I guess I beg to differ. I can think of many examples where providing proprietary services for locked-in users has been a primary source of competitive advantage -- consider why Microsoft fights so fiercely to maintain a high market share for a product which generates no direct income (IE). It's a little counter intuitive at first, but they're ensuring control of the market. That's a powerful thing.
Referring to facebook as a "Walled garden" brings to mind AOL's demise, but just because they may appear to be similar tactics the companies aren't doomed to suffer the same fate. AOL failed for a number of reasons, the largest of which was a failure to adapt to the needs of the market. Facebook appears to be a more nimble company and I would be surprised if it had similar problems.
"AOL failed for a number of reasons, the largest of which was a failure to adapt to the needs of the market. Facebook appears to be a more nimble company and I would be surprised if it had similar problems."
You reckon AOL became the largest ISP by "failure to adapt"? No...the failure to adapt came much later. They ruled for a long time. Facebook is barely a wee lad in comparison. If it gets a run as top dog for as long as AOL then Zuckerberg should count his lucky stars.
Referring to facebook as a "Walled garden" brings to mind AOL's demise, but just because they may appear to be similar tactics the companies aren't doomed to suffer the same fate. AOL failed for a number of reasons, the largest of which was a failure to adapt to the needs of the market. Facebook appears to be a more nimble company and I would be surprised if it had similar problems.