Web Faceoff: Twitter vs. Facebook.
Mashable keeps putting up these surveys, and mostly I find them pointless. Every platform/application/soccer team has its fans, and trying to separate them is rather futile. And my immediate reaction to this one was that it was even more pointless than usual. After all, Facebook and Twitter are two different animals, right?
Facebook is a social networking platform — it’s social and it allows networking. You can post your status — what are you doing right now — just like Twitter, but you can also share stuff — photos and videos and links — and you can have conversations with your friends, by commenting on their stuff. And you can play games, from Tetris to FarmVille, and, more, you can play games with your friends.
By comparison, Twitter allows you to post your status. And that’s about it really. It’s micro-blogging, not social networking.
Ok, to be fair, with Twitter you can also share stuff — but only the link. You can’t embed the photo/video in your stream. Twitter is not visually rich. It’s text or nothing.
And, ok, you can reply to a fellow’s tweet, but it’s not exactly a conversation, is it?
So comparing Twitter and Facebook is rather like comparing, oh, I don’t know, sitting on your front porch shouting at passers-by, with going out on the town with a group of friends. I know which I prefer. (And in fact I have pretty much abandoned Twitter as of a month ago.)
Reading some of the comments on Mashable, some people are suggesting a major difference is that Facebook is personal/social, while Twitter is now “all” about businesses tweeting their wares. There’s some truth in that, possibly, although that depends very much on who you are following. (E.g. you would need to be following Dyson to hear about their latest breathtaking invention. But who is so interested in vacuuming that they’d bother following Dyson?) Fundamentally, I’m not really interested in going to Twitter to receive a bunch of 140-character press releases. Doubtless when Dyson releases its next really cool product, I’ll hear about it on Facebook, probably via a share from Gizmodo.
So, that may become Twitter’s niche, tweeting about products to followers who care. But it strikes me as a rather small niche to justify their recent $1bn “valuation”.
But even here, Facebook is better. Because Facebook has Pages, which are designed to provide a richer environment for companies to market their stuff. Pages have Fans (like Twitter has followers), and when a Page owner posts a message, it gets broadcast on the Wall of all its Fans. And not just 140 characters of text, but more text plus picture or video. Suck on that, Twitter.
But really, Mashable, you’re setting them up to fail. The stats from Alexa show that on all measures Facebook is way bigger than Twitter. Facebook is now ranked #2 globally, and Twitter #13. More people visit Facebook — about six times as many — and stay longer.
Prediction for the next six months: we see Twitter slide into obscurity and then disappear when its backers realize they’re never going to get their money back.