Friendfeed is better and different than Facebook. But it’s not nearly so engaging.
Twitter seems a useless waste of time to almost everyone who tries it. Yet many experts feel that Twitter is the future. That it could supersede Facebook one day.
Why? Why? Why?
Twitter is cryptic and random. I cannot even respond to a message sent me on Twitter. Frustrating!
Here’s why:
What if you could peer into the thoughts of millions of people as they were thinking those thoughts or shortly thereafter? And what if all of these thoughts were immediately available in a database that could be mined easily to tell you what people both individually and in aggregate are thinking right nowabout any imaginable subject or event? Well, then you’d have a different kind of search engine altogether. A real-time search engine. A what’s-happening-right-now search engine.
In fact, the crude beginnings of this “now” search engine already exists. It is called Twitter, and it is a big reason why new investors poured another $35 million into the two-year-old startup on Friday. Twitter is not the only company trying to solve this problem. Facebook, FriendFeed, and even Google are trying to crack it, but Twitter has a decided advantage in that it is capturing the vast majority of the real-time thought stream on the Web (because more people enter their thoughts directly into Twitter’s database than any other, and are doing so at an increasing rate).
What makes Google and other search engines so valuable is that they capture people’s intent—what they are looking for, what they desire, what they want to learn about. But they don’t do a great job at capturing what people are doing or what they are thinking about. For thoughts and events that are happening right now, searching Twitter increasingly brings up better results than searching Google. …
Facebook is confusing. And is pretty crappy, to be honest. But my friends number amongst the 175 million regular users. They like it. 
Rick McCharles 