The conversation about what contributes to the success of online entities such as MySpace, del.icio.us, and YouTube, continues with Paul Boutin’s article ‘A grand unified theory of YouTube and MySpace’.
If its the only piece you read about this conversation, then I think it’s an appropriate argument - though I’m obviously trying to make this very post the only one worth looking at, if for nothing else, for it’s brevity.
Two key things to pull out is where in one place Boutin disagrees with the common opinion on the success factor of these sites, in that they have seen such success because of their “collaborative nature” and Boutin posits that it is because “They’re easy to use, and they don’t tell you what to do.”
The other is where Boutin suggests MySpace’s immense traffic numbers have something to do with its “puppylike accessibility”, and he agrees and quotes JJG (who wrote in BusinessWeek here) who said that the undesigned layout/format of the pages “sends a “we’re just like you” message to newcomers”. Boutin adds:
If tech builders want to hand the controls over to their users, shouldn’t they presume they haven’t thought of everything?
And he wraps up the article by giving us the secret to success:
The secret to success is to make everything one-button easy, then get out of the way.
Now I’m inclined to agree with Boutin, where he pulls together two very good points about design: Make it as easy as possible to use: no friction between the user and product. And 2, make it extremely accessible: completely relevant and meaningful to the user.
But his rules are only applicable to a certain kind of online entity, and so far limited to ones that have no hint of a business model. Besides selling ad space. So while the success of these sites has an immense amount to do with these things Boutin explains - what is going to happen when the need to create a profitable and sustainable revenue stream is forced upon these organic and overnight successes?
Flickr may have peaked in it’s numbers/traffic for now, but it has the advantage of a revenue stream paid by subscriptions (as well as advertising) that will fund further feature and product development to encourage new waves of adoption. Sure it’s not bootleg TV or homemade videos - but it already has a paying subscriber base and as we have all seen (in 2000) switching on pay-for services to what was once free, dramatically reduces further adoption and can drive all traffic to the next free and maybe even not-so-easy-to-use online entity.
So I’d like to add, that MySpace and YouTube’s success in maturing as online entities, now relies in their deliberate yet extremely sensitive integration of monetizing their services if they want to last anywhere nearly as long as Flickr or even Slate has.
Jason Kottke weighed in also here.