Ben Lorica
2008/05/02
|
We have been tracking the usage in each individual Facebook application since the launch of their platform, so I have been following the discussion questioning the utility of the majority of applications published to date. A lot of Facebook applications are perceived as “time-wasters”, but I should caution that the number of apps in a category do not translate directly into active users: As an example there are much fewer Dating apps than Sports apps, but Dating apps generate far more active users. Moreover, Messaging generates more active users than other “less useful” categories, and has grown the fastest over the last month: Developers select the categories for their applications, so besides double-counting apps that are assigned multiple categories, inconsistencies in how the developers assign their apps to categories affect the results. We addressed some of these issues by categorizing the top applications ourselves. For more on the Facebook Application Platform, check the most recent edition of our research report. Also, Roger Magoulas of O'Reilly Research will present some of our most recent findings at the upcoming Graphing Social Patterns conference. |
我们一直在观察Facebook应用每一类别自发布之时的使用情况,也一直在跟踪质疑大部分应用到底是否有用的讨论。很多Facebook应用被认为仅仅是“浪费时间”,但是我要提醒大家注意每一类包含应用的数量并不能简单等同于活跃用户的多少: 比如约会类应用比运动类应用少很多,但是约会类应用的活跃用户却远高于后者。还有,通讯类别应用产生的活跃用户远多于其他“没什么用”的类别,而且还成为上个月增长最快的类别。 开发人员给自己的应用分类,所以除了分为多个类别产生的重复计算之外,设计人员如何分类自己应用的不统一性也会影响结果。我们通过自己分类那些顶级应用来解决一些类似的问题,可以参阅最新一期的研究报告来了解更多Facebook应用平台。另外,O'Reilly Research的Roger Magoulas将会在即将开幕的Graphing Social Patterns会议上介绍一些最新发现。 |
Discussion