FriendFeed Beta: More Like Facebook And Twitter, Which Is Not A Good Thing

April 6th, 2009

The only social site I use with any regularity anymore is FriendFeed. They just launched a redesign, currently in beta, that can be summed up as “Twitter on steroids.” Avatars are the primary focal point, and new activity appears at the top, pushing earlier updates down the page in real time (sort of like Twitterfall). But there is more functionality than Twitter, such commenting on any “tweet,” filters, fast search, and the ability to pull in all kinds of content into your lifestream.

The problem: I don’t care for Twitter’s web page (there’s a reason for all the Twitter clients) and quit using Facebook, so mimicking either service is a big do not want. The awesome data stored within FriendFeed deserves better presentation, not what Twitter and Facebook already provide.

Then there’s this “real time” aspect which is a literal depiction of a firehose pointed at one’s head. I know the “real time web” is the current hot thing, but I haven’t seen any evidence it’s any less a fad than tag clouds or rounded corners. There is a reason why Google Reader has a “refresh” button and every email client allows periodic retrieval of new mail.

Trying to keep track of updates flying by in the new FriendFeed is like playing a sadistic video game, or at least, a design error like the increasing size of the icons in the Mac OS X Dock — great for demos, but a real hamper on productivity. You can turn off the relentless updates with a pause button, but like dock magnification, I feel it should be off by default.

But back to FriendFeed’s unbecoming strategy of copying Twitter — it feels odd to me, and personally, rather disappointing. Before, I felt like FriendFeed was pushing the envelope forward, and it was Twitter and Facebook doing the copying. So this mimicry of the competition feels like an acknowledgment that they were having difficulty attracting new users, and this redesign is a deliberate attempt to attract Facebook / Twitter users by creating a service that would appeal to them through familiarity.

But FriendFeed mimicked the least attractive part of Twitter (the website design) and the emphasis on “real time” will most likely overwhelm the vast majority of casual Facebook users that check their profile once a week, if that. All these Facebook folks protesting the lifestream have already voiced their distaste of the real time web.

Second, I’ve fielded several questions from friends who are active on Facebook that don’t understand or see the need for Twitter. Now that FriendFeed is more similar to Twitter than ever before, I can’t with a straight face recommend FriendFeed to them. If someone is overwhelmed by Twitter, their brain will explode on FriendFeed, and they should just stay on Facebook.

I am hopeful FriendFeed will tweak the presentation of their awesome data during this beta, but ultimately, they’re headed for a race where FriendFeed tries to gain more users faster than Twitter and Facebook can add FriendFeed-like features. I think based on the already large user bases of both, plus the resources available, FriendFeed is the underdog.

Some may think this comparison between Twitter, Facebook, and FriendFeed unfair, but this recent redesign forces the comparison. Sorry, FriendFeed.