Browsing through Mashable.com today, one main story caught my eye. It was a story about a new social networking site called Path. Spawned from the idea of Twitter, Path allows users to make random updates and see what others’ updates are as well. What makes Path different from Twitter, however, is that it only allows users to have a maximum of 50 friends. Path’s “thing” is to have a more intimate social networking site so users don’t have to worry about what they share because only their closest friends will see it.
Path also claims to be focused on “intimate photo sharing.” When users update Path, they must share their photos with three things to give them context: a person, place and thing.
Being a photo person and a person with only a few close friends, I can see how this sight might catch on. One thing I’ve always disliked about Facebook and Twitter is that, especially with the younger crowd, it seems to be a popularity contest of who has the most friends and whose wall gets written on the most.
Photos give a social networking site more of a personal touch, and more of an “intimate” feeling – which is exactly what Path is going for. It would be nice to, say, go on a trip, take a photo and have only a select few people see it. I think sometimes on Facebook, not everyone cares to see your new haircut or pictures of how big your belly has gotten in your final trimester. But, close friends and family probably do. Path would be perfect for that.
I think Path might attract an older demographic – those who have 50 or fewer friends on Facebook and only care to use it to keep in touch with family and close friends. However, I’m pretty sure the point to Path is similar to Twitter; more of an instant gratification thing, done more on a smart phone than on a computer. I just can’t picture my parents carrying around a smart phone, taking pictures of random things and sharing it. I also don’t know if they would have the motivation to do that or learn how. I can see my parents maybe uploading a picture or two a week – not per day, which is usually how many times people Tweet. But then again, maybe Path won’t be used like Twitter; why would it have to be?
I’m not sure Path would work for people who feel like they have to have 100 friends to feel OK about themselves. Many people would hear they would be limited to only 50 friends and not even bother to try it. I really think 50 friends is enough. Who actually knows every single Facebook friend they have; especially those with more than 500 friends?
Overall, I think Path is a good idea. I think it may help create a more intimate feel for a social networking site. I don’t think it will ever be as popular as Facebook or Twitter, but why does it have to be?
To see the Mashup article on Path, click here.
Path also claims to be focused on “intimate photo sharing.” When users update Path, they must share their photos with three things to give them context: a person, place and thing.
Being a photo person and a person with only a few close friends, I can see how this sight might catch on. One thing I’ve always disliked about Facebook and Twitter is that, especially with the younger crowd, it seems to be a popularity contest of who has the most friends and whose wall gets written on the most.
Photos give a social networking site more of a personal touch, and more of an “intimate” feeling – which is exactly what Path is going for. It would be nice to, say, go on a trip, take a photo and have only a select few people see it. I think sometimes on Facebook, not everyone cares to see your new haircut or pictures of how big your belly has gotten in your final trimester. But, close friends and family probably do. Path would be perfect for that.
I think Path might attract an older demographic – those who have 50 or fewer friends on Facebook and only care to use it to keep in touch with family and close friends. However, I’m pretty sure the point to Path is similar to Twitter; more of an instant gratification thing, done more on a smart phone than on a computer. I just can’t picture my parents carrying around a smart phone, taking pictures of random things and sharing it. I also don’t know if they would have the motivation to do that or learn how. I can see my parents maybe uploading a picture or two a week – not per day, which is usually how many times people Tweet. But then again, maybe Path won’t be used like Twitter; why would it have to be?
I’m not sure Path would work for people who feel like they have to have 100 friends to feel OK about themselves. Many people would hear they would be limited to only 50 friends and not even bother to try it. I really think 50 friends is enough. Who actually knows every single Facebook friend they have; especially those with more than 500 friends?
Overall, I think Path is a good idea. I think it may help create a more intimate feel for a social networking site. I don’t think it will ever be as popular as Facebook or Twitter, but why does it have to be?
To see the Mashup article on Path, click here.
RSS Feed