Facebook...Whats the Deal?!

[Blakjack]

http://techcrunch.com/2011/04/27/facebook-ipad-app/

"What’s crazy is that Facebook is letting other developers not affiliated with the company own this space. That’s great for those developers, but it’s potentially bad for Facebook. Most of the apps that promise a “native” iPad Facebook experience are simply Facebook’s touch-optimized site wrapped in skins. And most of them are mediocre — not to mention very ugly. And many of them even charge customers for those experiences!

"THAT'S THE WAY THOUSANDS (IF NOT MILLIONS) OF USERS ARE EXPERIENCING FACEBOOK ON A DAILY BASIS. THESE DEVELOPERS EFFECTIVELY OWN THE FACEBOOK BRAND ON THE DEVICE."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hopefully Facebook has gotten the point and have something special planned for iOS 5.

 

[GeekPill]

Facebook still thinks that the iPad is a "real" computer and not a mobile device and as such they believe that there is no need to have an app when the account holder can just open an Internet Browser app.

Or they are just letting these other companies fight it out then buy the best company.

 

[Thedeathbear]

I never knew Facebook had to put out their own free iPad app out. They can do what they want. Try using one with adds, use the browser, or use the iPhone app.

 

[jmthigpen]

I'm pretty sure it has something to do with advertising revenue. If people are forced to use the facebook website and not an app with no ads...they make a lot more money.

 

[NikeTalk]

Say what you want but it's really no excuse to not have an official Facebook app on the iPad. Especially, since it's already on the 2nd version. I'm sure it's not that hard for them..

Anyway, Friendly works just fine for me.

 

[djon41]

Facebook still thinks that the iPad is a "real" computer and not a mobile device and as such they believe that there is no need to have an app when the account holder can just open an Internet Browser app.

And this is a legitimate argument. But I would be much more understanding of it if the Facebook site didn't perform absolutely horrible on the iPad (2) through normal browser access.

 

[omyard]

I downloaded some of the free ones and they were rubbish. Most of the free apps I saw were just ad supported versions of paid apps. The site works well enough for me in Safari or Mercury that I don't feel the need to change to a dedicated app.

 

[darngooddesign]

Most of the free apps I saw were just ad supported versions of paid apps.

Umm, that's why they are free.

 

[saving107]

The only time I feel limited by the browser version of facebook on the iPad is when I feel the need to upload an image to my wall, but since most of the photos that I take (that I would like to share) are generally from my iPhone's camera roll, so for that I just upload it directly from my phone using the facebook app, problem solved.

for everything else that I use facebook for, I don't feel limited and I'm ok with the browser version.

 

[logandzwon]

The touch site works great. It makes me wonder what the point of the app is at all.

 

[Skika]

I'm pretty sure it has something to do with advertising revenue. If people are forced to use the facebook website and not an app with no ads...they make a lot more money.

So... why not make an app with ads?

 

[afireintonto]

i use friendly for facebook and the only reason i do is because safari doesn't allow users to upload pictures.
hopefully this will change in iOS 5. in order for the ipad to feel much more like a real computer the safari browser has to allow uploads of files, which in turn probably requires iOS to recognize files like it does on osx.

 

[Crosbie]

Seconded. Friendly is pretty cool, not least for the reason stated above (including direct upload of photos from iPad 2 cam to FB - nice), but it's unstable because FB change their formats without warning to 3rd parties.

Why don't they just buy up Friendly and make it the official app, as Twitter did with their favourite 3rd party app?

 

[lilo777]

And this is a legitimate argument. But I would be much more understanding of it if the Facebook site didn't perform absolutely horrible on the iPad (2) through normal browser access.

But that's Apple problem not Facebook's one. Just buy Android tablet.

 

[Blakjack]

But that's Apple problem not Facebook's one. Just buy Android tablet.

It may be Apples problem, but eventually these Facebook knockoffs could hurt facebooks brand. The iPad is already in the hands of millions and isnt showing any chance of slowing down. That means more and more people will continue to use Friendly's unstable app. Although its named friendly, the average Joe immediately thinks its just Facebook's iPad app.

Had a friend the other day say, "Facebook sucks on the iPad!" Had to tell him that it wasnt facebook.

 

[GeekPill]

And this is a legitimate argument. But I would be much more understanding of it if the Facebook site didn't perform absolutely horrible on the iPad (2) through normal browser access.

Indeed, we just have to put up with it until Facebook then decides to intro an universal app or back end of the site to improve connect with iPads. Or we just have to wait until something comes along to kill Facebook, that FB did to MySp and Bebo.

Am looking at you Google.

 

[notjustjay]

And this is a legitimate argument. But I would be much more understanding of it if the Facebook site didn't perform absolutely horrible on the iPad (2) through normal browser access.

I used the "regular" Facebook website on my iPad browser for many months, and for the most part it worked great. A few things aren't supported -- uploading photos and playing Flash-based videos, for example. But otherwise, it worked. More recently however they seem to have done a lot more Javascript-based stuff (for example the lightbox-style photo browser), and I've noticed more issues with it. Half the time you try to view a profile page, it doesn't all load, for example.

 

[GeekPill]

I used the "regular" Facebook website on my iPad browser for many months, and for the most part it worked great. A few things aren't supported -- uploading photos and playing Flash-based videos, for example. But otherwise, it worked. More recently however they seem to have done a lot more Javascript-based stuff (for example the lightbox-style photo browser), and I've noticed more issues with it. Half the time you try to view a profile page, it doesn't all load, for example.

You would think they would be using more HTML5 and not Java since Javascript cant be viewed on all devices.