Twitterrific v. Twhirl v. IM

April 16, 2008

I now have  IM updates for Twitter, Twhirl, and Twitterrific all on my desktop, and I use all three at various times.  In homage to Whitney Hess’ great Bloglines vs. Google Reader post and Bill Simmons’ classic Pacino v. Deniro (you have to scroll for this but trust me it’s worth it), let’s break the three twitter clients down, Dr. Jack Style.

I’ll put the caveats down once up front and not speak of them again: this is what works for me and why I like/dislike the various features, your mileage may vary.  If I erred, let me know and I’ll update. 

Updates

IM uses xmpp updates, which is technical talk for "immediate posts just like instant messaging."  This is the primary reason to use this type of tool (which could be any IM service that uses xmpp, pidgin, ichat, gtalk for example.)  The downside for me is that it doesn’t always work.  I turn my updates ‘on’ and nothing happens.  Some time later I  wander back to my laptop and voila, I’m getting updates; there has been no discernible pattern to this, so I’m stuck.

Both Twhirl and Twitterrific use the Twitter API, so they must abide by the update rules, i.e. every 3 minutes or within the boundaries of 20 posts per hour that the API allows.  For people who follow hundreds or thousands, this can be problematic, but I am still following below 150 people so this aspect of the API doesn’t bother me, yet.  What I cannot stand is the constant display of old DM’s and replies to me.  I’ve deleted all DM’s on Twitter, yet I still get DM’s from 6 days ago.  So every time I power up I have to pay attention to see if there are no DM or Replies to me.  Because both apps give me the same DM’s and replies I assume it’s the API, but that’s the breaks.

Both IM  (I use ichat on my Mac) and Twitterrific support using Growl for updates, which is my preference for all my apps’ displays. Twhirl does not, and only displays updates in a window in the lower right corner.  This may seem minor, but in trying to be productive yet still see these items as they come in, I want them to come in the same place that Growl puts all my other updates (in the upper right of my monitor.)

Running Iconfactory’s ipulse, I checked all three for memory usage, and while they spike for updates, none of them were hogs: Twhirl was in my top 5 but negligible, Twitterrific didn’t crack the top ten.

IM gets 2 points here, would have been more if it worked every time; Twitterrific gets 1 point for Growl support.

Think Inside the box

IM takes a hit here for me.  When scrolling through tweets, my eyes look to the picture of the tweeter, not the name, and IM doesn’t display this.  There is also little differentiation for replies or DM’s in IM.  There are no shortcuts to reply, DM, filters, really any interactivity within IM beyond a simple tweet back.  And here, there is a small box which does not tell you how many characters you have left in your tweet.  (This of course makes sense, as the IM client is not designed specifically for Twitter.)

I give Twhirl the lead in this category over Twitterrific.  Twhirl has color options, I chose the light beige which makes it VERY easy for me to read.  Twitterrific has the black which I find more difficult to scan; although I do like that when I click on a tweet it is highlighted, unlike in Twhirl.  I’m not big on loads of icons normally, but I find Twhirl’s icons for interacting with the app easier to remember and digest.  If you are a keyboard shortcut person, Twitterrific uses those instead, just look in the toolbar under Edit or Window. 

Twhirl gives me the option of viewing various drop-downs, my timeline, list of people I’m following, twitter search via Tweetscan, followers, and several others (see picture.) And I can also choose whether certain clicks will keep me in Twhirl or take me to the Twitter web site. 

I asked this question on Twitter and another response that I hadn’t thought of (since I don’t use it) in support of IM is tracking.  For many people this may be THE reason to use IM, since your tweets and your tracks will be in the same flow. (Note for tips on using IM with Twitter, see Sol Young’s posts on this.)

Twhirl gets 5 points here, Twitterrific 2, IM gets 1 for the tracking.

Tweeting

Twhirl gets the win here with a box big enough to see your whole tweet, has twitpic, and a built-in URL shortener.  And I just discovered during this post that the filter box is a nifty little search box.  No contest on this one for me.  I cannot use Twitterrific for updating because I can’t see my entire post.  And while CMD-D on my Mac is easy enough to remember, the rest of the keyboard shortcuts in Twitterrific are negated because I can’t remember them (see Whitney’s post on keyboard shortcuts.) 

Twhirl gets 3 points here, Twitterrific gets 1 for showing how many characters are left, IM gets zip.

In the end Twhirl wins with 8 points, Twitterrific comes in 2nd with 4 points, and IM comes in third with 3 points.

My bet is some people leave Twitter IM up for instant tweets and have another app open, or even the twitter website open, for posting.  Sometimes I will open Twitterrific and minimize just to have the tweets come in via growl, and then turn off window notification in Twhirl.

I look forward to seeing what Twhirl does with Seesmic, and am interested to see if any desktop twitter app combines the instant updates of xmpp (like IM) with the features found in the desktop app that leverage the API.

I’d love for you to comment on what you use and why you use it.

Posted in User Experience