Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB) has become an addiction for many who are socialites, so to speak. And with a reported 60 percent of the social network’s more than 1 billion users accessing the blue social scene from a mobile device, it’s being the life of the party on the way to the party. Twitter has gathered a lot of fans as well, with various socialites taking to the Twitty Bird to give party-like profundities in 140 characters or less – many of those also on mobile devices.
Image below: Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB)
Maybe that’s because it’s easier to tweet 140 characters while driving than it is to post the latest monologue on Facebook.
As the two social platforms have gained in popularity over the years, some of their differences have come to the fore. But it turns out the differences can also apply to those mobile devices we all have in our pockets, purses or attached to our belts. Apparently posts on Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB) wreak a lot more havoc on our wireless data plans than Twitter does – by a large factor, it turns out.
And while Facebook is far and away the most popular social media app on both iOS and Android devices – and may likely be the same on Windows and BlackBerry devices, if and when those market-share numbers are recorded – it would only make sense that Facebook would likely eat up data.
But is it unusual amount compared to similar exposure on, say, Twitter?
Some research was conducted recently that suggested that Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB) is much more expensive than other social networks on wireless connections because it uses significantly higher amounts of bandwidth. Grabi.org conducted the research using some comparable usages for Facebook and Twitter as an example. The firm found that since the mobile Facebook app launched last November, those who accessed Facebook through the app used 50 percent more bandwidth than they did before the client launch.
In a side-by-side comparison, Facebook was nearly four times more expensive to users than Twitter. Being on Facebook for one hour, uploading a single phonto and seeing 10 each day for a whole year would cost users about $470 in that year, according to the research (about $1.29 per hour). Doing the same thing on Twitter, except looking at 10 photos every 23 hours instead of 24 makes the annual bill about $125 per year (about 34 cents per hour).
And for safety’s sake, there is this – using a smartphone for social networking while driving has shown to reduce driver’s response times by almost 40 percent – which is more than alcohol and marijuana combined. This results in these drivers being 400 percent more likely to crash than “sober”/non-distracted drivers.
What do you think about this? Let us know your thoughts about Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB) in the mobile culture in the comments section below.