[lnanek2]

Seems like a silly article. Even if they had feature parity today, very few people would use the replacement because their friends aren't using it, their family aren't using it, the shops they want to buy from aren't using it, the people they meet aren't using it...

[soylentcola]

Exactly. Setting aside the issues of whether Google would be preferable to Facebook as a central "portal" like this, they ran into the exact same issue when they launched G+.

At the time it had feature parity (and in many cases, superiority) with Facebook, but even though loads of people already had Google accounts for Gmail or Docs, etc. they didn't want to post to both Facebook and G+.

Since everyone was on Facebook and less than everyone was on G+, it didn't matter that you could silo your contacts more easily, integrate voice/video chat, make online/in person payments, or maintain some semblance of a personal "page" in addition to just looking at an activity stream.

And as we've seen over and over, once something is seen as an "also-ran" or less popular option, it largely becomes a joke among the potential userbase and definitely not a success.

[dragonelite]

This i think, they are grossly overestimating how much people really care about privacy. To make the transition to a more private ecosystem etc. I'm still surprised why Facebook still has multiple apps for feed and chatting.

Because Friends and Family are still using Facebook, Whatsapp, Instagram etc i also keep on using those apps. Im just navigating those app with the thought of they will probably save this somewhere.