Shared publicly  - 
Why am I a Google+ Fan? Well, let's look.

I posted a link to my blog about Facebook's new features at 11 a.m. on both Facebook and Google+.

Here's what I posted on Facebook. Here's what I posted on Google+.

What's the results?

On Google+ I got 46 + 1's. 84 shares. 100 comments. So far.
On Facebook I got six likes. So far. NO comments.
On Twitter I got 11 retweets. So far. Very few comments back other than "nice post."

Says it all, really.
Scobleizer wrote: Facebook announces new privacy and... Join Facebook to connect with Scobleizer and others you may know.
Natascha Ljubic's profile photoofficeandgo's profile photoSimon Rogers's profile photoTony W's profile photo
nice results breakdown.
haha just shared it here and on my twitter/fb streams. But, first I shared it here :D Guess it shows who has priority over me :)
That have anything to do with the way you manage your graph on FB vs. G+?
+Robert Scoble I disagree with you frequently, but when you're on the money, you are dead center on the money, sir.

Google+ is not Facebook, and shouldn't want to be.
i think the audience participation here is a little different. i am not sure if it's because of the type of crowd g+ attracts or because of the way g+ is designed, or both.
To be fair, you didn't post the same announcement on Facebook that you did on G+.
Google+ is the best social network by far! Any news on when Google+ will be rolling out brand profiles/pages?
bingo. people join the conversations here faster than they do on facebook
J. roto
So you're a comment fanboy ;) Kidding aside, the conversation is what makes this great.
I will be honest, if Zuck can pick up on all the benefits G+ has to offer, in order to prevent a mass exodus, we may be able to retain this elevated level of dialog indefinately
Well its also depends on the "identity" profile of your Google + and FB followers.....If FB has more people like your wife....they would not appreciate the import of the new features unlike the techies on Google +
out of what engaged population on each service? (oh, and how many nyms gave what proportion of good feedback here? :)
Once again you have hit the nail right on the head.
Every time you go to comment here there's 400 comments ahead of yours...that alone says so much!
My facebook exploded...but I still think both are very different social networks.
Similar experiences. The G+ audience is significantly more engaged. It would be interesting to normalize the data on a distribution basis. However, overall, it makes sense.
Yep, I read your blog from here as well. In one month here I have more followers than in 3 years on my FB fanpage. I agree with you too, FB is king of the social graph and G+ is of the "interesting" social graph. Will wait to see how it all plays out but having more options helps everyone.
One great thing about Google+ is that people actually are interacting with each other.. you can say its a social network that really works.. but then again, is it cause everyone here was invited and we all feel special and obligated to participate??
I treat Google+ as a place for conversation, I tend to ignore Facebook. Twitter is for breaking news.
Your other posts about social graph vs interest graph pretty much explain it all.
LOL, that's rather funny statistics. The fact that Google plus is so real time may skew these results. Even in the long run though I think you will find more +1's/shares on here over twitter/facebook. The community here is so much more active. also there are people like me who mentioned you before the post came out but didn't +1 the resulting post because we felt it was over-hyped :+P
this is going to be interesting , lets see how google responds and how things turn up , for now fb has the upper hand.
mirrors my fb experience exactly.

if you want to get response on fb you need to post something like...

i just ate a sandwich
duh- because more people are just using facebook for games (farmville and cityville)
The people there, are bored. I'm starting to feel that they are not even there
Facebook is for friends not a bunch of geeks that like to do random comments on other peoples post. I would never follow u are most of these folks on facebook thats pointless to me.
I refuse to comment on this.

Facebook is suffering from the "looks like GeoCities at this point" information, spam, and garbage creep. Google is benefiting from the "right place, right time" position that Facebook once enjoyed. What will this site look like when everyone from Facebook is here?
+Robert Scoble 100% agree.
I scratch my head at why twitter is still used for posting conversational or discussion prompting content. It is such a horrendous experience... and 140 characters with no formatting?
I really wonder if G+ will stay the distance- really hope it does, it's a better system and built on broadcast sharing principles rather than having broadcast sharing bolted on. FB for friends G+ for strangers is a clever comparison, but i hope the FB friends come over and make this the better for both groups. How G+ will ever appeal to my mum in her 50s though is beyond me. Just too much to explain.
Honestly Google+ made it easy for us to find the GEEKS
people tend to 'overfollow' with any new platform, then over time, cut back their followers due to overload, verbosity, etc. But like Twitter there are more intelligent conversations here than FB, and better than Twitter there is more interactivity
+Jody Raines If the earthquake was a factor the G+ response would have been muted as well. Instead we see the continuation of the trend that the same thing posted on both networks gets a much bigger response from G+.
Even though google+ is less than 1% of FB's user base, the people who are on G+ are active and actually know how to type. I for one enjoy all of the intelligent conversations here. FB is just all spam and game notifications.
I find my G+ to be much more active.
Well, this news might also be perceived as being more important by people who are on g+
I tested this with a photo and I got so much more responses on G+ than FB... My clients were ALSO tagged on FB and still didn't match up against G+
lol even on facebook no one cares about facebook's privacy directives :D
Facebook seems to be more about self-broadcast rather than content creation, admittedly that is also largely to do with the audience. Now that I am an adult I like to split the two. I keep my facebook for unashamed self-plugs, and I keep my G+ for interesting discussion that is likely to get a bunch of feedback, opinions and healthy debate! Oh lets not forget my biggest gripe, my photos are always butchered by Facebooks ugly compression algorithms. G+ wins that last point hands down.
This just means that google+ is Nerdsville
G+ is currently more "elite", so people tend to engage alot more as they have not been burned out yet by endless noise and game requests.
I read your write up here because it is the place I can connect with interact with you best I feel. I like that G+ moves more like the speed of twitter with a facebook feel.
does anyone want to buy my farmville facebook farm?
I sent you an email about my experience as well, if you have a chance to read it. It's not too long I hope.
I think the more comparisons are made between Google+ and Facebook the more I think they are like a fork and chopsticks. You can consume content with both but one is going to work better for you based on what you use it for. People on G+ seem to be making it a competition while, I would hazard to guess, that the majority of the folks on Facebook couldn't care less and will be unlikely to leave. They may occasionally gripe about FB but for the most part they are contented. Google+, Facebook, Twitter? Who cares, I have tabs enough for all.
Normal Father:Facebook
Normal Mother:Twitter

Mutant Child: Google+
I guess on FB only people on your friends list can coment on your posts,whereas on G+ any of your followers can comment on your post, once it's been posted publicly, even trhough they might not be in your circles!
Home is where the comments are.
they commented and shared because there is not much to do. most of the active people, i believe, are following same people.
Very interesting observation! I wonder why G+ followers are so much more active than FB friends. Could it be that your friends are really not that interested in what you are interested in?
G+ has a different purpose then FB its more like Twitter except no business names or screen names. G+ is harder to follow comments since they scroll only early adopters in here. FB friends are family or from school with many different interest
could it be that more like minded people are spending more time on G+ to learn, share and collaborate.......the data suggest so
Kam Siu
i agree too. getting comments make me feel alive and noticed
I like your article, but FB's features aren't new. They just rearranged where these features are located.
So far for me, I got no +1s on G+, but 1 like on FB. No comments on either network for me. And no reshares for me on either.
Eh Sonny!!! Back in MY DAY .. we used to walk six miles in the SNOW.. and when we wanted to communicate.. we'd write Letters on a piece of paper and MAIL it! Bah Humbug! ;-)
Google plus definitely shines at discussions. Reminds me of how Slashdot was back when it was relevant.
The difference is that facebook has turned into a place to dump anything and everything about yourself. The relationships on facebook are also more personal because family members and close friends use it exclusively, even more than email. G+ has not turned into that yet, (hopefully it will not), I see G+ as a place where people think about what they are posting before they post, they don't just dump everything on there.
G+ is still better, the competition is healthy :) 
I much prefer the conversations here. But are you taking into account that we're all paying attention to the device itself, and FB people are used to it?
+Jon Zobrist I still visit Slashdot, although its not as alive, you still get good discussions. It'd be great if G+ can be even closer to Slashdot in terms of the the quality of discussions/comments. I learnt many things from those comments.
G+ is way to go. i only go FB to say hi to my grad ma
Facebook might try anything with privacy and stuff but it won't beat G+ unless it has something like(or better than) Hangouts.
There's something special about Google+. In 3 years on Facebook I didn't get daily followings from random people, and when I did get a "friend" request from someone I didn't know, I typically ignored it. On Google+ with the "following" model, it says "hey, I"m interested in what you have to say", which is welcomed, because I can filter what I share with strangers. Another interesting thing is that I find people moving between circles as I get to "know" them on here. The ability to easily control who gets to see what is the fundamental difference.
I think you may be looking at it wrong though +Robert Scoble.
On Facebook, I only add people that are my actual friends (and no offence, but I don't have you on FB). I think a lot of people are the same way.
However, here on Google+ I'm more open to engaging with people that I don't know personally. As well, here people can follow you without your permission (unlike FB).

I think comparing the two environments (for most people) is comparing apples to oranges. Different social networks, different ways in which people interact with each. I don't see why people are all about FB vs G+, why can't there be both G+ AND FB?
It relates to what you've posted. tech related contents may have a higher chance to attract attention on G+, i dunno.
What I like about Google+, +Rob Good, is that I can do both and, in fact, I can do them both better. What I mean by that is that with the ease in which I can navigate my circles, I can post very private and personal stuff to small subsets of people if I feel like it . . . and then I can also peruse, comment and post on more public, open discussions with like-minded people who I may not even personally know and I can do all this with literally just a click.
Why do people compare G+ with Facebook? They have different use case and different social graphs. Facebook for family and real friends. G+ same social graph as Twitter...
It can't be both(FB and G+), at least not to the majority.
Great point Robert and it also highlights the difference in audiences on those platforms. I find G+ to be more professional / industry focused.
I think the result you got is because the followers and most users in G+ are google fans and are interested in tech and G+, so they like to make comments on your blogs about FB and G+. But people in FB are different.
BTW, I am also Google fans.
+Robert Scoble I think it's the content that your posting.... I said in a post yesterday, that Twitter was turning into chat for me, Facebook into email and Google+ for blogging. If you post newsworthy stuff on email or in a chat room, you probably won't get much of a response. In the old days, if you posted on a blog, you would. If you use my analogy, I think you can see why I think your experiencing this with engagement around your content... --- just a thought.
+Sheldon Levine 100% agree. All the hate between G+'s and Facebook is just silly. My REAL friends and family are at Facebook and I don't see that changing anytime soon. G+ will never have the amount of active users that Facebook has but thats ok since it isn't needed. I want to "follow" people that share my interest and passion here. Facebook is for something completely different.
我也越来越喜欢Gogle+,Facebook 信息流太杂乱了
Let's just face it, the general g+ population are more tech savvy and knows what should be shared! ( and what to avoid)
would be interesting to get an update after a day or so, after the flash fire of G+ commenters dies off.
I can tell you why you had no comments on Facebook. Its the audience. Post a picture of you drinking a beer or write a wall post that says "I farted". That should get you the engagement your looking for. Everyone saying that G+ and Facebook are different is correct... they definitely have different use cases and social graphs. The social graph on Facebook is basically reliving High School. So you have to adjust your strategy accordingly.
waiting for the G+ page to come out, then I guess a lot of people will abandon FB? :)
Google+ is superior & closer to real time than the others as far as refreshing etc.
And you don't think any of that has to do with you posting here last night that there was a big announcement (which you didn't post on FB)? A lot of the comments seem to be regarding your post last night and how this isn't a big announcement.
I'll comment even tho nobody will even read this later but I think we all know that Facebook Pros use the Like button instead of their voice, the best even liking their own shit.
I like Google plus, because I no one here (at my job) yet knows it exists. We cannot do Facebook using the office computer;)
+Eddie Resendez That was because they were different, completely different features. We have a combination of both twitter and facebook here. G+ and Facebook are pure rivals.
Some might use both (those who have geeks and muggles as friends). I doubt others will bother logging in on both.
+Robert Scoble I for one follow you on many different sources, FB included, but what got me to respond to today, was the dynamic interaction that I am witnessing right now. In order to get even near the same magnitude of a responses on FB, I had to go their Groups. The quality of the response here in general are by far more robust than ANYTHING I have seen there.
4 comments on FB so far. But I couldn't comment even if I wanted to, because I'm not your 'friend'. That is a huge difference.
Hey +Robert Scoble, please don't take this as a troll comment, or anything like that. I'm genuinely curious on this front: if you're a journalist, why would you declare yourself a "fan" of one product or another?

I was under the impression that a journalist would generally like to keep himself neutral in such matters. Is that a false assumption?
I have to disagree with +William Parker III , but I think you'll like why I am disagreeing with you. It is because I read your comment! :)
+Mohammed Maaz No they are not and if they are Google+ wouldn't survive. Good thing for us they both serve two very different needs for most the population.
I, for one, actually commend FaceBook on what they DIDN'T do... they DIDN'T try to send out lawyers or do a "you copied me" campaign... no, they IMPROVED their own product!!! THAT'S how to compete... take note Microsoft/Apple....

Oh yeah, and additionally... Mark Zuckerberg did one thing that most CEOs and company heads don't do enough... HE SHUT THE FUCK UP.... He didn't hit 18,000 media outlets bashing the competing product, he signed up for an account so that he could watch what goes on here... and then he STFU and improved his product.... I won't be going back to FaceBook, hardly ever (still have an account, but I'm not active there at all), but good on Mark for this...
I can agree with that :D. Just thought it was worth mentioning that part of the engagement is spill-over from previous engagement.
I can't lie. The activity in my FB world is just as fun in G+. My college/university friends are all over the world. The FB group (726) they created is super active. My elem/hs (109) friends are also very active in another FB group. Right now one group is playing musical DJ on the group's wall. They grew tired of games.

In FB, I talk to people I know while in G+ I talk to 50% good strangers and 50% peers.

-edit (added count of active users on FB groups)
Conversion booms, noise filters needed as well.
From my observations (which are highly debatable) - Twitter's 'social network' was basically a glorified RSS feed where the early adopters were techies. Twitter's inability to track a thread or a conversation somewhat limits the discourse on a particular piece of news. Now with Google+ I would venture must early adopters are techies, and with the ability to have a threaded topic people can engage on a particular topic. I think the next challenge Google+ would have to overcome is with 'super users' such as Scoble and giving more relevance about the conversation (e.g. too many comments, trolls etc).
I like the comment feature of G+ best!! It allows you to edit comments easily and the interface is really good (not confusing like that of Facebook).

PS: I am also a fan of G+
G+ super enhanced twitter like flow is definitely attractive.
It really depends of the audience for your post. I got opposite results when I posted about the death of Jack Layton yesterday. But my sample is very small to be taken as trend though.
Why are you guys talking about G+ not appealing to non-techies when its not even publicly released yet?
It's just an hour and look! the comments have over-flooded!
Facebook is no place to have a discussion. It was always sold as a micro-blog site but never became more than an expanded Twitter (yes, I'm aware that I have the chicken and egg reversed). Here, there is ongoing, interesting discourse minus MOST of the noise and Google appears to be working to respond to our requests for ways to control that noise.
Uhmmm ... +Chadwick Popillion does make a good point. I, for example, am following +Robert Scoble from my G+ account. However, I am not following him from my FB account. That would be an interesting vote to set up - Of those that have both a G+ and FB account, how many are following Robert in both places? How many are following Robert only in FB? How many are following Robert only on G+?

Don't get me wrong ... I love G+ hands down over FB, I like that it's more interesting, a more rewarding experience, and more real-time. But I just think that Chadwick makes a good point.
+Richard Walters Guess I'm someone that doesn't mind "Noise," I have him on G+ FB and on Twitter.. What am I crazy! ;-)
+Richard Walters That is true, but is a signal of a bigger issue... WHY? I don't follow Scoble on FaceBook but I follow him here. Why? Because my FaceBook feed was filled with so much stuff, like "I went to Jamba Juice" or the daily prayers to God through FaceBook that I just don't want to rifle through even MORE crap there. Here is a little different, I just go down the list and check my Circles where I have him in a "Tech News" circle... Generally the nature of the Circles and making it easily available on that left side to switch between them, makes the information coming at me through Google+ much more manageable.
Last week I was able to search my own entire link feed on facebook all the way back until 2008. Every link, every YouTube video I ever posted, now that feature is gone again. Facepalm for facebook. At least the link to my facebook page is more accessible.
+Robert Scoble You are right on about the interest graph vs. the social graph. I believe the real opportunity for Google+ will be in using it as part of Google Apps. Project, policy, education, and decision conversations within organizations are frequently an engaging combination of the two.
So, again, you're saying that you prefer Google+ because of the followers, but it has nothing to do with the service itself?
I like how Google+ is compared to FaceBook, as if it was some long time rival entity. Not as if it is a two month old product. "Google+ is way behind here." HAH!

It's a good sign for Google+... If G+ gets compared on this level two months out of the gate, imagine what it will be like when Google+ gets some actual time under it's belt... Looking forward to great things!
+Drew Corbitt The service attracts those that follow... It's not an either or, it's a culmination of things.
That has a reason, Google plus is far better than the other site.
I think this PROVES G+ is geeky and not cool and FB the reverse.
Looks like Google employees will actually get bonus this year!
+James Pakele I completely understand that. And I'm not knocking G+ at all. I'm just saying that there's not enough separating it from its competitors to keep it relevant...especially now that FB has its own answer for Circles.

Basically, the only thing that I've heard people praising G+ for was that it's not filled with all the junk that you get in your news feed on FB...heck, just looking at your post up above mine, that's exactly what you said. I'm simply saying that, with this change in FB, you can have all the benefits that you like about G+.

Again, let me say, I'm not trying to attack anyone here...I love G+. I'm simply saying that what it's had going for it all along is easily duplicated elsewhere.
Maybe those on Facebook and Twitter are smart enough to know that Facebook announcement was not worth the trouble of talking about.
I suspect FB uses different algorithms. Prioritizing updates from people that are actually close to you (friends and family). People like you would be punished as most FB "friends" would never see it. I experience a similar effect with crosspostings (albeit at a lower magnitude and scale). --> FB is dead to me.
People on facebook are too busy combing their dog or trying to figure out what color to paint their nails.
+Robert Scoble Very well be completely honest, I haven't delved into G+ as much as I'd like. And I DO prefer it over FB. It's just that, whenever I hear people singing the praises of it, it seems that the only thing that they praise is that the feed is not full of crap like FB is, which is something that I had a feeling all along would be easily remedied by Zuck & Co by adding an answer to Circles.

Personally, I like G+ because it's not blocked at work. Yet.
+Tristan Ria no! whatever i read today is more than enough because it's already 1 and half hour past midnight here at my place. So, i will instantly shut down my laptop after this comment and go to bed. I must have some sleep to catch up my college tomorrow at 6:30 am morning.
+Drew Corbitt You can mirror features but it's less of single features than the combination of features. For me, Google+ has the exact combination of features that allow me to dump practically everything else and participate here in this one place.

I can follow people here and participate in commentary, but I don't have to be one of their "friends". Meaning I don't have to get their "blessing" to see their posts. Also, we have yet to see if FaceBook really answers Google's Circles or if it comes up short. For instance, even if their solution allows me to post to only a subset of people, that is only half of the picture, the other half is using Circles to sort though the stream of information coming in as well. I might look at the "Full Stream" here but I can also go down the line in that left column and take in my information a section at a time... which they allow me to sort by importance that I define... So my daily activity would be to check out the full stream... see what's dominating Google+ at the moment (highly commented stuff is pushed to the top of the stream) then I go down the list first is a circle called "The Clique" it contains about 6 of us that share almost everything, intimate, embarassing, everything, no holds barred, but these are the close friends that we hang out with all the time, now it's like we're together even more, which is great. Then "Close Family", my brother, his wife, my wife's siblings etc. Then "Family" this would be all my family related to me in any which way. Then Friends. Then "Tech News" (which usually flows to the top of the main stream anyways) and "Google", which are Google employees and how I usually find out about new features here on Google+. It sort of unfolds like a newspaper which I read in descending order of importance. Unless FaceBook can let me do that, then no dice....

Also, being the "veteran" can sometimes work against you. I have people in my Google+ circles that have either NEVER had a FaceBook account or have sworn off of FaceBook, because it has been the cause of fights and/or arguments in real life... Just drama. For a lot of people, the amount increases as time goes by, FaceBook is becoming synonymous with drama, in a negative way. Most of that is because people have added "Friends" to their FaceBook account, then post something negative about someone, which of course can be seen by all these "friends" and one is bound to tell so-and-so "Do you know what <person> is saying on FaceBook?" BOOM fight, and negativity. Google's way of putting these circles upfront and in your face gives you a chance to really look at what your posting and to whom, from day one. FaceBook, while they may have matched it now, will have a harder time shaking the history of all the fights and arguments that have been started by FaceBook posts. Not to say that something like that can't happen here, it is very likely that it will but they way Google has laid stuff out here it will definitely be a far less occurance.
Ironically I find G+ more "open", although FB insistently wants to make your every single action/private information to be public. FB is like the gossip girl, constantly watching you and reporting everything you do to your real world acquaintances (you all know, most of them are never your "friends"). Whereas in G+ you can share what YOU want with the rest of the world without any limitations or restrictions. And this makes G+ a good platform to connect people worldwide and let them interact in a more natural way. I hope they never change this aspect.
+Robert Scoble Good post Robert. Twitter is dead and the New Twitter interface is a trainwreck. Facebook is a nightmare. Long live G+.
It all depends on your point of view. Some people like it and some not. Most of my relatives and friends are on Facebook and not on G+. And, from what I've understood from your post Robert, you prefer G+ because you have more answers. But, are people looking for feedback or is it to be in relation to each other? So, it all depends on what you want with each of them. And each of them have benefit and concerns. Just my 2 cents
science experiment..jump frog jump.....cut one leg off .. jump frog jump....cut other leg off..jump frog jump.....frog with no legs cant hear
Google+ had more comments about a competitor than Facebook did about itself. That shows what the community is like.
I liked your FB page now too. (I had not heard of you pre G+)
I think there will be plenty of room and unique functionality for both services to co-exist.
I really feel that a combination of Circles and the clean layout of Google+ help drive engagement. Circles allow you to easily filter down and the layout gives comments more prominence so they don't get lost and are easy to pick out. I've written a blog entry on this which explains further:
On FB page I had over 400 likes and 40+ comments
G+ I had 2 +1s
After 4+ years invested into Twitter, I'm happy to get ONE reply to a tweet, and a few retweets on blog posts, if that. The stream is just too much noise for people to consume anything; so they just broadcast (at least my network).

Facebook; I never invested much in that site - I never saw it as something scalable from an "Internet" point of view. To get anything from Facebook, you have to be strong on Facebook, and put money into marketing on Facebook, and sacrifice your time solely for the benefit of Facebook.

With G+, it's attached to Google, last I checked thew run the consumer Internet and have a large stake in Internet advertising that exceeds the boundaries of their company from every angle.

To hell with Facebook. It's a walled garden that requires you to pump time & effort (& money) into a system that promotes only itself.
+Robert Scoble Do you think that maybe G+ suits business-oriented conversations better? I find that's how I'm using it, at least for now.
Really good insight. Can we assume Facebook is more geared into knowing what is going on in your close circle, twitter really helpful in content discovery with most value in the links the stream provides and plus is very valuable for interaction with public circles? At least from my perspective this is what works for me. 
Well, at least Facebook works on Safari. Any Googlers reading this: the talkgadget frame has an illegal frame access in it. 
The problems I see with these kind of stats are: All the tech minded bloggers are here on G+ and want to get mentioned by you. On twitter, it's so much more about broadcasting than commenting. On Facebook, you'll find all the non-techs. In other words, regular people. If your audience is tech nerds, this is the best place. if your audience is everyone else, Facebook still holds court.
A lot more professional people are on G+ where as Facebook turned into Myspace. A great hangout but not somewhere to be taken seriously.
Today I just use Twitter to see read posts, Google+ is where I write all my posts now.
Facebook? What is it?

You could create groups of people to send things to before. (on Facebook) They haven't added anything to that. The thing is, it's still much easier to do it on Google+, and we are FORCED to put people in specific circle(s) right off the bat.
Agree with the view that the audience of twitter, facebook and Google+ are different. Thus the suitable content to be shared and the objectives of using each social media will be different. 
Your numbers mean absolutely nothing unless you also gave FB a 15+ hour head-start of public pre-hype to build anticipation: I've looked for a corresponding post on FB, under both your identities there. I still want to believe it was there, just because you're asserting those statistics mean something. I've asked +Kat Armstrong to help me with a link, but no reply yet; though that's only been a couple of hours.

Show us a link to the balancing FB post, or retract the stats claim.
While still learning the ropes on Google+, I'm finding that I'm already using it differently than I'd thought. A very happy accident if you will. I'm the father of an autistic son, and I'm finding heaps of knowledge, tips, iPad apps, and so much more. All of it through complete strangers. I'm pretty sure I'll never meet anyone in my autism circle in person, but I feel powerfully connected to them. There are days when autism brings me to my knees, but knowing there is an understanding ear/eye in that circle is worth more than I can say. I can't do that on FB.
Did I read this right... You only have 14k Likers on FB compared to being in 118k G+ Circles and 201k Twitter Followers?
Me too: Did I read this right... You only have 24k Likers on FB compared to being in 407k G+ Circles?
I noticed the same thing. Nothing gets noticed on Facebook anymore.
Those are interesting numbers, Robert. That's what I like about here too - the conversation, rather than just silence or a bunch of "me too"'s.
Amazing! G+ is for sure garnering much more response in terms of volume, velocity, and depth (read: thoughtful comments). +Robert Scoble, I'm sure you don't need me to point out many of the variables as to why the response is so different between Facebook and Google+:

- You have just under 14,000 fans on Facebook vs. close to 120,000 followers on G+.
- Given Facebook's EdgeRank algorithm, only a fraction of those ~14k fans even saw your post in their News Feed.
- You're much more engaged with - and accessible to - your G+ followers than your Facebook fans.
- G+ users, who were formerly quite active on Facebook, appear to be spending more time on G+ and engaging more.
- There appears to be more excitement, buzz and momentum on G+ among the most active users ... for now. ;)

And, of course, it depends on one's objectives. You're skilled at mobilizing a crowd. Just an educated guess, but if you spent the same amount of time on Facebook as you're spending on G+, and asked your G+ peeps to go over to Facebook to engage with you there, I suspect you may see different results. Not that you would switch it up, of course! I'm simply making observations and thinking aloud here! ;) (And I agree with you as to all the reasons why G+ is so cool!)
+Mari Smith Took the words out of my mouth! All about how you encourage engagement.
Wow, that's really interesting. Also, if you go by percentage of users, it's even more impressive.
Although, your audience is skewed in the same direction as the Google+ userbase... and I think part of what Google+ needs to encourage is the less technical users so that google+ doesn't become another usenet...
People read posts on Google+. Most Facebook posts are noise.
What abot Microsoft? Why they are sleeping? When we can expect something from Microsoft?
could it be cause G+ is all new and exciting?
+Robert Scoble That is stated very astutely: "There is a feedback loop here that is very addictive." G+ is way better than Facebook or the horrid New Twitter.
And what about the quality of comments? What are the differences? I saw Trey Ratcliff's similar post earlier, only mentioning numbers... I know it's by no means scientific, but it would be interesting to see anyway.
Btw you shared the number of comments on FB and G+, but how does that compare to the number of comments on your blog itself? I feel like G+ is mostly competing with blogs, and most of the active G+ users are "old" bloggers like you and me. How long will we keep our blogs online if all the interactions happen on G+?
+Laurent Haug although you can use G+ as a blog, there is still a lot of room for a blog engine. They are different and yes G+ allows this usage it is far more flexible. However you can add no branding and you can't customise in the same way (ie, Wordpress, et all)
As your experiment proves, google+ has become the place for getting traffic and great conversation.
I wonder does +robert scoble read all the comments. It must take ages.
I like Google+ more than Facebook!
+Robert Scoble The shares are not as powerful as a blogger Linking to your post and I'm seeing the same content over and over and that's not an efficient use of my time
Question remains on what people comment and share and so on. Mostly tech people on G+ so far but will be even more interesting once and if "normal" people also show up in big numbers.
Yep, the initial user base for G+ is mainly tech people. Still, the results are great! :)
+Berke Hitay Define Tech people? Is it anyone with a computer or someone who can build one?
:) I would guess anyone with a computer who is also exclusively interested in technological developments, follows tech news and enjoys tech talk. (a la +Robert Scoble's current circles here)
Andy P
Google+ isn't "taking off" from my perspective. Few of my friends are on here, most of them are users of Facebook, most have little interest in tech so wouldn't come on here unless all of their friends are on here - not the kind to try out something new and see what it's like. As much as I like Google+, I'm tempted to argue that it is very late to the party what with both Twitter and Facebook so prevailant in the same space.
well, maybe +Robert Scoble it might be because you have roughtly ten times more followers on Google+ than on Facebook... just a thought ;-)
I think putting Google+ up against Facebook is the wrong approach, they seem more like two different kinds of social networks. To me at least they fulfill different needs:

Facebook is the 'close friends and family social network'. I don't see G+ taking over this role or being a "Facebook killer"

Google+ is the 'creativity/writers/bloggers/photography/tech/IT social network' that Facebook never really was.

I used to use Twitter to follow interesting and creative people (outside my FB friend/family realm) but G+ is taking over that role IMHO. Being able to easily share thoughts, photos, art, music, videos etc to a huge public audience and (especially) receiving comments (something I missed a lot in Twitter) is what makes G+ something Twitter should be worried about.
As much as I like G+ over FB, I agree with +Frank Nørvig's comment.
Those two are targeted towards different audience, I think.
I clicked the "Like" button on your FB page to post a comment, and it hung - dumb, fat and happy. Bells and whistles don't make a good site - content does. This is why G+ will win in the long run.
to me G+ is a chance for a fresh start social network where I can add people I'm actually interested in rather than everyone I had a vague interaction with a long time ago. G+ is where I go for informed discussion etc and FB is where I go to see what the girl in school who sat 3 rows behind me is doing now she's out of jail. It's not the feature set that interests me as much as a 2nd chance to build my social network with discernment rather than just adding everyone because it was novel.
Different networks are great for different people. It's great that Google+ has provided an awesome place for discussion and collaboration. Google plus is still in its honey moon period though. The level of interaction on Facebook and Twitter in its earlier days was also awsome, until it became populated with every tom dick and harry. Bigger is not always better.
Isn't this just the result of different follower bases? I'd hesitate to directly credit G+ for increased engagement rate.
Hahaha, that is interesting.... I have not been on Google+ in about 6 weeks, since kinda the "end of the beta", interesting current stats on Google+ metrics for postings...maybe this thing has legs after all? Thanks for sharing! As I think everybody has been preaching all along nothing is going to "replace" fb, but it sure is nice to have some viable and productive options to socialize and engage with people, both "friends you care about" and strangers (besides 'for hire' dating sites). :)
PS..haha, it took me all of about 5 minutes of being back till I needed to use my favorite of all time feature of G+, the "edit postings" feature...has fb added that yet?
It seems to me that Facebook is really good at bringing your "real life" identity to the internet, and G+ is much better at exposing your "online life." It's a better soap box, and it's currently filled with technologically inclined people. I don't think that the statistics you've posted are evidence that G+ is a superior platform, but rather that it's a better place FOR YOU, as a technology reporter.

I wouldn't bother making an effort to follow you on Facebook - pages are tedious, and it's unlikely you'd be willing/able to establish a public, mutual friendship with me. And if I did follow you (and other people I'm interested in) on Facebook, there would be way too much noise for it to be useful to me.
be interesting to see same experiment carried out in 12 and 24 months time..................... at the moment G+ is full of nerdy intellectual early adopters, so of course you will get more replies........ but the format is much better here ........ have you seen +Chris Pirillo live shows on here yet.......... they are on youtube live....... but you can watch them live on it
Commenting on this may have many angles. I think it is not a matter of black and white. There are grays. In the example you mention I think the experiment behavior (and results) are more related with audiences factor.

I use both (FB & G+) but I use G+ to follow and consume news and public conversations (mostly from geeks). And that happen to be better in G+ nowadays.

Maybe that is why having those sharing and comments rates higher in G+.
facebook will be like yahoo. its very chaotic.
Facebook is losing the most important part of Social Media - Connecting. I see a bunch of Junk on FB and I see some good stuff. I got on my Soap Box to post: I know some of you personally and I know you've got more to offer than just quotes, become a real person and your "network" side of social network will open up!!
Perhaps, something to do with Edge Rank? Hmmm.... interesting
+Robert Scoble on your FB page you only have 14K likes as opposed to 118K circle-followers/whatever on Google+
so it's very normal to not have the same response in your post
It does say it all. But tell us the implications anyway.
yes, but still ... 99% what you write is PR, trivial or emotional rollercoastering. quality vs.quantity.
Good point +Robert Scoble. But you have a lot of more viewers from Google+ than Facebok. And answers on Twitter are majorly RT when you tweet a post in my opinion.
So, Robert, we have an ultimate nerdosphere right here we wait for long time?
By the way Robert, I think it will be great for Rackspace send emails to customers (I'm one of them) anytime, when traffic is jumped up.
I want just open Rackspace email, read him, understand is it bot attack or not and press"add servers" button right from email, because model, used right now at Rackspace is too long for me (eight characters and numbers - well, I need open file with typed pass, then copy it etc.) and I need something much easier, like posterous or facebook like button. What do you think about?
Really doesn't say anything other than Google+ is the new shiny tech toy. All the technophants are vacationing here for the moment while the rest of the world hasn't even peaked outside their Facebook neighborhood. The engagement here is the exact thing we saw with Quora. Article after article, advocate after advocate were screaming for Quora for a couple months, and now... Nothing. This was a noble attempt by Google, but building a full blown social network when almost all Facebook users are perfectly happy was at best naive and at worst blindingly arrogant.
G+ works great for people with a following such as yourself. But for the rest of us, all of our friends and family are still on FB with no desire to add yet another social site. Right now G+ is a geek playground only.
I'm a Google+ fan because the Facebook crowd hasn't shown up yet. Or at least I haven't seen them. Maybe I was too late to the FB party, maybe I just wasn't using it right, or maybe I just have crappy 'friends'. I gave up after about 6 months because there was too much drivel to sort through looking for those gems.

I compare FB to G+ like this: FB is a typical house party: people hanging around, maybe having a drink, there's food, and the conversation runs to the trivia and gossip of daily lives. I can think of little else beyond the desire to escape. G+ is an after-lecture mixer: the same as the house party except that the conversation tends toward discussing the lecture and related topics. Small talk exists, but it doesn't play a central role.
Noticed +Bob Townsend comment. G+ along with SGPlus solves the problem regarding FB and Twitter by integrating everything into one stream. It's a good start at least.
Add a comment...