But I think it’s FriendFeed that Facebook should be more closely following, given what it wants to do with its service. That’s especially true when even more information starts coming into the site by way of Facebook Connect. Twitter has exploded in popularity because it’s so simple — but it’s far too simple for everything that Facebook want to do. But FriendFeed seems to be morphing into exactly what Facebook wants to be.

So the question I have now, is whether or not Facebook will copy these better features from FriendFeed? I think it will. After all, it had no problem borrowing the “like” feature, the importing of third-party stream elements, or the commenting functionality. (Sure, FriendFeed didn’t invent all of these, but they’ve been implemented on Facebook in nearly the exact same way they’ve been used on FriendFeed.) **** And if Facebook is able to follow that lead, 200 million plus users will essentially be using FriendFeed — just under the moniker of Facebook.****

My **** highlights. Very interesting take, and yes, these are all key developments in the quest for Social Networking dominance.

One thing the post also points out that I have been saying for quite a while now is the speed differential between FriendFeed (faster) and Facebook (slower, despite much larger user base), and thereby indirectly between Twitter and Facebook (since Twitter still makes up the majority of FriendFeed users’ entries).

So in a way, TWITTER’S speed is/has been driving speed on FriendFeed, and it is not clear if Facebook users en masse ever will embrace that level of speed.

Its more private, more “real-world social graph” oriented (to an extent) set-up so far seems to predict no, while Twitter’s open follow model appears to outright encourage ever GREATER speed, because users are subliminally incentivised to post more due to the ever larger numbers of people thought to be listening.