Yesterday I created my new MySpace page after I had received an invite from the site. The new MySpace is really nice focusing strongly on gorgeous imagery and music and it definitely looks like it can be a legitimate competitor to Spotify. You can read about my initial impressions of the site here.
When I first received the invite I have to admit that I was a little ecstatic and my first plan was to give as many people as I could an invite. Immediately, I called a good friend of mine and asked him if he wanted an invite to this new service. Without hesitation he agreed but, what he said next left me at odds. He jokingly said, “Wow, I’m not sure how many more of these social networking sites I can take.” I paused for a bit and I said to myself, neither can I.
MySpace represents to me an old site being reborn in hopes of making a comeback and it really is an underdog story. I’ve been on MySpace for only a day but already I’m hoping to experiment with it periodically. Google+, according to my RescueTime tracker, has taken much more of my time in recent months so I believe it’s safe to say that I’m pretty much a Google+ power user. My Facebook also has been steadily receiving activity due to some added leisure time. The point is, among the three sites my time, attention, and energy, are being spent in all three. That is simply unacceptable.
Social Media is great because it allows us to connect with the people, topics, and ideas, that we all care about most. So why is it so difficult to have one site dominate all the others? The answer is simple really, since each Social Media service is appealing for different reasons. Facebook has the people, MySpace has the music, Instagram has the photos, and Google+ has the ideas. Each service is great because they each provide something unique. However, is it beneficial to actually use all three together?
As I’ve said before plenty of our energy is being invested into these sites and I can’t help but think that being involved extensively in all three is really unhealthy. This thought hit me as soon as I decided to update my profile pic on my new MySpace page. As soon as I uploaded the photo I asked myself, am I really going to do this for all three sites? What about for a status update? Let’s say I get married, graduate, get a job promotion etc. am I going to update every single website that I am on with the same status update? Talk about counterproductive!
There’s absolutely no way that I am going to update every status, post, or photo, on all three sites. It really is extra work that is highly unnecessary (excluding business purposes). Plus, I only really enjoy one out of the three. So, my solution to this dilemma is simply to focus on one site rather than the three.
I’m already a Google+ power user and I’m on the site more often of the three. There is where I’ll be updating my page more frequently than the rest. MySpace is nice and I’ll experiment with it to see if it develops into something better, but only occasionally will I visit the site. Everyone is already on Facebook and just as I’ve done for months past, I will be on the site but my updates will be minimal.
This however is only my solution and might not fit everyone’s needs. Here are a couple of ways to decide upon a solution. Do you enjoy Facebook the most? Focus on Facebook. Do you enjoy Instagram more? Focus on Instagram. What if you still want to use all three? Try setting up days/times/weeks focusing on one site over the other. In reality, there are plenty of solutions out there. Try experimenting and try to discover which one fits your own needs.
With so many Social Media websites out there it definitely becomes difficult to manage a combination of them. There are benefits to each site accordingly and my suggestion would be to focus on the service you enjoy the most so that your time is being well spent.
How do you manage your combination of Social Media sites? Do you focus on one? Or do you divide your attention amongst your combination?
With the most recent Sony Network (PlayStation Network) update on the PS3 one of the games that I have been waiting to buy is available at a significant price drop. The game is Persona 3 Portable and I have to say that at a mere ten dollars it is definitely a steal. There is a catch however, the game is only available at that price in “Digital” form.
This isn’t the first time that I’ve encountered this specific scenario and if you’ve been following my posts I’ve probably mentioned this once or twice before. There’s been numerous times where I’ve seen a game become available at a much more convenient price only to discover that it’s in digital form.
It makes sense that digital copies are not equally priced as physical copies too. For one, you are not getting the actual disc or booklet that you would normally get in the physical copy. Second, you won’t ever be able to hold the game or feel it in it’s physical state. Still, I can’t help but ask is this really such a major tradeoff?
It’s important to take a look at the benefits of owning digital games as well. If you were to buy digital the game box would never be a problem again in terms of physical clutter. The disc also won’t ever pose a problem if it were to get scratches. As for portability, you would now have the freedom of having multiple games inside your devices without taking along each individual disc or cartridge with you.
Basically, the choice for buying digital over physical copies is all a matter of choice, however, I believe that I have found a good solution to get the best of both worlds. Simply, don’t be afraid to buy digital over physical, buy a balance of both, and don’t pass up on great deals.
The first part of this solution is meant for the people that are worried that their digital copy won’t always be there for them. I’m not one to assure you that they will be there “forever” but from what we’ve seen before chances are your media isn’t going anywhere. Let alone, digital distribution is probably the safest bet when thinking of the future. Every major company from Nintendo to Amazon has found a new appreciation for digital distribution and they have shown no signs of letting this idea go.
Second, I would suggest buying a balance of both digital copies and physical copies. This is pretty self-explanatory, try buying both so that you are not left out of the benefits of either side. Personally I buy games that I am really fond off in physical form while other games of franchises that I’ve never played I buy in digital form. Try buying both so that you don’t miss out on the benefits of each.
Third, don’t pass up on a great deal regardless the form of the game. Persona 3 Portable is only ten dollars in digital form while its physical counterpart via Amazon is a full twenty dollars. In other words I can get this game at a great 50% discount. Imagine if the latest Call of Duty was available digitally at a full 50% discount, I would not think twice of passing up this deal. Don’t be afraid to buy digitally specially when it means that you can save some money in the process.
As I have mentioned before I tend to buy a combination of both digital and physical copies and this is the best method that I have discovered when buying games. However, this method doesn’t just apply to games since it can also apply to any other form of media as well such as books, movies, music, etc. Deciding whether to buy digital or physical copies shouldn’t be an issue and this method may help ensure that it never is an issue ever again.
Do you buy digital over physical? Physical over digital? Or both?
