Observation of Facebook vs. Twitter Users
Facebook and Twitter are two completely different types of web sites. Facebook is a full-featured web-based service, offering a wide ranging set of capabilities – it is the epitome of a social networking service. On the other hand, Twitter merely offers the ability to update your status and nothing else. It seems each site appeals to a specific subset of users and for particular reasons. What is it about each site that makes it appealing and what types of users engage each site?
It seems everywhere you turn Facebook and Twitter are mentioned in the same breath as if the two sites are competing. There is no reason why the world cannot live with both Facebook and Twitter, with each service fulfilling a unique role on the web.
For starters, Facebook is a fully-fledged social networking site. It offers a comprehensive set of features not really found elsewhere on the web, such as status updates, note posting, groups, photos, pages, plug-ins, games and more. You name it and it’s on Facebook, with the possible exception of porn. And I’m sure porn is available on Facebook somewhere – it’s a matter of finding it if you’re such an enterprising individual.
One of the major appeals of Facebook are the wide-ranging privacy control options. Allowing accounts to display certain data to specific types of users is very important, especially in this day and age where the paranoid rule the web.
Facebook is so freaking ginormous that it would take a bunch of forevers to visit every crevice the service offers.
Compare that to Twitter, a service solely designed solely for microblogging. Got an idea worth spitting out in 140 characters or less and Twitter is there for you. There is about as much to understanding Twitter as there is space allotted to users to tweet – very little. Users tweet and read tweets. That is all there is to it.
So what is it about each service that appeals to a certain set of users?
Although Facebook does have Twitter envy these days, and to an even greater extent FriendFeed envy, the services seem to attract far different audiences. While there is crossover between the sites, the majority of Facebook users simply do not seem to get Twitter.
When Facebook users ask why they should use Twitter, what they are effectively saying is they do not understand what is so compelling about a service with essentially no features. Why dedicate time to a site that is basically nothing more than Facebook status updates?
Is it really all that difficult to see the importance of each individual service? Just because early adopters understand or use a service does not automatically guarantee its success with the just-as-savvy mainstream technology evangelists.
Does this lack of understanding say that Facebook users tend to be less savvy than Twitter users simply because they cannot comprehend why Twitter is so valuable? In my observations I find Facebook users to be just as technologically capable as Twitter users.
I work with a variety of people, ranging from the highly technical to those who might as well be walking EMP’s to those who are so technology clueless they can barely use a toaster. People from each group use both Facebook and Twitter, with no apparent correlation between the user types.
Oddly enough, it seems the majority of the technical folks I work with are Facebook users or at least understand the services utility far more than they see the point of Twitter. Compare that to the average mainstream users who seem to be attracted to the simplicity of Twitter.
The real deciding factor ultimately ends up boiling down to the age-old social networking question: what service are my friends using? Most users tend to gravitate towards the service they can find their campadres.
So what is the ultimate point? As far as I can tell, at this point in their lives there does not appear to be a substantial differentiating factor between Facebook and Twitter users. It really boils down to where your friends can be found or which service you feel most comfortable using.
What service do you find you use most often and why? Any particularly compelling reason drawing you to that service?
Twitter for live nigga. I just don't feel I have the need to use something like Facebook, I just don't like the general concept behind those kind of services. I like Twitter however, because it's simple and it's a great way to share articles.
I agree with most of it, as you said, Facebook is a fully-fledged social networking site, while Twitter works merely as a status updater, but I think they can hardly be put in the same balance, going past their first impression of kind of having a similar function, Facebook offers a wide array of features that I think just puts it in a completely different plane, it has become an enormous dynamic platform with tons of optional attachable services that just places it way beyond almost any networking site I can think of, but going down to comparing these two Facebook has one flaw, and it's what you were hinting, while twitter lacks all these features networking sites like Facebook offer, Twitter can be plugged to a huge amount of sites, and you can practically update your status from one place, saving valuable time from running through every site to type in the same line, fact that not only can benefit average users having accounts in multiple networking sites but it can become a really valuable tool for businesses as well. That is where I see Facebook stays behind, being hermetic in that sense just limits it's world for within itself (which by the way is something that pisses me about ahem, deviantART.. lol, they have these weird hermetic politics that I just find awkward, I guess it benefits them to keep people signing in just to check their home page for new messages and community updates but it's still an odd attitude IMO, I see other sites don't seem to have a problem with opening themselves… *shrugs* anyway).
So as a matter of fact yes, I absolutely think combining both tools is the best way to go for users having a presence within multiple sites. I think the average “facebooker” wouldn't really find a use for twitter being already in facebook and not having the need to update anything else than facebook itself.
Nice article Scott, I've been reading a bit through the site and have found several really interesting things.
Keep up the great work. :)
I gave up on Facebook, because I like the mindset Twitter has. Twitter has always been about one main feature, and thats it.
I use Twitter for updates, Flickr for photos, Vimeo for video, & FriendFeed to see what everyone is doing online.
I don't like it when services start to become bloated with too many “decent” features rather than focus on improving what they are good at. (I think Flickr offering video support is retarded for the record)
Excellent article that has some very good points, some of which can be read between the lines. I use both Twitter and Facebook for the same and for different reasons.
I think if anything, Facebook and Twitter complement each other.
I completely agree, but unfortunately a lot of my friends use Facebook. So I'm stuck between either not communicating with them online or by using Facebook.
I've opted for the latter because I find the ability to stay in touch is more important than not. Know what I mean?
For the record, I like Twitter much better than Facebook. Unfortunately it's just not that simple.
Many thanks for stopping by and reading through the site. It's definitely much appreciated!
I'm with you on using various, specialized services rather than the monolithic Facebook. Like you, I use Twitter, Flickr, Vimeo, FriendFeed and a whole host of web-based apps.
Unfortunately, many of my friends are Facebook-only users so I have no choice. Or, I just stop communicating, right? :D
Exactly. Why some folks can't see this is beyond me.