An excellent example of this was back when I worked at Snapvine. We setup our signup flow, and launched our widget on MySpace. Our initial user base of 20 users sky-rocketed, and within one week, we had 400,000 users signed up.
I’m not saying results like this are typical, but they do happen. And like Snapvine, they kind of sneak up on you without any warning. The problem that most viral widget developers run into is very similar to the Slashdot effect.
Let’s take a look at the Snapvine widget example. After week one, 400,000 users have installed the widget. Let’s say that an average person’s profile page is visited twice a day. Once by them, and once by one of their friends. You’re looking at 800,000 requests hitting your servers, daily!
So here you have a really cool widget that users just love. Word of mouth is spreading. Users are posting on their friends message boards (omg, u hve GOT 2 chk out my Napolean Dynamite boblehed. w00t). Before you know it, your server can’t keep up with all of the requests, or your hosting provider’s bandwidth allotment has been reached, and down goes your widget.
Nothing makes a person pull a widget off their profile page faster than it not working.
But alas my friend, there is hope.
The best solution that I have found thus far is to use Amazon S3 to host your creation.
Amazon S3 is a completely scalable service which also allows you two very important ideals. Pay only for what you use, and pay after you use it.
Paying only for what you use is a huge deal when you’re deploying a Flash widget. I’ve talked to many people who fell into a very common pitfall. They invested large amounts on money into into either a dedicated hosting solution, or leasing some rack space and providing their own server hardware. However, when their widget didn’t go viral like they were hoping, they were still stuck having to pay for their infrastructure that wasn’t being used.
Amazon S3′s monthly billing setup is also a major benefit for us Flash widget developers. You can host a widget, get paid for showing advertisements, and your Amazon S3 bill doesn’t show up until the end of the month.
ComputerWorld released an article this morning about Amazon’s new S3 payment options.
This is really cool! Imagine a setup where you can offload bandwidth costs to the people advertising within your widgets. That way you’re not having to pay it out yourself, and advertisers only have to pay bandwidth actually used. This can make for an enticing advertising package setup.
That’s an excellent question! Here’s an excellent answer.
I’ve seen time and time again, companies and individuals trying to create the next MySpace. Frankly, chances are you are going to fail, and fail miserably. An Epic Fail if you will.
And here’s why. Let’s take a look at your typical social network junkie.
Name – Ashley Smith
Age – 18
Gender – Female
Network of choice – MySpace
Logs on – Multiple times a day (morning, lunch break, evening, before sleepy time)
Favorite Bands – Coldplay, Paramore, Jonas Brothers
Favorite Books – Twilight (omg, the movie was sooo amazing, I’ve seen it, like, a 100 times)
Having sat in on more than my fair share of focus groups, the majority of social network users spend the majority of their online time on said social networks. Especially with widgets and the splendor of OpenSocial and the Facebook Developer Platform, users are spending less and less time visiting other websites.
You might be asking yourself. Why build a widget instead of a third party application for social networks? I’ll address this in more depth in a later tip, but the quick answer is, there are pros and cons to both. One of the biggest pros for widgets is cross network support. However, there are absolutely times when developing a third-party application over a widget is the best choice, but more on that in a later tip.
Trying to create your own social network is a fruitless endeavor. Think of who you’re trying to compete with.. MySpace, Facebook, Bebo, Orkut, Hoverspot, MS Live, VampireFreaks, etc… Even if you were to get venture capital backing, it’s an extremely tough market to break into now-a-days.
So back to the question at hand… Why Widgets?
Social network users love widgets
Nothing says how cool I am more than a Napolean Dynamite bobblehead on my profile.
Widgets allow you to take your content to the masses
Driving traffic to your website can be done, but it’s never going to be anywhere near the same amount of traffic that the social networks already have. It’s much easier to cast a net into a raging river, than it is to divert the river.
Widgets are portable
They are not just limited to Social Networks. Take the YouTube.com external video player for example. Their embeddable video player shows up on blogs, webpages and pretty much anything that will render HTML (exception: the iPhone, Apple allow Flash on the iPhone already, gosh).
Widgets are a fairly inexpensive way to get your name and brand out there.
Build something really cool, and allow social network users to run with it. Next thing you know, people have heard of your company. Especially helpful if your target demographic is 16-28 year olds.
Widgets can make you money
Widget advertising is a new market, there hasn’t been a lot done with it yet. Personally, I think there is a huge revenue stream there that is waiting to be tapped. Just be careful when advertising inside widgets. Some social networks will shut you down if you’re trying to make money on their network without their consent. A wise MySpace employee once told me that sharing some of your advertising revenue with MySpace is better than not getting any revenue through MySpace.
So that’s it for our first Tip of the Day, thoughts?
One of my a new years resolutions I made this year is to post more to this blog.
While writing my last blog post dealing with widget development, I accrued a large list of tips and tricks that I’ve learned over the years. There are way too many to put them in a single post.
So in honor of Senocular, who probably doesn’t know it, but has taught me a lot about Actionscript and Flash development in general, I’m going to start posting a Tip of the Day. The first few tips will be dealing with widget development.
I’m going to post a different tip everyday for the next 30 days.
You can also take a look at the original AS3 Tip of the Day, which is still an extremely valuable resource.
An interesting conversation has been happening for a while over on flexcoders. The conversation started with a simple question… Whether or not using the Flex framework is a good idea when developing widgets.
First a little background about me.
A little while back, I worked for a small startup named Snapvine. Snapvine currently has many widget offerings, one of which still gets loaded millions of times each week. These widgets are deployed across hundreds of social networks (who knew there were so many). As the lone flash developer in the company, it was my job was to create and maintain all of these widgets.
The great thing about Snapvine was that I was surrounded by brilliant people, we discussed the Flex framework in extraordinary detail, weighing the pros and cons of using such a framework in our widgets.
So that brings me to the whole point of this blog post… pros and cons for building widgets for the Adobe Flash Platform using Flex.
My experience in widget development was mostly focused on development for social networks, so I might say some things that may not apply to other types of widget development.
– Pros –
Flex does a lot of the work for you
Flex does so much of the heavy lifting for us. If you’re ever bored, skim through the Flex documentation. It’s not uncommon for me to find things within the framework I didn’t know existed.
Also, If you haven’t already done so, I highly recommend picking up the O’Reilly Flex 3 Cookbook, or thumbing through it at your local bookstore. I’ve found some really great things in there that I didn’t know about the Flex Framework.
Flex allows quicker development time because there is less code YOU have to write.
Once again, Thanks Adobe… for doing my work for me.
RSLs decrease frequent loading time
The use of Adobe’s Runtime Shared Library significantly reduces multiple loads of your widget. This is because parts of the Flex Framework become cached inside the Flash Player itself. One of the big benefits of the framework RSLs is that not only your widget benefit from them. The framework is cached the first time ANY Flex content, on any site, using framework RSLs is loaded.
One caveat to Runtime Shared Libraries is that you have to configure your widget to utilize them during compilation. They don’t just get used magically. This also means that when you deploy the widget on your web server, you need to also upload and distribute the RSLs.
So if a user visits Picnik, which uses the Flex framework RSLs. Then the user visits a myspace profile page with your widget on it, they wouldn’t download the framework RSLs again (if you and picnik.com are using the same version of the SDK).
Myspace wants users to use Flash Player 9 and above
A while back Adobe and MySpace scratched each other’s back a little bit. Adobe added support for MySpace to disallow navigation events from flash widgets (allowNetworking=”internal”), and MySpace in turn highly recommend users to upgrade to Flash Player 9 (I’m pretty sure they also did this for the video support in Flash Player 9). Myspace did this by prompting users to update their Flash Player if they detected version 8 and below.
That’s a BIG pro for us widget developers, because that means the majority of our widget market is using a player with loads of the features we know and love. At the time of this writing, I’m unsure if MySpace is pushing Flash Player 10, I haven’t noticed it yet.
I’m currently writing this post aboard an airplane at 33,000 feet. Would the person who keeps passing gas, please knock it off, this is an enclosed air system for heaven’s sake.
– Cons –
Flex is huge, comparatively
300 KB is still too big for dial-up. Many people argue that if people are using MySpace on dial-up, that they’re used to slow loading times. It’s not uncommon for a MySpace profile to be littered with hundreds of 100 KB photos, music, etc… However, that brings me to one of my main points.
By keeping your widget small, It’s more than likely going to load prior to other things on the profile. This is key for getting your brand out there. In Snapvine’s case, this meant that before pictures of friends, before the music players, before the slideshows… Snapvine’s logo was spinning on the page.
Bandwidth is expensive
If your goal if for your widget to go viral, bandwidth is something you should consider. It is bandwidth which drives how much money you are going to spend.
This calculator estimates how much it would cost if you were hosting your widget on Amazon S3 (US).
Why is this a con? Using the Flex framework bloats a swf’s file size, and ultimately costs you more money, even if you are using Runtime Shared Libraries.
A simple application which is JUST a combo box, is still 56 KB, even when using Runtime Shared Libraries.
Flex was built primarily for Enterprise Development
This means that lots of the components within the framework, are pretty much useless within widgets. For example, using a datagrid to show massive amounts of data… not really a good use for a widget.
Remember, we’re talking about widgets, not about widgapplications (my spellcheck doesn’t like that word). Most widgets are fairly simple apps. Examples – a music player, slideshow, awesome video slideshow, small game, etc…
Keep your widget fairly simple, if it begins to become too complex, you should probably ask yourself, “Should I be building a 3rd party application (OpenSocial or FBML) instead of a widget?”
It’s hard to selectively use pieces of Flex
I’m not going to say that it is impossible, but loads of classes in the Flex framework are dependent upon each other. Which means that if you’re going to use one Flex class within your widget, it will import ALL of it’s dependencies, whether you use them or not.
– Nate’s opinion –
If I’m building a widget whose soul purpose is to go viral and be loaded millions of times a day, I’m going to write it in straight ActionScript.
Sure, it will take a bit more time, but in the end I’ll save money, have more granular control over my widget, and feel good about myself.