最陌生的重磅公司

    这些天来，有一家名不见经传的小公司在社交媒体领域掀起了轩然大波。它就是App.net，硅谷创业家道尔顿•考德威尔的又一杰作。当Facebook与Twitter都在绞尽脑汁向用户推销广告时，App.net却反其道而行之。这家与Twitter十分类似的网站打算向用户收取年费。完全不同的商业模式——更别提考德威尔发出的战斗号令，引起了整个科技界对社交网络现状的大讨论。我们最大的疑问是：一家社交网站能在满足用户需求和获取收益两方面实现完美平衡吗？

    下面是关于App.net的详细介绍，以及它的重大意义何在。

    App.net干什么的：App.net和Twitter很像，不过仍处于开发初期。用户能使用256个字符进行更新，比Twitter的140个字符多出不少，而且App.net上完全没有广告。“我们在打造最受用户和开发者青睐的实时社交服务，不欢迎广告商，”App.net的主页上有这么一句话。所有服务完全开放，所以第三方开发者能毫无顾虑地基于App.net开发新服务。长期来看，App.net有可能更进一步，成为影响广泛的大众化社交标准，开发者能在这个网站上任意使用用户更新。

    考德威尔之前成立过两家公司，一家是已经关闭的音乐网站iMeem，另一家是Picplz，它曾是图片分享网站Instagram的竞争对手。考德威尔曾在博客上描绘了自己理想中的社交网络，他抨击Twitter为了控制内容，监控第三方开发者，同时还批评以营销微博形式出现的广告。考德威尔在本月初致信扎克伯格，据传此前Facebook为了扼杀竞争，曾经打算收购App.net。

    App.net的用户是谁：目前，只有前卫的技术骇客和早期使用者乐意花费50美元的年费使用App.net，因为它虽然没有广告，但也没有经过完备的测试。考德威尔利用类似大众集资平台Kickstarter的募捐网站为App.net筹集资金，他原本打算在8月15日前筹集500,000美元，但最终金额一举达到803,000美元。许多捐助和支持似乎都来自于硅谷。“感谢尝试这么出色的东西，”约翰•格鲁伯在Twitter上称，他是Daring Fireball——一家颇具影响力的苹果科技博客的作者。

    App.net的重大意义是什么：Facebook刚刚创建时，它似乎完全没有任何私心。刚刚创建那几年，扎克伯格一直强调Facebook是一项“社会福利事业”。此后，Facebook的用户数迅速膨胀到8.45亿之巨，而且成功上市。不过，如今Facebook已经不再是单纯的“社会福利事业”。它成为了一门生意，要回报股东，要创造收益。正如考德威尔所诟病的，这种内在压力迫使Facebook不得不将用户和开发者抛在脑后。考德威尔指出：“我对付费服务如此乐观的原因是，它使我们和用户及开发者在经济利益上保持一致。如果我推销一项服务，那么客户就是我们的用户，我们的工作就是让客户满意。如果我们的服务是免费但依赖于广告的，那么广告商就成了我们的客户，而我们的工作就变成了让他们满意。”

    App.net的成功几率如何：那得看你询问的对象是谁。虽然舆论一致认为考德威尔在进行一项崇高的事业——将社交网络的用户体验重新还给用户，但人们似乎对App.net并不看好。803,000美元是一个不错的开局，但与Facebook上季度11.8亿美元的营收相比，它不过是不过九牛一毛。考虑到App.net的付费商业模式，它能否在和Facebook和Twitter的竞争中保住一席之地仍然是个问题。

    调研机构高德纳（Garter）的研究总监布莱恩•布劳认为，App.net成功的机会微乎其微。他说：“除非出现一场‘完美风暴’，否则App.net难以有所作为。”Facebook和Twitter这样的公司成立多年，在社交领域根深叶茂，而且营收还在不断增长，作为后来者的考德威尔要想赢得足够多的用户，可能面临极大的挑战。不过，话说回来，考德威尔也许已经完成了一项非常重要的使命：他旗帜鲜明地表达了态度。

    译者：项航

    These days, the company making the biggest waves in social media isn't likely one you've heard much about. It's App.net, the brainchild of serial entrepreneur Dalton Caldwell. Facebook and Twitter are currently trying to find ways to push more ads to users. In contrast, App.net, a Twitter-like service, relies on annual subscriptions. That fundamental difference in business model -- not to mention Caldwell's call to arms -- caused buzz in the tech world about the current state of social networking. The big question: Can a social site prioritize users' needs while still driving revenues?

    Here's a primer on what App.net is and why it matters.

    What it is: Still in the early stages, App.net is like Twitter. It lets users post updates with up to 256 characters, more than Twitter's 140, and the experience is totally ad-free. "We're building a real-time social service where users and developers come first, not advertisers," crows the Web site. The service is completely open so third-party developers are free to build new services on top of it. In the long-term, App.net could become something more: a widespread, democratized social standard where developers can use users' updates for what ever they see fit.

    Caldwell, who previously founded the defunct music site iMeem and Instagram competitor Picplz, first pitched his idealistic social network in a blog post criticizing Twitter for supposedly coming after third-party developers, trying to control the content, and for the ads that come in the form of sponsored tweets. Then, earlier this month, he lobbed a letter to Zuckerberg after Facebook (FB) allegedly tried to acquire his company in effort to squash competition.

    Who it's for: For now, just the avant-garde techies and early adopters willing to spend at least $50 a year on an unproven service, albeit one without ads. Caldwell was funding App.net with a Kickstarter-like donations page with plans of raising $500,000 by Aug. 15, but donations topped $803,000. Many of the donations and public endorsements appear to come from Silicon Valley. "Thanks for trying awesome," Tweeted John Gruber, author of the influential Apple-centric blogDaring Fireball.

    Why it matters: When Facebook first launched, it seemed entirely altruistic. In the early years, Zuckerberg was keen on emphasizing the service as a "social utility." Since then, its userbase has ballooned to over 845 million users and it's gone public. Facebook isn't just a "social utility," anymore. It's a business, with shareholders to answer to and sales to drive. That kind of intense pressure, Caldwell would argue, has pushed Facebook to put users and developers in the backseat. "The reason why I'm so optimistic about a paid opportunity is that it aligns our incentives economically with users and developers," Caldwell said. "If we're selling a service, our customers are our users, and our job is to make our users happy. If we have a free, ad-supported service, our customers are advertisers and our job is to make advertisers happy."

    Odds of success: Depends who you ask. While the general consensus is that Caldwell is doing a noble thing -- return the user experience of the social network back to the users -- people seem somewhat less optimistic about its future. The $803,000 is a good start, but that's just a small fraction of the $1.18 billion in revenues Facebook raked in last quarter. And given its pay-to-play-type business model, it remains to be seen whether it can compete in a space already dominated by Facebook and Twitter.

    Brian Blau, Research Director at Gartner, thinks it's a long shot for App.net. "It just seems like there has to be a perfect storm where this company can be positioned to make a difference," he says. With companies like Facebook and Twitter already long-established and deeply entrenched in the social space, backed by growing revenues, getting a critical mass of users could be a big challenge for Caldwell's effort this late in the game. But if anything, he may have already accomplished something very important. He's made a point.