This is clearly the age of being a netizen, so much so that you will find even your next door 12-year old being busy doing something with his keyboard. Take a closer look and I am sure you will find him doing what most grown-ups like doing. Social networking! There have been a host of social networking sites, like those of Orkut, Hi5, and MySpace, dig, to name a few.
But, clearly there seems to be three names that will top the list.viz, Facebook, Twitter and Google plus. Most of the young lads and lass would be found devoting time to all the three. But, which is the one that you would pick out of these three? There can be clear arguments. Let’s us find out.
Twitter, Facebook, Google plus – What are they?
Facebook is the oldest among the three. Started way back in 2004, it gave a tough competition and sounded the death knell of Orkut, which was a subsidy of Google and then a hit. Twitter started next. The main aim of twitter was to be a micro-blogging site but at present it serves a dual purpose of social networking site and a micro-blogging site. The tagline of twitter says it all – ‘instantly connect to what’s more important to you’.
The attractive thing about twitter is however these two features. They are ‘followers’ and ‘following’. The latest entry in the world of social networking is however by Google’s own Google plus. The main aim of Google was to steal the hype that existed around Facebook. It occurred as a major showdown of rivalry when Facebook launched its own mail services.
Analysis and Comparison
Now, let us try and compare some of the features that the three offers. The market that each appeal to, is quite varied. For instance, Facebook appeals mainly to the section that is non-geeks. Twitter is for the social-conscious-group type and Google plus is for the geeks (well not really, since there are a lot of tutorials on how to use Google+).
The number of users could have been a point for comparison but more importantly it is amusing to see how quickly they reached the million figure mark. If Twitter did it at a good rate, Facebook bettered it and Google plus smashed both of them in taking less than a week.
Can we compare these three?
While Facebook is a two-way connecting tool, Google plus and twitter are both one-way following. The presence of friend lists in Facebook is substituted with circles for tracking in case of Google plus and lists in case of twitter. Twitter does not have any group options; however Facebook subscribes to it and thus is a hit.
On the other hand, Google plus have circles which are not exactly groups and these circles promote limited sharing. Facebook and Google plus both have comment threads but this important feature is missing in Twitter. This is one of the many reasons that users have abandoned Twitter and many feel that Twitter is boring.
The name of a user is mentioned in the same way in Facebook as it actually is where as in Google plus and Twitter it is preceded by a ‘+’ and ‘@’ sign respectively; not something that is worth of comparing but it has more to do with ‘standing out from the rest’.
Coming to the shared contents visibility, Twitter can act as both an open profile and a private profile. In open profile everyone can see the contents that user shares whereas in a private profile contents are shared in a variety of ways. It can be shared with only friends, or friends and their friends, everybody or a particular list of friends. Google plus has the same feature to that of Facebook.
Now what does a user see? In twitter, he will see what the people that he follows are publishing. In Facebook, he will see whatever his friends publish. However, in Google plus he will just see what people who have put him in a circle publish, provided that his publish is for that same circle.
Facebook’s best part is about relationships and adaptability. Twitter specializes in being a light weight tool with better mobility, simplicity and reach but devoid of important features. Best of all, Google plus sums up all these features of Facebook and Twitter and spices them up with better privacy and services bundling.