Comments on: Mixed reactions to FriendFeed overhaul

The social-network feed aggregator launched a new beta design. Some people don't like it. Some people do. Opinions don't seem to be too strong in either direction yet.

[judsoncollier]

Maybe I'm just a design nut, but I have yet to see friendfeed actually move into the post web 2.0 design era, if I can call it that. It reminds me of 2004.

Still don't see the purpose of friendfeed yet.

[mathewballard]

The purpose of friendfeed is to take in as much information as possible, discover new things, and to have some good conversations. Friendfeed by far is the best social site I have ever used. And it is far beyond 2.0 standards.

[blusky08]

Social networking sites should be called "anti-social networking sites".

Seriously, the egotism and avoidance (of real relationships) involved in social networking phenomenon is astounding.

[clh22793]

I see the purpose of Friendfeed, just not the market for it. The hardcore junkies are all in, but it just doesn't seem practical for the rest of us. It assumes there's a need to follow all our friends activity on the web, but that's only true of a handful of folks. And now that Twitter is experiencing crazy growth, there just isn't much room for another life stream. It's exhausting just keeping up with Twitter.

[mathewballard]

I'm one of those Friendfeed "loyalist" as you call us and although, there are some things that I want to see improved or changed, my experience has been great thus far.

[davidds64]

I think that friendfeed is far more useful than twitter. You can get all the activity of your contacts on the net at youtube, flickr, delicious, blog, facebook. linkedin, twitter and many other services. Anyway, most of the content is from twitter itself, since it is a conversation service. You get all your twitter stuff and much more things to trace your contacts, and can make groups to follow the activity of just a few of them.