There was a huge buzz around the Facebook platform when it was initially launched last year. Companies were now able to integrate their own personal applications on the Facebook platform. It has been over a year since it’s initial launch, and since then several fundamental issues have come up. This post on ReadWriteWeb lists the following:

1. Technical: Should the app be just a teaser that leads users to their site or should it be a duplicate and have full functionality?
2. Business: If e.g. New York Times builds a Facebook app, will it be economic for them (since there's little revenue in Facebook)?
3. Provider costs: Does it pay for Facebook to maintain the platform? As a business with a huge valuation, Facebook needs to maximise profit.

On the Technical End, creating Teaser apps confuses the general public. It also creates a bad experience for them since they are jumping between Facebook and different sites. On the other hand, native apps are a marketing and engineering nightmare since maintaining these duplicate base codes are very costly.

On the Business End, Facebook does not have an infrastructure for paid applications. So, if companies want to include ads on their apps, readers will be seeing two types of ads on their page, and that might prove to be unbearable.

With the abundance of applications made available on Facebook, Provider Costs have risen to new heights. Facebook must change the user experience by minimizing the amount of applications allowed within their interface.

The future of the Facebook platform is still a mystery. Mark Zuckerberg has a lot of work ahead of him if he wants the platform to advance.