Social Media Thunderdome - Plinky vs. Aardvark

For Part I (Introduction), Part II (Media Bracket) & Part III (The Criteria) click the links.

Plinky vs.Aardvark

	Plinky.com	Aardvark
Traffic (Alexa Ranking):	197,865	29,424
Alexa’s Global 3 Month Reach Increase/Decrease:	-42% to a global monthly average of .00052% of internet users	+76% to a global monthly average of .0068% of internet users
US/UK Traffic Ranking	103,359/160,111	6,372/33,584
Largest National Traffic Source:	49.1%.0% - US	67.7% - US

	Plinky.com	Aardvark
Founded:	2009	2007
Headquarters:	San Francisco, California	San Francisco, California
API:	No explicit API, some integration to other services	Curently Not Present
Mobile Usage Options:	None	iPhone application, 3rd party mobile channel integrations
Advertising;	None present on interface	None Present on interface

       Plinky and Aardvark both aim to consolidate and provide a variety of information through social media. The approach, type of information and user experience for both sites however, is what sets the two apart. In its most basic form, both sites' popularity is tied to the validity, usefulness and timeliness of the information they aggregate and provide, regardless of their differences.

 Certain questions seem to be an opportunity to aggregate crazy...

       Plinky centers on a Twitter based interface that allows users to share an answer to a daily question or "prompt". The prompts allow for users to elaborate on experiences ("what was the most embarrassing thing you've ever done?"), advice ("where is your favorite pub?") or opinions ("defend your vice?") in a way that aims to build a community of users interested in others responses while simultaneously generating personal content for external sources like blogs. The site allows prompts, answers and user names to be searched for various terms or words, letting users tap into the repository of opinions and topical information. Plinky offers a multitude of integration features (Blogger, Live Journal, Tumblr, Typepad, Wordpress & Xanga) hoping that users don't see the site as another social network, but an integrated aid in generating ideas and posts for other outlets.
      Mobile options for Plinky are scant, but with the nature of use for the site, this seems to be slightly justified (typing a 300 word story about summer camp on your iPod touch/iPhone might take longer than the experience). Overall, while Plinky seems to have positioned itself in an efficient way against its objectives, trying focused integration with useful external sources to generate user value, traffic figures for the last 3 months show that visitors aren't trending towards accepting the offering readily (-42% for global reach over the time period).

Asking this question may pose some manner or network trolling paradox......

      While Plinky focuses on sharing personal stories and experiences daily, Aardvark is hoping  to leverage the power of social media to crowd source information and opinions. The site allows users to post questions, which are then sent through a network of Aardvark users (both related users, utilizing Facebook & other connections, & unrelated users, through pairing tags about the question and user's specializations). The response is intended to be a quickly posted, but correct answer from a member of the network relevant to your question.
     
         In theory, this model works quite well, as sites such as Yahoo!/Google Answers and Wikipedia have illustrated, since people like to share information and resolve intellectual issues. Response rates in initial trials from the company were around 75%, which provides a relatively good chance to receive an answer from the network. However, one issue that comes into consideration  is the validity of provided answers? Crowd sourcing through Yahoo Answers allows people to see other's responses to questions and vote on them and Wikipedia allows policing of its entries; subsequently, does Aardvark offer enough solutions to ensure reasonable answer validity within the two normally provided answers?

          In terms of integration, Aardvark wants to be able to facilitate communication on multiple channels. It allows for IM questions/responses, e-mail, mobile and site based interaction in a way that provides easy crowd sourcing. Personally, I initially found it slightly creepy when my Google chat window popped up and Aardvark had a question about London, but after an introductory period, you begin to see the value in having a readily available crowd sourcing base (an advantage over Yahoo! Answers and Wikipedia).

Once case where Wikipedia's need for thoroughness seems a tad bit nihilistic?

          Overall, Plinky's approach seems to be based on informal and personal experience sharing building a tool for generating content, which in turn generates a community of users. Aardvark, instead focuses on leveraging existing network relationships and user posted interest areas to create a crowd sourced repository of more formal information. Using the criteria set forth in the introduction about information, it seems that while Plinky may provide the most valid information (reasoning that personal experiences and memories hold less chance to be wrong than crowd sourced expert opinion), Aardvark has created a network in which relevant answers can be provided to a user in a timely fashion. In a battle of networks based on information provision, Aardvark's quality of information, as well as its user experience and integration, shows that it holds the better chance at achieving prominence within the micro-blogging and possibly overall social media sector.

Winner: Aardvark

Social Media Thunderdome - Jaiku vs. Qaiku

For Part I (Introduction), Part II (Media Bracket) & Part III (The Criteria) click the links.

Jaiku vs.Qaiku

	Jaiku.com	Qaiku.com
Traffic (Alexa Ranking):	17,055	134,498
Alexa’s Global 3 Month Reach Increase/Decrease:	+42% to a global monthly average of .0075% of internet users	+80% to a global monthly average of .0009% of internet users
US/UK Traffic Ranking	14,226/14,284	1,004,572/229,069
Largest National Traffic Source:	23.0% - US	74% - US

	Jaiku.com	Qaiku.com
Founded:	2006	2009
Headquarters:	Helsinki, Finland	Helsinki, Finland
API:	Open source platform, limited API modeled after Twitter's	Twitter modeled API present
Mobile Usage Options:	Mobile site, model specific client, 3rd party interactivity possible	Mobile site, 3rd party interactivity possible
Advertising;	None present on interface	None Present on interface

       The comparison of microblogging services Jaiku & Qaiku is a study in similarities over differences. Both services hope to be a Twitter alternative, both have a shared history and aesthetically the relation is pretty obvious. The history between the two network offerings stems from Jaiku's launch and subsequent procurement by Google, which after some time in development hell, led its founders to branch out and help to produce Qaiku as an alternative. Both services have a tie to Finland, with Jaiku developing out of the region and Qaiku just recently expanding its scope outside of the Finnish language.

Qaiku's description of the service as an "Echo chamber" may typify my experience with both....

       The two services both make tweaks over the industry standard functionality popularized by Twitter. Jaiku offers "channels" which function in a way similar to hashtag message aggregation on Twitter, but with a formalized grouping and management. Perhaps Jaiku's best feature for comparison with Twitter, Lifestreaming, was taken out once it was converted to an open source focus. Lifestreaming allowed for integration with content services so pictures or video could be easily embedded and linked for messages. Without extensively different features such as this, Jaiku's offerings seem to be too similar to the normal Twitter functionality, while offering less overall users.

Qaiku's Blue interface, relative to Jaiku's Green, really does feel like another world...or atleast another postal code or apartment floor

       Given the forming opinion about Jaiku, Qaiku's similarity with its competitor doesn't bode well. Qaiku does however, differentiate itself from Jaiku and Twitter in a few slight ways. Perhaps mot noticeably, Qaiku allows for an aided embed of pictures or links through a sub dialog on the interface. Such a feature isn't a tide shift in functionality relative to Twitter, but it is a nice touch and it provides something that Jaiku can't do relative to the industry leader. In addition, Qaiku offers Jaiku's channels, but also provides a section to track conversations that a user is involved in. Finally, Qaiku's ease of use when it comes to adding feeds to your Qaiku postings seems reminiscent of what Jaiku offered through lifecasting.The ability to do this through third party sites on Twitter diminishes some of the feature's significance, but it still stands a convenience. While it doesn't seem like it will be enough to overcome something like Twitter in functionality, a comparison of functionality shows that Qaiku has a distinct advantage of Jaiku.

I find the lack of a "u" after the "Q" slightly disturbing...if not a little exotic...

        While functionally Qaiku has the advantage over Jaiku, the site's focus, traffic and strategic orientation need to be considered to judge which has a better shot at becoming prominent within the sector. Jaiku holds a decided advantage between the two when it comes to backing (Google's help, however maligned, is possibly game changing for any site) and traffic (Jaiku has shown penetration globally and in major markets, while Qaiku still has to transfer their Finnish audience into global success).In the face of Jaiku's global status, Qaiku's slowly expanding niche focus seems slightly troubling, as questions arise about the overall capacity and scope of the network to grow. Normally, I would say that Jaiku's orientation, backing and traffic size may be enough to overcome any functional advantage Qaiku has. However, with Google's current integration of Twitter data into search, it seems that some of the backing may be halfhearted for the service at best (its already being tended to by "Volunteer" Googlers). While Qaiku may have a long road ahead to transfer local success into something larger, its heading in an ascendant direction, something that can't be said for Jaiku.

Winner: Qaiku

Social Media Thunderdome - Foursquare vs. Dopplr

For Part I (Introduction), Part II (Media Bracket) & Part III (The Criteria) click the links.

Foursquare vs.Dopplr

	Foursquare.com	Dopplr.com
Traffic (Alexa Ranking):	20,039	34,870
Alexa’s Global 3 Month Reach Increase/Decrease:	+4030% to a global monthly average of .013% of internet users	+36% to a global monthly average of .0073%of internet users
US/UK Traffic Ranking	2,495/3,593	18,009/ 5,600
Largest National Traffic Source:	70.9% - US	20.1% - US

	Foursquare.com	Dopplr.com
Founded:	2008	2007
Headquarters:	Washington, DC	London, UK - Accquired by Nokia
API:	Basic API Present, no user social graphing	Basic API Present no user social graphing
Mobile Usage Options:	Android/iPhone app, mobile site	Social Atlas Mobile app, mobile site
Advertising;	None present on interface	Related advertising on site

     Geo located/Geographic focused social networking possibilities are one of the major things I'm very excited about right now. The ability to keep up with ones friend's locations, find out reviews and tips about nearby venues and discover new parts of a city are all quickly becoming necessary benefits. The rise of microblogging services has opened up the possibiilty for a large user base to quickly habituate to frequent updates on the go. Frequent user behaviour is key to success for these networks, since time relevant user locations and tips are the networks' value drivers. Within this geolocation/geography focused social networking sector, Foursquare and Dopplr take different funcational approaches for the same overall goal,to bring people together.

Judging by my current holiday history, the only recent trip I'm planning is from work to home and back...anyone wanna meet up?

     Dopplr's proposition for users is the coordination of contact's travel plans so that overlaps can result in possible meetups. The network strengthens this proposition by adding reviews of locations and city q&a, as well as the ability to calculate and track carbon usage from traveling. Dopplr extends its functionality through its social atlas, which hopes to parlay the user generated city data into a geolocated network of information. 

     Dopplr's main function, as a travel coordination and commiseration site seems novel, but I wonder if the core functionality is engaging enough to drive routinized user behaviour? While all social networking sites are only as valuable as their users, Dopplr seems to take this to a new level, as without contacts to coordinate travel plans with, the major functionality wanes. Furthermore, the type of information you're sharing might discourage users from meeting new people on the site, limiting the active network for a user to existing contacts. The secondary features of Dopplr seem to add value to this proposition and counteract any of the shortcomings in establishing a network, however, other sites offer the same with greater detail and intuitiveness. Trying to beat review/information sharing sites at their own game (and with fewer members) seems like a hard path for Dopplr to pursue. 

One of my mayorships may be a lie....its not the Harp....

      Foursquare seeems like a site thats on the verge of larger popularity. Fostering an image as the geolocated version of Twitter, it allows users to "check-in" from locations for points. Checking in allows other users to locate friends, as well as allowing the checking in user to see whom else has visited a location. The service also includes tips (a lite version of a review) and a todo list as additional content over the core functionality.The network features sharing content into Facebook and Twitter, something that the check-in messages and shouts seem to lend themselves to. 

      In order to encourage frequent use, Foursquare features a badge system (awarded for feats like staying out late on a "school night"), a points system (with rankings per city) and a mayor system (awarded the user who checks in from a specific location the most). The networks competitive structure almost creates a type of token economy, synthesizing points based video gaming and real world activity in a way that captures interest. Foursquare's mayor system also presents possibilities in the form of business promotion, as businesses can interact with their most fervent patrons. 

       The site's growth has been meteoric (+4030% increase in average reach over the last 3 months), a feat further increased by the fact that the founder's have taken pains to roll out the service gradually, city by city. The gradual roll out may hamper the exponential growth seen by other networks, but it also allows for the network to focus on establishing a site in tune with the nuances of each metropolis, as well as preventing a sprawl of unrelated locations from changing the network's scope. 

Becoming Mayor of the local work pub has yet to confer onto me the status I expected.....

     Both sites, while novel in their own ways, aren't without drawbacks (which seem to be pretty similar). Both suffer from a lack of readily available users (at least in my case as importing my Facebook & Twitter contacts yielded 1 person per network), which while fixed through growth, hampers some of the initial user experience. Its fun to be able to encourage your mates to join a network and grow it, but in the mean time, both sites suffer from varying degrees of activity lag.

     Due to Foursquare's shocking growth rate, I believe its safe to say that the network should overcome any userbase problems first. Within the context of becoming the "Next Big Thing", Foursquare seems to show the potential to grow its userbase, encourage activity through its token based economy and integrate itself within the consideration set of a user's favorite networks. 

Winner: Foursquare

Social Media Thunderdome - Present.ly vs. Yammer

For Part I (Introduction), Part II (Media Bracket) & Part III (The Criteria) click the links.

Present.ly vs.Yammer

	Present.ly	Yammer.com
Traffic (Alexa Ranking):	5,005,263	34,870
Alexa’s Global 3 Month Reach Increase/Decrease:	+50% to a global monthly average of .000016% of internet users	+62% to a global monthly average of .003%of internet users
US/UK Traffic Ranking	N/A	24,687/ 35,718
Largest National Traffic Source:	N/A	36.2% - US

	Present.ly	Yammer.com
Founded:	2008	2008
Headquarters:	Washington, DC	Mountain View, CA
API:	Version of Twitter API with some limited functionality	Copy of Twitter API with less social graphing due to network structure
Mobile Usage Options:	Explicit mobile apps and social network integration	Mobile app
Advertising;	None present on interface	None present on interface

       The juxtaposition of Present.ly and Yammer is one of two Enterprise/Business Micro-blogging services fighting for overall semi-prominence and a B2B fiefdom to call their own. Enterprise Micro-blogging stems from the idea that just as Twitter allowed users to casually share various personal information with other users, employees can be encouraged to privately do the same with coworkers. These services hope to harness the real-time, information sharing properties fueling Twitter's success (something Present.ly touches upon below).

I'm beginning to think all pitch videos/elevator speeches should be in the style of Zero Punctuation's reviews

      Overall, I can see the argument for the functions both of these services provide, as information sharing, employee coordination and a platform for organizing the next card game/football pub are all useful endeavors in fostering workplace efficiency. I wonder however, what amount of companies already implemented some manner of communication platform/knowledge base within their intranet? I'm also quite wary about the idea that while Micro-blogging has taken off in a personal context and simultaneously e-mail remains prominent in office communication, if a large enough need exists for enterprise Micro-blogging? Integration with other services such as Twitter aims to limit the user exhaustion inherent with trying to update various networks, but it also raises the question if users want messages generated in one network context placed on another?

Meet Yammer....Its like Twitter once it gave up the dreams of being in an Indie Rock group and became a CPA

        Concerns about the overall sector aside, both platforms offer a varied approach to get your work information and gossip going real time easily. Yammer strongly attempts to replicate the feel of parts of Twitter in its functionality and style. While its functional side is incredibly Twitter-like (and adds the ability to include files), its aesthetics are all business (from the look, all the way to asking about your current projects). I can't begrudge Yammer for loading up on the corporate formality, as that's required by their target audience, but the lack of customization is disheartening. I'd like to see the ability to fully skin the interface to corporate graphics, as the logical extreme of corporate aesthetic is staying completely on brand.

     Using Yammer is relatively easy and the ability to create groups opens the possibility of separate project threads and communication. Yammer's utilization of organizational charts and attention to the hierarchy of employees  is an interesting feature, but aside from playing around with the organizational chart, I doubt many people will get a great amount of utility out of it. Overall, Yammer seems to represent the quick choice for businesses looking to capitalize on Micro-blogging for internal coordination, but it may not be the best choice for the sector or as a "Big Thing" within the world of social media.

 Meet Present.ly...its like Twitter, but after it graduated Cornell and got a job with a trendy tech start-up

       While Yammer banks on its image as an easy to establish enterprise micro-blogging platform, Present.ly emphasizes security and installation options. It offers almost all of the features found on both Twitter and Yammer (including file embedding and groups), but also offers greater customization options (though nothing to the extreme of quick skinning the interface) and the ability to self-host on a company intranet. While a feature such as self-hosting isn't a silver bullet against most other sites within the social media sector, within enterprise Micro-blogging, this serves as something that can allay fears about security and confidentiality from decision makers.

         When comparing Present.ly to Yammer aesthetically, one can see where Present.ly goes the extra mile. The color coding of messages within a user's feed based on different contexts is a nice touch and helps to categorize a flood of messages if and when it takes off within a firm. Functionally, Present.ly also improves on Yammer's API usage, as it mirrors Twitter's API in a way that allows for 3rd party Twitter clients to be easily ported onto the network.

        My only concern about Present.ly in relation to Yammer comes from a comparison of the traffic statistics. Yammer is generating a respectable reach, especially considering the function and target market, as well as a user base of companies claimed to be around 50,000. Yammer's advantage as the more prominent of the two may be multiplied within the mind of clients looking for a quick and easy Micro-blogging solution. In spite of this, I reason that some of Present.ly's traffic woes come from the variety of platforms the network encourages and the self-hosting option for the product. While Yammer is currently a more ascendant star within the sector, I think the promise of added security, a better interface and the ability to keep the product in house will sway not only those  looking to purchase an enterprise platform, but also those on the fence about the concept. While Present.ly might have a hard time justifying itself as the "Next Big Thing" in social media, relative to a respectable Yammer, it seems to be.

Winner: Present.ly

.

Social Media Thunderdome - Identi.ca vs. Posterous

For Part I (Introduction), Part II (Media Bracket) & Part III (The Criteria) click the links.

Identi.ca vs. Posterous

	Identi.ca	Posterous.com
Traffic (Alexa Ranking):	7,437	1,503
Alexa’s Global 3 Month Reach Increase/Decrease:	+65% to a global monthly average of .0156% of internet users	+161% to a global monthly average of .0881%of internet users
US/UK Traffic Ranking	7,894/5,667	641 / 589
Largest National Traffic Source:	21.3% - US	41.1% - US

	Identi.ca	Posterous.com
Founded:	2008	2009
Headquarters:	Montreal, Canada	Mountain View, CA
API:	Open source platform, no extended API	Basic API present with separate functional silos
Mobile Usage Options:	No explicit app, integration in multiple platforms / apps	Mobile app, e-mail posting circumvents need for more
Advertising;	None present on interface	None present on interface

       Comparing Posterous and Identi.ca is a study in innovation of posting categories. Both sites emphasize a relatively novel way of posting content to pages and bank on this a selling point for success. Posterous, errs on the side of Tumblr's functionality, allowing users to post video,audio,text and link content through either network syndication (posting from Wordpress, Twitter, Tumblr, etc.) or e-mail (something that exists as their emphasized method).Identi.ca, licensed under the Creative Commons agreement, is an open source network which emphasizes posting from a variety of sources, including jabber/IM clients. Identi.ca's main selling point, stemming from the open source ethos, is the use of the Open Microblogging protocol, which allows users to post messages through Identi.ca to other microblogging services.

Identi.ca's interface might not be winning any beauty awards soon, but the same could be said for Twitter

       Identi.ca's interface seems to manifest the company's orientation of funcationality and autonomy. Through its bare bones structure users are given the ability to procure the source code of the service and modify it within the framework of the CC license (Actual software utilized is called Statusnet).The site allows for users to post the standard 140 character updates (ensuring compatibility on basic mobile platforms) but also allows for users to embed files within messages on the interface. Embedded content comes up as it would on Twitter, through a link, but the ability to embed within site does circumvent the need for services such as Twitpic. Furthermore, Identi.ca improves on parts of the Twitter experience by allowing for group creation and selective broadcasting. Overall, Identi.ca represents a glut of technical possibilities, but brings up important questions about a typical user's need for some of these features. Considering how micro-blogging has been brought through to the masses on Twitter, users may value aesthetics over technical capability, something that has the possibility to overshadow Identi.ca's networking features. While the open source nature of the site allows for 3rd party integration rather easily, if the benefits brought by the service are similar to Twitter, what attracts users to using both?

I've always thought having to type in a six letter username to create an accout WAS too laborious, thanks Posterous...

      If identi.ca has taken the approach of a more integrated, user-autonomous Twitter, Posterous has attempted to become a stone simple version of Tumblr. Employing the same output as its more popular brother, Posterous allows users to post multimedia content into a sub domain blog feed. Nothing is that ground breaking about the way the content is presented (it actually lacks some of the aesthetic customization options of Tumblr), but Posterous' brilliance lies in the way content can be posted. By emailing pictures,audio or video to post@posterous.com, users can automatically have sent content posted to their page. Such a feature allows for blogging on virtually any internet connected device. Posterous offers all of the features you would be accustomed to on Tumblr, including external network integration, group page management (for multiple user administration) and mentioned integration with google analytics (with some quick code pasting). Posterous aims to simplify content blogging, going as far as automatically creating an account when first emailed, for those few that have the technological skill to blog on the go, but just don't know how to create a username. When contrasting the ease of use with some limited functionality on customization, it seems that Posterous errs on the egalitarian side of use, hoping to attract people through simplicity. 

      Comparing both sites, its easy to see how a contrast can be made between Identi.ca's aims for integration and Posterous' aims to simplify use. As one can't normally have both power and simplicity easily, its normal to declare that basic users will choose simplicity in mass. Such an approach seems the easier path to adoption and subsequently prominence within the sector as a "Big thing". Alexa data seems to back this, as Posterous' traffic growth and reach show a site that is quickly becoming a contender within the sector. On an aside, commercial adoption of/advertising on Posterous seem(s) much more likely than Identi.ca, as brands prefer to deal with a quantifiable network in finite terms. Identi.ca may stand to be a hit amongst users with a technological slant, but overall, Posterous seems poised between the two for prominence. 

Winner: Posterous