Flock is dead (opens in new tab)

(flock.com)

176 pointsidefix14y ago56 comments

56 comments

"The Flock team joined Zynga in January, 2011 and is now working to assist Zynga in achieving their goal of building the most fun, social games available to anyone, anytime -- on any platform."

garagebander14y ago

No exceptions!

cageface14y ago

Sorry to hear this, but I think that the customized browser is basically DOA. It's hard enough to get people to update their main browser as it is. Better to build whatever you have in mind within a conventional browser.

spitfire14y ago

As an end user technology it was always DOA except in very nerdy niche's. As a delivery technology I think we'll see it around for a long time to come. Users clamour for "native" apps, this is a cheap (fake) way to give it to them.

younata14y ago

A few years ago, I managed to inherit some laptops that were being thrown out by the company my father was working for at the time.

One of them, apparently, used to be used by the CEO, and had Flock installed on it. This was my first introduction to the browser.

MichaelApproved14y ago

The CEO's laptop wasn't wiped clean before being thrown out? What else did you find on that machine?

1 more reply

akkartik14y ago

Joel Spolsky pithily summarized the argument: http://akkartik.name/blog/12342736

codeup14y ago

Even though most may disagree: Am I the only one who doesn't shed any tears over this news?

A dedicated browser for social networking like Flock always seemed superfluous to me. The recommendations of the Flock project point at this: use other free browsers (preferably FF) with the appropriate extensions.

k-mcgrady14y ago

I always liked the idea behind Flock but the UI was too cluttered and confusing every time I used it. Definitely too confusing for any regular user to be able to use it effectively (and therefore near impossible for it to ever gain as much traction as the 'big' browsers - even now when social is huge).

isani14y ago

I have to agree with you. When it comes to design, Flock was the anti-Chrome: a huge number of sidebars and tiny icons, all screaming "Look at me!"

betterlabs14y ago

Sad but I am not surprised. Its incremental value was always questionable and I never understood why they thought they could build a successful browser based on niche features that only a tiny segment of the online population would want. It would be interesting to see what happens to RockMelt.

Hipchan14y ago

Good news or bad news for RockMelt?

dudurocha14y ago

I think its bad news. If Zynga, the biggest maker of social games do not want a social browser, maybe this means something. Or not... See when Zynga aquired the Flock team, the rumors where that they want to get the senior team of flock, and make them work for zynga. http://venturebeat.com/2011/01/05/zynga-flock/ So now is just the annoucement of something that was already dead.

ryanglasgow14y ago

Bad. It proves RockMelt doesn't solve a pain-point.

Uhhrrr14y ago

Well, it proves Flock _didn't_ solve a pain-point. I still would like a tool that manages all my social crap nicely.

2 more replies

gordonguthrie14y ago

I like RockMelt - I tried Flock but it did nothing for me...

Does RockMelt have a business model? dunno. But RockMelt solves the pain of twitter/facebook/linkedin fire hoses (for me)

3 more replies

kingsley_2014y ago

Surprised and disappointed that they don't recommend RockMelt to their users. I'm not a huge fan of either, but if they wanted to do right by their users, the least they could do is to point them to the only other social-browsing game in town.

start12314y ago

They recommended a platform rather than an alternative browser. Flock was initially built on Firefox and it later switched to Chrome.

Brandon014y ago

Interesting how they list Google Chrome before Mozilla Firefox (left to right). Did Mozilla do anything to piss off Flock?

Edit: Nevermind. I didn't realize that Flock 3.0 moved to webkit.

michaelpinto14y ago

The original release of Flock was amazing back in the era when blogs were new, but sadly they seemed to unfocus after a bit of time.

petervandijck14y ago

There must be a case study in there somewhere.

anotherjesse14y ago

It was fun working on flock. I still work with many of the guys I met there.

"Wanted to destroy something beautiful" - http://factoryjoe.com/blog/2005/12/29/wanted-to-destroy-some...

sharjeel14y ago

Read this news using Flock 2.6.2 :(

ericmsimons14y ago

I've used Flock since version 0.7. Makes me sad to see a product I loved for five years die :(

brackin14y ago

Flock had deeper integration and less uselessness than rockmelt in my opinion.

vonsydov14y ago

Working on the mozilla source code....worst decision ever. They made chrome from scratch and its already got large number of users without any special feature.

flyosity14y ago

"They made Chrome from scratch"

They're using the WebKit rendering engine. While Chrome is a great browser, I'd hardly say it was "made from scratch".

bkudria14y ago

Well, Chrome is so much more than Webkit. (See: V8, among other things.) He said "mozilla", not "Gecko".

pmiller214y ago

Sure, but that was Google. If some random, unknown company made a browser just as good as Chrome, it wouldn't have gotten a tenth the users Chrome has now.

ceejayoz14y ago

Precisely. Chrome got advertised on the Google.com homepage. You can't buy an ad that effective, anywhere.

brianbreslin14y ago

yeah exactly. see: opera.

Mistone14y ago

a tenth would be generous.

jawee14y ago

I would say Mozilla/Gecko was a very good choice when the project started. Webkit itself was just being open-sourced at the time and cross platform compatibility was lacking.

antidaily14y ago

I'm sure it seemed like a great choice at the time. Remember, Flock is pretty old. The original beta came out in 2005.

golgo1314y ago

No love for Opera, Flock people?

windsurfer14y ago

Flock was open source, so presumably they prefer open source browsers.

rodion_8914y ago

If that was the case I assume they would have put a link to Chromium rather than Google Chrome.

Androsynth14y ago

Zynga is a web development company. They have no love for browser fragmentation; it means multiple environments they have to develop and test for.

android214y ago

Ahem."use the new zyngaweb browser and earn an extra 20% Frontierville dollars." I think Zynga could induce serious (double digit) uptake onto their own browser. Once they have this kernel of user installations, where could they go next?

1 more reply

taylorbuley14y ago

Amen brother. That said, since Flock was build on Webkit I don't know if there's any less fragmentation caused by Flock flying the coop.

1 more reply

farrokhi14y ago

wasn't this obvious from the beginning? And the same would happen to RockMelt as well.

nsfmc14y ago

Long Live the Browser

simonhamp14y ago

Wait, there was another browser based on Mozilla that then moved to Webkit that then died? Who knew?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

56 comments

lallysingh14y ago

"The Flock team joined Zynga in January, 2011 and is now working to assist Zynga in achieving their goal of building the most fun, social games available to anyone, anytime -- on any platform."

garagebander14y ago

No exceptions!

cageface14y ago

spitfire14y ago

younata14y ago

A few years ago, I managed to inherit some laptops that were being thrown out by the company my father was working for at the time.

One of them, apparently, used to be used by the CEO, and had Flock installed on it. This was my first introduction to the browser.

MichaelApproved14y ago

The CEO's laptop wasn't wiped clean before being thrown out? What else did you find on that machine?

1 more reply

akkartik14y ago

Joel Spolsky pithily summarized the argument: http://akkartik.name/blog/12342736

codeup14y ago

Even though most may disagree: Am I the only one who doesn't shed any tears over this news?

k-mcgrady14y ago

isani14y ago

I have to agree with you. When it comes to design, Flock was the anti-Chrome: a huge number of sidebars and tiny icons, all screaming "Look at me!"

betterlabs14y ago

Hipchan14y ago

Good news or bad news for RockMelt?

dudurocha14y ago

ryanglasgow14y ago

Bad. It proves RockMelt doesn't solve a pain-point.

Uhhrrr14y ago

Well, it proves Flock _didn't_ solve a pain-point. I still would like a tool that manages all my social crap nicely.

2 more replies

gordonguthrie14y ago

I like RockMelt - I tried Flock but it did nothing for me...

Does RockMelt have a business model? dunno. But RockMelt solves the pain of twitter/facebook/linkedin fire hoses (for me)

3 more replies

kingsley_2014y ago

start12314y ago

They recommended a platform rather than an alternative browser. Flock was initially built on Firefox and it later switched to Chrome.

Brandon014y ago

Interesting how they list Google Chrome before Mozilla Firefox (left to right). Did Mozilla do anything to piss off Flock?

Edit: Nevermind. I didn't realize that Flock 3.0 moved to webkit.

michaelpinto14y ago

The original release of Flock was amazing back in the era when blogs were new, but sadly they seemed to unfocus after a bit of time.

petervandijck14y ago

There must be a case study in there somewhere.

anotherjesse14y ago

It was fun working on flock. I still work with many of the guys I met there.

"Wanted to destroy something beautiful" - http://factoryjoe.com/blog/2005/12/29/wanted-to-destroy-some...

sharjeel14y ago

Read this news using Flock 2.6.2 :(

ericmsimons14y ago

I've used Flock since version 0.7. Makes me sad to see a product I loved for five years die :(

brackin14y ago

Flock had deeper integration and less uselessness than rockmelt in my opinion.

vonsydov14y ago

Working on the mozilla source code....worst decision ever. They made chrome from scratch and its already got large number of users without any special feature.

flyosity14y ago

"They made Chrome from scratch"

They're using the WebKit rendering engine. While Chrome is a great browser, I'd hardly say it was "made from scratch".

bkudria14y ago

Well, Chrome is so much more than Webkit. (See: V8, among other things.) He said "mozilla", not "Gecko".

pmiller214y ago

Sure, but that was Google. If some random, unknown company made a browser just as good as Chrome, it wouldn't have gotten a tenth the users Chrome has now.

ceejayoz14y ago

Precisely. Chrome got advertised on the Google.com homepage. You can't buy an ad that effective, anywhere.

brianbreslin14y ago

yeah exactly. see: opera.

Mistone14y ago

a tenth would be generous.

jawee14y ago

I would say Mozilla/Gecko was a very good choice when the project started. Webkit itself was just being open-sourced at the time and cross platform compatibility was lacking.

antidaily14y ago

I'm sure it seemed like a great choice at the time. Remember, Flock is pretty old. The original beta came out in 2005.

golgo1314y ago

No love for Opera, Flock people?

windsurfer14y ago

Flock was open source, so presumably they prefer open source browsers.

rodion_8914y ago

If that was the case I assume they would have put a link to Chromium rather than Google Chrome.

Androsynth14y ago

Zynga is a web development company. They have no love for browser fragmentation; it means multiple environments they have to develop and test for.

android214y ago

1 more reply

taylorbuley14y ago

Amen brother. That said, since Flock was build on Webkit I don't know if there's any less fragmentation caused by Flock flying the coop.

1 more reply

farrokhi14y ago

wasn't this obvious from the beginning? And the same would happen to RockMelt as well.

nsfmc14y ago

Long Live the Browser

simonhamp14y ago

Wait, there was another browser based on Mozilla that then moved to Webkit that then died? Who knew?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse