?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Is LiveJournal on life support?

Since others are posting this as well, this may be a duplicate of what you have already seen.

http://valleywag.gawker.com/5124184/the-russian-bear-slashes-a-social-network

I'll be honest - I've been contemplating dropping LiveJournal for Facebook for any updates, and perhaps starting a specialized blog off my domain for technical things.

Comments

( 15 comments — Leave a comment )
cahwyguy
Jan. 6th, 2009 04:42 pm (UTC)
The story is wrong in that it was 13 laid off, leaving 17. As for leaving LJ -- I would if I found a service with equivalent mechanisms. Facebook isn't it, and LJ allows the non-public posts. Rather, I think we'll be seeing less new mechanisms for a while. Could the income from this site really support a staff of 30? Can it support 17 better?
rialtus
Jan. 6th, 2009 04:45 pm (UTC)
You do know you can do secure posting on Facebook, right? Not of statuses, but posts...
cahwyguy
Jan. 6th, 2009 05:05 pm (UTC)
Of what? Notes. They don't have the same formatting capabilities. Further, I don't think FB supports for the secure posting the same notion of friends groups. Certainly the ability to read friends lists isn't the same. It's a different community.
talonvaki
Jan. 6th, 2009 05:13 pm (UTC)
I agree. I use LJ as a portal, with all my daily read feeds and everything, plus my communities and my friends...

If there was anything like LJ, I'd be on it. But there isn't.
rialtus
Jan. 7th, 2009 01:02 am (UTC)
Well for feeds, there is always Google Reader. I personally dumped using LJ as my feedreader about two years ago and haven't regretted it once.

Yeah, I know, another site that does just one thing versus LJ that does that and more. I hear ya. But, IMHO, Google Reader does that one thing really well. YMMV.
msmcfeeley
Jan. 6th, 2009 05:22 pm (UTC)
Facebook is good for updates. Stuff that doesn't mean much and is basically impersonal. And for virtual farming and virtual pet ownership and saving the rainforest and world via silly apps where you click a lot :) In terms of 'posts'... it seems like you have to go thru hoops in order to filter it easily to share things with people. The LJ format is just so easy now :/
It makes me a little uneasy that they just had a big perm account sale and then *poof*...they do this. It's a little shifty if you ask me.
Brad Fitz needs to come back and SAVE IT!
drbear
Jan. 6th, 2009 05:44 pm (UTC)
What really worries me is that I CAN access LJ at work, but not Facebook.
rialtus
Jan. 7th, 2009 01:02 am (UTC)
Same at my work.
missingdonut
Jan. 6th, 2009 10:35 pm (UTC)
I'm surprised that they have this many employees. But selling permanent accounts is a terrible business model -- at least for people who want to make money in the future.
untexan
Jan. 7th, 2009 03:26 am (UTC)
Well, so is letting 95%+ of your users pay nothing for the service with no requirement to ever pay for it in the future.
missingdonut
Jan. 7th, 2009 04:32 am (UTC)
Well, they do compensate for it by having advertising, whatever that's worth.
untexan
Jan. 7th, 2009 07:33 am (UTC)
On this topic, I wonder how much money does WordPress get from having entities like CNN and Time and people like Curt Schilling use their service. I just can't see any serious, high-traffic blog using LJ as their platform and that's probably one reason why LJ is in the toilet. They never moved past the stigma of being a haven for teenage emo blogs and they couldn't pull that kind of big-time clientele no matter how well-written their software was.
missingdonut
Jan. 8th, 2009 12:40 am (UTC)
This is all speculation, but I imagine that CNN and Time would pay a good amount of money for all this webs two point oh stuff, but Schilling probably wouldn't need to spend a penny.

I fully agree with the last half of your comment; that it has a certain baggage.
untexan
Jan. 8th, 2009 03:25 am (UTC)
Well, that and Harry Potter porn, but I figured that went without saying.
missingdonut
Jan. 8th, 2009 10:25 am (UTC)
I wasn't aware of Harry Potter porn. But please, please, don't link me to it...
( 15 comments — Leave a comment )