A rumor about a special "Facebook Phone" would be going down the wrong path for Facebook. I hope it doesn't happen.

DigiTimes, the tech world's favorite science-fiction magazine, came out today with a report that HTC and Facebook are working together on a customized "Facebook Phone" due out later this year.

This is a really dumb idea, and I hope it isn't true. Of course, this being DigiTimes, it probably isn't.

For years now, Facebook has insisted that there won't be one Facebook phone - . Facebook should be an underlying service on every smartphone, as basic as texting or Web browsing.

That's the best way for Facebook to grow. Once you anoint a single device with your name, other partners grow less comfortable about working with you. For Web services like Facebook, which depend on reaching the absolute maximum number of people possible, the exclusivity route doesn't have much to offer.

Yes, there's been one "Facebook Phone" in the U.S. so far, the (see slideshow below). I think it had the right balance of standard Android with a dedicated Facebook button. It didn't fail because of anything about Facebook's involvement. It failed because it was slow and had a weird screen layout.

Plunking Facebook buttons onto more and better Android phones would be a great plan for Facebook. Improving the overall Facebook app on Android would be another good idea. (It's too sluggish, too often.) Forking Android into some sort of weird Facebook-centric OS wouldn't.

Facebook Phone vs. Amazon Tablet

There's an obvious question here: if Amazon can make a tablet, why shouldn't Facebook make a phone?

Amazon is succeeding with the in part because there's no decent Android tablet ecosystem. No Android tablet maker has been able to break through to the market beyond "phandroid" geeks. The in the Google Play market is the central problem, minor heroes like notwithstanding.

On the , meanwhile, Amazon is the Yankees playing an away game at Fenway Park. They can win, but there's a sense the playing field is tilted against them. Amazon had to create its own tablet because there was no home court in which to play.

But that isn't the case with Android phones. Google has been careful to keep its frenemies happy, and there's enough flexibility within the compatible Android platform for everyone to get what they want. Yes, Google is pushing Google+ right now, but the company seems to have a good sense of its limits there. On phones, Android is popular, well-known, and has an awesome selection of apps.

This is why I'm also skeptical of the many rumors of an "Amazon phone." There's just no need for that, when a wide range of popular phones could run Kindle, Amazon Instant Video, and other services.

But even in phones, Amazon has a stronger economic argument for a dedicated device than Facebook does. Facebook's business is eyeballs. More users means more money. It has to be everywhere. Amazon's business is selling things direct to consumers. A smaller number of more intense users could make Amazon more money, and the "Amazon OS" increases that purchase intensity.

We could use a better Facebook experience across all phones. Facebook could use that, too. But one "Facebook phone?" That's just the wrong path to take.