Greatest Vitamin On Earth : Centrum Silver
There a pattern here?