Its complicated

..and a bit long 🙂

What do you do when you can’t buy a service? If you have the capability, you build it yourself. That seems to be what Facebook is up to, triggering of what would perhaps be only the first of the battles for real time supremacy. When you log in to Facebook, you can see the message right at the top “Changes to the Home Page are coming soon”, and the link gives you a preview of what to expect on Wednesday. Keeping in mind Facebook’s history of design changes, its not going to be a democratic process like the TOS incident. Change will happen, whether we need it or not.

So, what are these changes? RWW has a good post that captures the main features. The publishing bar is extremely similar to Friendfeed – Facebook’s favourite idea shop (the newsfeed, comments on the newsfeed, the like feature are all from there), and users can now publish photos, links, videos from here without going to the application. The homepage will now have the newsfeed in the centre (with better filtering features basis their relationship with friends, groups and even applications) When I wrote about Twitter saying no to the Facebook deal, I’d asked for a twitter like ‘Follow’ feature in Facebook, and now thats happening. Thanks to the updated privacy settings, you can follow a person’s updates without being his/her friend. The cap of 5000 friends is also going to be removed. Most importantly, the newsfeed is going to be real-time. Fan pages are changing too, and can brands/personalities (or whatever you’re a fan of) will now be normal profiles and can update their status, and if you permit, your newsfeed will be updated too. So yes, Britney will tell you, on your newsfeed, that she’s having a concert wherever!! I wonder if these changes will make a difference to the existing not-so-great engagement statistics between fans and their objects of fandom. Lastly, I read on TechCrunch that apps on Facebook will now be able to use the live chat functionality, giving them the chance to make an app go viral faster.

So that’s what Facebook’s been upto. Sometime back, I read an article which compared Twitter to Palm. To summarise, Palm, which used to be a consumer darling for a long time, lost out when it refused to overcomplicate its products, while competitors solved the issues that had made them unsatisfactory. Twitter, thankfully hasn’t been idle. It has been working on its integrated search for sometime, and is now rolling it out (on a few profiles) with a search bar and a trends button. Meanwhile, there has been some speculation about Google buying Twitter. Google should definitely be interested considering Twitter’s prowess in real time search. As this Adage article says, its way beyond the contextual search that Google offers.

In the future, searches won’t only query what’s being said at the moment, but will go out to the Twitter audience in the form of a question, like a faster and less-filtered Yahoo Answers or Wiki Answers. Users would be able to tap the collective knowledge of the 6 million or so members of the Twitterverse.

(In that context, check out TwitterThoughts, its a work of art!! And if you’re the kind who misses the real time style of Twitter on google search, you will love this greasemonkey script. Amazing!!)

While Twitter has been growing exponentially – a whopping 752% in 2008, Facebook has too – though at a relatively more normal 86%. I remember reading sometime back that Facebook was about 15 times larger than Twitter, and that if Facebook were to stop growing today, and Twitter were to add users at the best rate its shown so far, it would still take Twitter 36 years to catch up.

Very subjectively, and from a user’s perspective, Facebook and Twitter are not competitors. My involvement with my Facebook friends is quite different from that with my Twitter friends, and I don’t have a lot of overlap. But I know a lot of users who have a huge overlap. I actually share a lot more stuff on Twitter and get a lot more stuff from there too. But I am only one user and perhaps represent a minority of typical Facebook usage patterns. For example, The Inquisitr had a good story on how tweets got more responses on Facebook than Twitter itself.

I am always on Twitter thanks to the browser plug in, irrespective of whether i actively take part or not, I login to Facebook a few times every day. I have to wonder if real time on Facebook can change that. In Facebook, profiles/groups/chat are the bases of conversations – quite well defined spaces. In Twitter, the stream is the base, you start from anywhere. There are different clients that can be used to log into Twitter, Facebook (with a couple of exceptions) has to be accessed from its own homepage.

Also, from a new user point of view, Facebook provides more ways to interact than the one size fits all approach of Twitter’s ‘What are you doing’?  When you log on to FB, you most likely already have friends who’re there, and you find more friends (who you know in real life), therefore the context and common interests already exist.  You have a base from where to start. Twitter perhaps works in reverse, since you have to make friends (common interests and therefore conversations) on Twitter. Maybe all this contributes to why you have to explain Twitter to people, and they still say ‘Yeah, but what do you DO there?’, and people automatically take to Facebook. Even if thats not the case, relatively, ‘learning the ropes’ is easier on Facebook than Twitter. Thats generalisation and debatable too.

Facebook’s redesign and policy changes have sparked off user outrage in the past, Twitter (except for the whale) is smoother, perhaps it hasn’t deviated from the original approach much – even the new set of changes doesn’t affect the user much, only adds value to his usage. Is it a difference of intent – Facebook being pure social networking, and Twitter being on a meta plane – higher? Or are the differences merely a function of time in the market and user base? Interestingly, in a recent research with 200 social media leaders on which service they were willing to pay for, Facebook came first with 31.2%, Twitter was third with 21.8%, behind LinkedIn. (via TechCrunch)

Users are one side of the story, the other side is made up of advertisers. In the survey I mentioned above, when the same social media leaders were asked which service they would reccommend businesses to pay for, Twitter topped with 39.6%, Facebook was third at 15.3%, LinkedIn separated the two again. Every week, developers bring out a new tool that augments/complements Twitter usage and helps the service cater better to users, and perhaps brands too. Meanwhile, Facebook is working on a combination of Facebook Connect and Facebook Ads, to create a social ad network. It seems quite possible that just like users, brands also will differ in their usage of the two services. Some might adopt the same practices, some might vary, and use each to complement the other. It could also be that they would cater to different kinds of advertisers altogether, just like my friends list. More on that next week.

until next time, never the twain shall meet?