Twitter is to Friendfeed as Tomato is to Lasagna

We shouldn’t be comparing Twitter to Friendfeed; they’re not the same. Doing so is like comparing a tomato to a lasagna. This doesn’t work because a tomato is an ingredient of lasagna, not a competing dish.

Friendfeed is a hub. It’s network-agnostic. It says, “use whatever you want–track them here”. Twitter is a religion with something to lose. It says, “use Twitter, it’s the best”.

I like the Friendfeed story better; it’s less fleeting. The inputs will come and go, but the hubs can flex with that change. And yes, I know that some hubs serve as inputs, and some inputs can be hub-like. But fundamentally it all comes down to the identity of the company. If you are a Mormon church you might play nice with others in public, but ultimately you’re selling only one thing.

Friendfeed isn’t selling Friendfeed so much–at least not directly; instead they’re selling a superior interface to all of its inputs. The distinction matters. It’s easy to understand this when put in this way, but it’s also easy to forget.

Pick your inputs, pick your hub, and know the difference between them. ::