It is much more like Twitter in that it defaults to a public broadcast format and is asymmetric in the network construction versus the “friending” approach that we see on Facebook. As a result Google+ is much more about discovery, content consumption and broadcasting than Facebook. Users are much more likely to follow people they have never met here but with whom they share an affinity for the same topics just like they do on Twitter.

The “Google juice” effect that is so important to marketers will increasingly attract larger and larger audiences for user content. That’s what built Twitter and I believe that will continue to help G+ grow.

There is also the simple scale an ubiquity of of Google. Android, YouTube, Google, GMail and soon Google TV are all integrated with Google+. The critique that “my friends aren’t here yet” is akin to what we saw with Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn in their first year or two of existence. G+ is still in diapers.

The people you may know algorithm is based on your network just like other networks. Pete Cashmore and I, for example, are friends so just like on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn the algorithm is suggesting him based on our relationship. It also looks at interest graph in a way to suggest people who share stuff that you find interesting.

In the end, if people are looking for Google+ to be just like Facebook only made by Google they are missing the point. Here is a different take on the social web. Use it in a way that it brings value to you and see what happens.