Social Network Deux: Clash of the Tech Titans

It never gets old and it never goes away; the 'who's up, who's down' soap opera with table betting on the side that is daily coverage of the latest developments in tech.

Richard Waters of the FT describes the scene as the latest version of this web-based, tag-team sumo sees Microsoft and Apple stagger to the sidelines while Facebook squares off against Google:


"At first glance, it feels like we’ve seen this movie before. A fast-growing internet service starts to rub up against a better-established rival. Pretty soon, the rival, which controls an important software platform, shows signs of using its position to disadvantage the upstart. The internet newcomer has little choice: it has to get into the platform software business, if only to assure access to its audience rather than remaining beholden to an enemy.

That was once the story of Google and Microsoft – and, more recently, of Google and Apple. Now, the rivalry between Facebook and Google is the one that is defining the web – and Google is cast as the entrenched power. But it is worth remembering that movie scripts never play out exactly the same way twice. Facebook is at far less risk of getting boxed in – in part, ironically, thanks to Google.

The enmity between the online social networking and search titans has so far been apparent in the border skirmishes that have flared up, rather than in outright warfare. The latest incident was sparked by Google last week; the search company pushed out an update of its Android mobile phone software that blocked Facebook from embedding its service as deeply into Android as it would like.

The impact was limited – it will affect only the Nexus S handset, currently the flagship of the Android line – but the message was clear: play by our rules, or don’t expect favoured access to our users.

Google invoked a noble-sounding justification for its action. Since Facebook does not let its users export their contact data to other internet services, Google will not let it integrate this with the contacts list on an Android phone, which is exportable. Not lost on anyone, though, was the fact that Google has been struggling for a stronger toehold in social networking, and the contacts list is one of the few strong assets it has.

Coming the week after Apple slapped new constraints on media companies looking to sell subscriptions through their iPhone and iPad apps, this was a reminder of the power that the wildly successful new touchscreen operating systems have quickly amassed. But while most media companies will have to accept Apple’s rules – whatever their public rhetoric – Facebook has another option: it could try to outflank Google with its own, much-rumoured Facebook Phone.

This was the course that Google took to get past its unhealthy reliance on other companies’ software platforms – first Microsoft’s IE browser, then Apple’s iOS operating system. The Android OS was a hit almost from the start, while its Chrome browser is picking up momentum. Another software platform, the Chrome “cloud” operating system, looks far more of a stretch (does anyone really want a computer that won’t work when it’s not connected to the web?). But in the all-or-nothing business of developing platform technologies, two out of three is nothing to be ashamed of.

This may look like a blueprint for Facebook as it considers its latest Android problem. But the calculation hardly bears comparison with the one that Google once had to make. One difference is that Facebook is not squaring up against a monopoly platform, as Google did when it was dependent on the PC-based browser.

Ironically, Microsoft may become part of the answer to Facebook’s problem, should its deal with Nokia give it the leg-up it needs in the smartphone business. On the grounds that my enemy’s enemy is my friend, Microsoft has already cosied up to Facebook, and the social network is on some Windows Phone 7 handsets.

Another big difference is that, in Android, Google has created a more open platform. The Nexus S may be the flagship over which the search company feels it can exert more control, but it has so far steered clear of interfering too much with other handset makers using Android.

Seeing this as a killer app for mobile – at least for a certain group of users – “Facebook phones” have already started to appear, built on top of Android. That has reduced the need for a true Facebook OS.

There are longer-term risks. Android might not be as successful on tablets as it has been on smartphones, leaving Apple to dominate – though with hardware makers ready to launch the first Android devices, the iPad is about to face its first real test.

Google may eventually exert more control over its OS, restricting how it can be used and favouring its own services to the detriment of companies such as Facebook. Such a Trojan Horse strategy does not fit with Google’s rhetoric or actions so far, but it is nonetheless an unpleasant thought that keeps some other players in the Android ecosystem – mobile operators, for instance – awake at night.

For now, though, Facebook faces far less pressure to get into the platform software business, and can afford to direct its energy into what it does best: dominating the social networking market.