Slashdot Mirror


Zuckerberg: Betting On HTML5 Was Facebook's Biggest Mistake

An anonymous reader writes "Speaking yesterday at TechCrunch Disrupt, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg acknowledged that the company's stock performance was disappointing. He also made an interesting remark about Facebook's development efforts over the past couple of years: 'The biggest mistake we made as a company was betting too much on HTML5 as opposed to native. It just wasn't ready.' According to Mashable, 'the benefits of cross-platform development weren't enough to outweigh the downsides of HTML5, which pulls in data much more slowly than native code, and is much less stable. ... Now, Zuckerberg says, Facebook is focused on continuing to improve the native mobile experience on iOS, as well as bringing a native app to Android.'"

19 of 290 comments (clear)

  1. Correction... by war4peace · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Zuckerberg meant: The IPO Was Facebook's Biggest Mistake.
    There, fixed that for him.

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    1. Re:Correction... by Grantbridge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hardly, the IPO was an amazing success for facebook. They managed to sell the company for twice the current market price! Anyone who had facebook shares before the IPO (which is who facebook was doing the IPO for) did rather well out of the deal.

    2. Re:Correction... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Zuckerberg meant: The IPO Was Facebook's Biggest Mistake.
      There, fixed that for him.

      You meant: The IPO Was Investors Biggest Mistake.
      There, fixed that for you.

    3. Re:Correction... by synapse7 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I fully agree with you, making a billion dollars over night is terrible, absolutely terrible, I sure as hell wouldn't have done that.

    4. Re:Correction... by rudy_wayne · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Company-wise, their IPO certainly was a bigger mistake than using HTML5 in iOS.

      The IPO was inevitable and unavoidable. It was a bad idea, but it was inevitable and unavoidable.

      First, Facebook had already taken more than a billion dollars from investors, including half a billion from Goldman-Sachs alone. So that means that an IPO (aka pump and dump) was inevitable.

      Second, Facebook is the new MySpace and everyone knows it. An IPO (aka pump and dump) is the fastest way to cash in on the latest fad before the bubble pops.

    5. Re:Correction... by dnaumov · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Zuckerberg meant: The IPO Was Facebook's Biggest Mistake.
      There, fixed that for him.

      You meant: The IPO Was Investors Biggest Mistake.
      There, fixed that for you.

      You meant: The IPO Was The Biggest Mistake of Speculators Trying to Get Rich Quick Off an IPO Pop.
      The investors who actually SOLD shares on the IPO made out like bandits.

    6. Re:Correction... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Zuck holds 57% of the "voting" stock and specifically told everyone in the IPO prospectus that he wasn't going to listen to them. Nobody has the ability to oust him and he isn't leaving on his own. The guy knows what he's doing.

      I knew what he was doing, too, which is why I didn't buy any shares, and will continue to not buy shares until they're at around $10.

    7. Re:Correction... by kelemvor4 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "The guy knows what he's doing".

      LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!

      If he knew what he was doing, he wouldn't still be about a sinking ship.

      Let's see.. The guy made billions on the deal, and simultaneously kept control of his company. You somehow have a superior knowledge on the subject and know better. How exactly does that work? If anyone didn't know what they were doing it would be the investors who bought the overpriced shares. Zuckerberg, on the other hand can laugh all the way to the bank - or wherever else he might want to go. Because that's the sort of thing you can do when you're a multi billionaire. Cocksucker might be a good description if you ask the other shareholders, but I don't think the incompetence you're pretending he has is really there.

    8. Re:Correction... by crashumbc · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Apple most certainly is a "bubble"... It's not going to burst though, its going to be a "slow" leak back into mediocrity. One of the reasons Apple is so involved in lawsuits is they see the writing on the wall. History repeats itself. (see the 80's and Apple vs PC's). Their "profits" are based off the insane prices they charge. They can charge that much because of the "perception" by the public that Apple products are that much better.

      The gap between iphone and the others (android,windows) is MUCH smaller then 2 years ago. There's still a perception of a much larger gap then really exists and that is being propped up isheeple AND the wireless carriers. That is what is keeping Apple's dominance "a float" right now. Carriers are so desperate for the "iPhone" that they are eating the insane premium Apple charges themselves, making it seem as though the iphone is comparable. That is changing though. In a year or so the price of a iphone compared to a Android of the same quality is going to double/triple. Once "Consumers" start seeing they'll have to pay 500 for a iphone of 150 for a Android that works as well or better... Repeat the PC market, Apple will slip back into being a niche company...

       

    9. Re:Correction... by hawguy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "The guy knows what he's doing".

      LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!

      If he knew what he was doing, he wouldn't still be about a sinking ship.

      Let's see.. The guy made billions on the deal, and simultaneously kept control of his company. You somehow have a superior knowledge on the subject and know better. How exactly does that work? If anyone didn't know what they were doing it would be the investors who bought the overpriced shares. Zuckerberg, on the other hand can laugh all the way to the bank - or wherever else he might want to go. Because that's the sort of thing you can do when you're a multi billionaire. Cocksucker might be a good description if you ask the other shareholders, but I don't think the incompetence you're pretending he has is really there.

      A company is only as good as its employees, and having demotivated employees is not good for any company. If the employees are underwater on their stock for the forseeable future, it's going to be hard to keep them motivated. It's also going to drive up labor costs since they'll have to start paying out bonuses to keep employees happy as well as hire replacements for those that quit. Higher operating costs mean there's even more pressure to bring in more revenue.

      Zuckerberg is set for life, there's no doubt. Facebook as a company is ok for now,but I'm betting it will eventually go the way of Myspace. If Google put some marketing dollars behind Google Plus they might have a chance to take some serious marketshare from FB -- and not just online marketing, they need to reach a broader audience. Many non-geeks still haven't even heard of it.

    10. Re:Correction... by hawguy · · Score: 5, Informative

      If he lives in California and the divorce proceedings are started there that prenup is worthless after 5 years.

      Under California Law, she's not entitled to property he owned prior to getting married (gee, I wonder why he waited until the day *after* the IPO to get married!?). She'd be entitled to any gains the stock made after they were married, but she's probably in for a long wait before the stock rises to meet the IPO price again.

  2. I don't give a Zuck! by Elminster+Aumar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wish that guy would take a hike... As for his comment, well, let's see him come up with a markup language standard that appeases every vendor while supporting every aspect of media delivery for users. That's not an easy task. Say what you want about the consortium, but what they did in the amount of time they did it in is rather impressive... These things are done in baby steps--but their efforts delivered more than this. Just because HTML5 might have wrinkles to iron out doesn't mean that it's a failed endeavor. Rather, it means that the browsers, companies behind said browsers, and the users have created a massive cluster of epic proportions. The consortium is just trying to make everything more accessible while accommodating for everyone. Again, not an easy task at all.

    1. Re:I don't give a Zuck! by radio4fan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If that were really the problem in this case then the Facebook website would have exactly the same issues, and you'd have to download a Facebook client app for desktop use.

      The real problem is that browsers on mobiles still suck.

  3. For Mobile by mlingojones · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ooooh. What the article MEANS is "betting on HTML5 as a MOBILE strategy instead of writing native SMARTPHONE applications was a mistake." That's much less broad. Also, as HTML5 is still in its infancy and not yet a finished standard, I think it's kind of early to make this statement.

  4. I'd second that. He's spot on with this. by Qbertino · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Zuckerberg isn't dumb. This judgement on the whole HTML 5 craze goes to show. Techwise HTML5/CSS3/Ajax is a huge step backwards compared to other approaches, like, for instance, Flash. Flash is proprietary and invites doing all kinds of non-sense (sic), but it *is* a far better x-platform VM.

    Going HTML5 is not to be triffled with and will bog down your systems performance way further than other VM solutions such as Java or Flash/AS. Any web developer worth his salt could have told Zuckerberg that.

    The "problem" (lets just call it that for now) here is that geeks, i.e. opinion leaders, are willing to make huge technological concessions if the technology is more open than the alternatives. Some devs would rather chop their right arm off than develop against (semi)prorietary systems like iOS or countless versions of Android. Hence we've got native looking apps, that are web UIs in disguise, slowpoking about at speeds we know from Windows 95 Applikations back in the day. I presume Zuckerberg got himself talked into this by his devleads, who are, just like any respectable geek, probably way more concerned with system openess and anti-lock-in development wise than with business critical performance and end-user experience issues. That's my guess anyway.

    You can say and think what you want about Zuckerberg and Facebook - I dislike the whole direction thinks have taken with this FB thing just as much as the next geek - but his conclusion is spot on. He's a developer himself and it's to his credit that he recongnises where his company bet on the wrong technology. You have to give him credit for that.

    My 2 cents.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  5. Re:BS by nstlgc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What you're saying is "I don't need it, so nobody needs it". I hope you know how stupid that sounds.

    --
    I'm Rocco. I'm the +5 Funny man.
  6. Anything that causes pain for Zuckerberg is fine by iBod · · Score: 5, Funny

    Anything that causes pain for Zuckerberg is fine by me.

    Yeah! Go HTML5!

  7. Blame? by theurge14 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Facebook is a webpage, not a 3D game that pushes the hardware. Is it possible he is blaming the technology for the failure of his coders? After all, we're talking about an app that when you viewed the comments on a photo you had to back out and come back several times in order for it to "refresh". Or sometimes clicking on a friend's name would take you to an entirely unrelated part of the app. And photos would take ages to load. Sometimes entering in a comment would work, sometimes it would say "you can't comment on something that doesn't exist" even though you could open up Facebook on a desktop computer and make a comment in the same place without a problem. I don't know of any other "webpage" app on the iPhone that performed that poorly, and granted I don't know what the Google+ app used but in comparison it blew the doors off of the Facebook app. Was it really the technology to blame?

  8. Re:HTML 5 Java by Xest · · Score: 5, Informative

    "HTML5 is roughly equivalent to Java as far as a multi-platform programming language and development platform."

    No, not in the slightest. Not even close

    "The only successful approach I've ever encountered to using a virtual machine was employed by the Digitalk VM which cached successive VM invocations so that you ran at native 'raw iron" machine speeds after encountering the performance hit the first and only time an pseudo-instruction was executed in a method.".

    When did you last read anything about the JVM? 1995?

    "The lethal performance problems that WordPerfect encountered trying to implement their suite of office products in Java still apply."

    No, no they don't. That was the best part of a decade before Hotspot even came along, which was basically a complete rewrite.

    You could've typed your post about 15 years ago, and you might've had a point. Now however, your post makes absolutely no sense, and shows an understanding that only someone who had literally been living under a rock for 15 years would have. Java has changed a lot since 1997, and your criticism is nonsensical in the context of those changes.