Comments on: Facebook Chat is Here, Ridiculous

By: Oliver Lips

Oliver Lips — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:16:23 +0000

I wanna jizzz on your face.

By: New And Used Car

New And Used Car — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 07:28:00 +0000

Facebook Hack…

Hacking facebook is not to hard, there is a simple way…

By: megan fox

megan fox — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 15:53:47 +0000

Sign: umsun Hello!!! rcuwwymhyw and 8859ssgfhphzye and 8337I will try to recommend this post to my friends and family, cuz its really helpful.

By: sandrar

sandrar — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 20:17:52 +0000

Hi! I was surfing and found your blog post… nice! I love your blog. :) Cheers! Sandra. R.

By: Joe Stevens

Joe Stevens — Sun, 18 May 2008 00:20:28 +0000

I wouldn’t use it as my main chat platform.. but if I am on Facebook.. and someone I’d like to talk too is logged in. Then I would use it.

By: Kevin S

Kevin S — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 19:33:46 +0000

When I first saw this I thought it was ridiculous. I wouldn’t quite say redundant so much as Facebook’s first blatantly “wrong” move. They have done a great job with finding out of the box bells and whistles to keep the interest level up. I completely understand the thought process here, implementing a chat engine is actually quite simply and if it even keeps people on Facebook for 10 more minutes they did their job. This is a win win for them on the surface and frankly could be much bigger than we even realize. I can reach a lot more people on Facebook then I can on AIM. Simply put, I don’t know everyone’s IM name, but now that alleviates that problem. It’s a great idea, but what they don’t realize… is that part of the enjoyment of Facebook, is taking things at your own leisure and NOT speaking to people right now. Kind of like when you just want to reach someone’s answering machine…

By: Scott Monty

Scott Monty — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 05:45:18 +0000

Facebook is like an archive. Twitter, Gtalk, ooVoo – THAT’S where it’s happening.

By: Amanda Gravel

Amanda Gravel — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 19:10:19 +0000

Hollywood-

Maybe it’s because I don’t *want* to chat with the majority of the 1,000+ friends I have stored on there. And it’s fine to have a few different chat platforms or photo platforms, etc. It’s good to have plenty of options. But for me, Facebook is a catch-all friend storage place. The chat feature has too high a distraction potential and I don’t really want all the random people I’m connected to on Facebook to be able to just talk me up whenever they want. It’s like, too many dudes now think they have quick access to say “hey baby ur hot” and I don’t want and didn’t choose for that crap to disrupt what I’m actually using Facebook for. I personally just like my chatting to be separate from my profile, on my own terms, with only the people I choose to add to a list. To each his (or her) own.

By: Tim Coyne

Tim Coyne — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:57:59 +0000

I disagree Ms. Honeycomb.

Most peeps also have a photo sharing tool that they love (Flickr) but that hasn’t stopped them from uploading pics to their Facebook account.

And since you can’t export your Facebook friend emails (Scoble tried and get booted temporarily), I doubt most people have every Facebook friend loaded into their AIM or Gtalk or whatever accounts.

Facebook would be foolish not to create a chat client.

Tim

ps – Have you tried it? It’s actually pretty darn slick.

By: liz

liz — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 05:41:26 +0000

I’m with you–it’s redundant. In addition, other services have that trusty chat logging feature (I log all chats, not because I need everything on the record, but *sometimes* I have to go back in time and refer to something said or linked in a chat). If Fbook had a logging feature, I def wouldn’t trust it. They know enough about me already. I think the feature was an attempt at stealing yet another fbook application (Social.IM) idea and making it a staple with the site. Granted, I have used it over the past few days to talk to people I don’t talk to on IM….but I wasn’t trying to have any deep or long convos with these people. A simple, “hi, look the chat works,” convo was what we discussed, at best.