On Optimization...application

This is Part Two of my optimization posts: the application.


A lot of people have been complaining about the Facebook redesign. In fact, there are so many complaints coming in (one "study" claims 90%, but the group was self-selected, so the numbers are useless) that some internet folk have stated their astonishment that Facebook would do such a radical re-design without even considering their users' tastes through A/B testing (like Amazon uses).

I must say, I find this chatter quite silly. Admittedly, I have no idea what's going on in Facebook HQ, but I do know that they make an amazing product*, and I'm confident that they know exactly what they're doing, whether they think that directly pleases the users or not. Wait, what?

*(This asterisk style comes from JoePo. What can I say? He's a genius. I think I'll be using it, because it makes my sentences less confusing- I can expound on a topic later, but not too-far-end-of-the-page later.) I don't spend a lot of time on Facebook, but every time I go exploring around the site, I find another feature implemented really, really well. Those guys are good.


There, I said it. Doing what the users want does not translate to ultimate success. To connect this to Optimization, sites that do exactly what the users want right this minute are finding the local maximum of their site's success. They look directly to the right, and they see the graph peaks. They look left, and the site hits a valley. So they go right, and they're at the highest point as far as the eye can see, and everyone is happy. But...they're not at the global max, and they are thus not as successful as they could be.

Sites like Facebook determine what is best for the site, not solely based on user polling, and they implement it. Sure, they take back some mistakes (certain News Feed and privacy issues come to mind) quickly based on user reaction, but the overall direction of the site stays the same. Veterans of Facebook will tell you, this is hardly the first time that "everyone" using Facebook hated the redesign, and yet, the site continues to grow.

The site continues to grow because Facebook is seeking the global maximum of social networking sites. Through opening the site to the general public (the jury's still out on that one, in my opinion), and through emphasis on presenting fresh content every visit with the News Feed (this is a huge win for them), Facebook is going where they feel will lead to the most success possible.

Of course, this does not always work out. Like Apple, if Facebook's strategy of defining boldly what the consumer gets is to work, the theory behind their moves must be sound. So far, it's working out pretty well, but that doesn't mean it always will.

But imagine this: if, 5 years ago, MySpace polled their users endlessly about what features they wanted, and implemented everything they wanted, do you think the site would've ended up like Facebook (in the end, a much more successful site)? No way. MySpace would've found their local maximum (they probably did that a while ago...), and continued to serve their users the way they thought best. Meanwhile, getting back to the math post, just beyond their detail level, an enticing, new, global maximum was lurking, and they never achieved it.


In short, I think Facebook really does know what they're doing. I'm still not 100% convinced on their money-making schemes (I don't think advertising is working as well as they thought), but I think that, in the end, this new design will end up driving more traffic (and thus, more profit) to them. Just like the other re-designs, there will be lots of critiscm, followed by more and more people addicted to Facebook ;).