Well, just to play devil's advocate to the article, foursquare (to pick one example) is something that nobody wanted, surely. 'Make people want something' could be equally important..?
foursquare (to pick one example) is something that nobody wanted, surely
I think local merchants desperately wanted a way to use social networking to connect with customers and get them coming back. My local sushi place has a deal, check in 3 times and get a free appetizer. Users wanted a new, fun way to use the GPS on their smartphones, and they were looking for something more engaging than Twitter or Facebook.
I can say with 100% certainty that Foursquare addressed both needs nicely. I'm not a Twitter user, but I used Foursquare religiously in the early days. I spent more time (and money) becoming a regular at said sushi place just to defend my mayorship.
Foursquare tried to make them want it, and retrospectively it looks like people did. The decreasing number of checkins on that and Places would suggest that it didn't work, because presumably people didn't actually want it and they weren't convinced enough to use it.
Edit: in fact, it's kind of a perfect example of 'why now' making it seem like it makes sense, and bandwagoning, and the appearance of 'solving a problem' and 'changing the world', all to little effect because it's a shakey idea to begin with.
This is definitely true, but unlike with, say, Google and their products, that arguably have the same chain of product/retailer, Foursquare users get basically f*ck all for all their work. I don't think people are stupid enough to use something unless they see dramatic benefits from using it, and Foursquare just doesn't seem to be heading that way quickly enough (anecdotally, it feels too late to me, in my City anyway)
