6 ms·

The Very Last Thing I’ll Write About Twitter

213 points by andrewcaito 16y ago

riffic 16y ago
Twitter.com is not a protocol, it is a service. I think it is also important to note that it isn't a public utility either. right now it is dangerous to place all your eggs in a single basket. When you only have one service provider you lose control of things such as dependability, namespace, access, etc. These are things that most may be willing to let someone else provide for them, but some may want to control these and other aspects of microblogging. A federated design with multiple independent service providers would go a long way to help fix these shortcomings.
aresant 16y ago
Nail on head for me: ". . . Twitter Platform primarily serves Twitter’s interests, in stark contrast to the era of API growth . . ." and his rueful close in "I believe that Twitter as a medium is and should be distinct from Twitter as a business." Twitter got to where they are based on open standards, dev empowerment, etc. Thanks to their money in the bank and lack of need for a biz model they had ample time to own it, be the standard, become the medium - what is a Twitter exactly if not a Twitter? Going to be very interesting to see where this next step takes them.
mortenjorck 16y ago
It's an interesting question, one that Twitter is at the center of now but one that's not limited to Twitter: Where do we draw the line between a technology company and the culture its technology has spawned?
woodzowl307 16y ago
very nice
pope52 16y ago
His comments on the difference between Twitter and Facebook are particularly interesting: "Previously, developers took data out of Twitter and into the context of their own applications and services. The new design flips this on its head, bringing rich embedded content into the site from a host of brand-name web properties. (It’s worth noting that Facebook has done much the opposite: they started out with a very centralized build-it-within-our-walls model, then gradually grew their tendrils out into the web with Facebook Connect.)" I'm curious how this relates to his later observation that "walled gardens" are doomed to fail. In both instances, the walls are being chipped away, but in the former, the content is being brought in, while in the latter, content is being let out.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
larrywright 16y ago
This is a nice piece, and makes some very good points. Completely unrelated: I enjoy reading Alex's writing in the same way I enjoy reading John Gruber and Paul Graham. He's eloquent, thoughtful, and passionate.
riffic 16y ago
>Twitter needs to decentralize or it will die. told ya so
alanh 16y ago
Well worth reading the whole thing. It’s not too long, and he’s already Readability’d it for us, if you will. But if you don’t have time: • #NewTwitter will make Twitter more mainstream, and will provide advertisement opportunities. • #NewTwitter is a shift away from being a platform towards being a destination (or “place of consumption,” if you will), and as such further complicates relationships with third-party developers. • Twitter should become decentralized, but it’s clearly in Twitter’s best interested not to. • Alex circulated a document internally advocating decentralization, and executives disagreed (understandably).
- zem 16y ago
  and here's a readable article about newtwitter for anyone else who doesn't have the patience to watch the video: http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/14/new-twitter-tips/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/14/new-twitter-tips/
  - eavc 16y ago
    I watched the video and was still in the dark.
mkramlich 16y ago
pretty classy post by a pretty key ex-employee. i wish all were like this.
merijnv 16y ago
Disclaimer: I never "got" really Twitter. The service still strikes me as mostly useless. Now this could just be me but he says: "Twitter needs to decentralize [...] my belief that all communications media will inevitably be decentralized, and that all businesses who build walled gardens will eventually see them torn down." So I heard we had this decentralized way of sharing which they call "the web" which is completely decentralized and without walled gardens. And we had these technologies called RSS and ATOM for receiving updates on those. So...he's effectively suggesting we go back to the web and RSS but with everyone writing shorter messages?
- catch404 16y ago
  I'd been thinking the exact same thing on the drive home today, expanding on an earlier thought I had that twitter is RSS done right. http://twitter.com/catch404/status/24605947455 http://twitter.com/catch404/status/24605947455 I think they did this by providing a consistent format (both data format and by enforcing limits), a central view and a usable api. RSS/ATOM just didn't get this right. Twitter forces people to get their message across in a small amount of characters. RSS/ATOM again is inconsistent in mainly due to it trying to be a portable medium (reading full stories in a reader). I guess the twitter model is more natural? Perhaps there is a place for adopting a twitter based format for future rss feeds and making viewers around this. I personally like the idea of sites having a dedicated twitter account to post updates to, I don't use rss feeds but like getting information via twitter.
  - merijnv 16y ago
    I don't think Twitter can ever really replace RSS/ATOM. I have a handful of sites I follow (as in really read every update) and Opera having integrated RSS I get a nice reminder popup whenever there's an update. For me Twitter wouldn't work for this as the amount of incoming messages on Twitter is usually to large and it would be distracting. To be honest I don't really see any problems in the RSS system. I don't really see why enforcing a data format or enforcing limits makes it more usable? I kinda like getting comics delivered straight to my browser's RSS feeds and being able to read blog posts directly in there as well. Now Twitter would make for an exceptional social RSS where I could find one-of articles related to my interests. Which I guess seems kinda similar to FriendFeed (which I've never used since no one I find interesting is on there) or Hacker News (but without the discussion and a slightly different topic selection). The main problem I have is that people keep insisting on posting completely uninteresting tweets (such as what they're doing) or using it as a conversation tool. This kind of noise tends to drown its use as a social RSS feed for me.
dotcoma 16y ago
or, in other words: they'll keep on copying stuff other companies, like Tweetmeme, have done with their data so far.
heinel 16y ago
Is it just me but isn't it a bit too early to say Twitter is trying to wall itself in? Are they taking down the APIs? From what I can see here they just want Twitter.com to be a viable (and profitable) business. Why wouldn't anyone want that? In fact, I think it's about time Twitter finally stepped up to define just what kind of a service Twitter really is about. If anything it would be a nice stepping stone to introduce to people who don't yet get it's structure to try it out. Yes, there are third-party developers who have created their own platforms and in a sense helped define the medium. There are many such choices, but really many of the functions they provide overlap. Do we really need that many different Twitter clients with minute differences? If Twitter were to provide the basic functions itself, then I'd say that this is a good time for third-party developers to think up new ways to diversify themselves. Wasn't there just not so long ago someone posted a HTML5 tower defense game up here that has a Twitter scoreboard? Why not expand on that?
ayb 16y ago
Ultimately Twitter is a business that needs to generate ROI for its investors. The open API gave them plenty of ideas for functionality and "holes" in their system, and Twitter has made it clear that they need to fill those holes. The multiple points of entry also showed them that they needed a seamless user experience, which is why they launched their own native Blackberry app and acquired Tweetie, launched an iPad app and now relaunched their web interface. Many of the twitter.com upgrades were built by someone else on some other site first, but it is in Twitter's own interest to use those ideas to get more traffic to twitter.com and ultimately use the traffic to generate revenue. It is sad to think that Twitter fostered its ecosystem only to strong arm it and chop it down when it was ready to figure out its monetization strategy. But those are the perils of building a business off of someone else's platform. As a Twitter application developer myself I knew this was a risk, but I have become painfully aware of it over the past few months. I think their current trajectory will eventually kill off a good part of the ecosystem that helped them get to this point.
joey_bananas 16y ago
Maybe this #newtwitter is just not going down several times a day. That'd sure be revolutionary.
bhjodokast 16y ago
As the developer of one of the first microblogs (2005), I have always understood Twitter and its purpose. I prefer it over traditional blogging, since I have little to say publicly. One-liners suit me. I don't see #newtwitter as an issue because they are just plumping up their website. This shouldn't affect the API at all for third-party twitter clients, except to offer them more capabilities. They should embrace both forks: #newtwitter website and the API. I think they are doing that.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
pointillistic 16y ago
Can Twitter or Facebook become a Medium? In response to Alex Payne: http://benatlas.com/2010/09/can-twitter-or-facebook-become-a-medium/ http://benatlas.com/2010/09/can-twitter-or-facebook-become-a...

213 points by andrewcaito 16y ago

Twitter.com is not a protocol, it is a service. I think it is also important to note that it isn't a public utility either. right now it is dangerous to place all your eggs in a single basket. When you only have one service provider you lose control of things such as dependability, namespace, access, etc. These are things that most may be willing to let someone else provide for them, but some may want to control these and other aspects of microblogging. A federated design with multiple independent service providers would go a long way to help fix these shortcomings.

aresant 16y ago

Nail on head for me: ". . . Twitter Platform primarily serves Twitter’s interests, in stark contrast to the era of API growth . . ." and his rueful close in "I believe that Twitter as a medium is and should be distinct from Twitter as a business." Twitter got to where they are based on open standards, dev empowerment, etc. Thanks to their money in the bank and lack of need for a biz model they had ample time to own it, be the standard, become the medium - what is a Twitter exactly if not a Twitter? Going to be very interesting to see where this next step takes them.

mortenjorck 16y ago

It's an interesting question, one that Twitter is at the center of now but one that's not limited to Twitter: Where do we draw the line between a technology company and the culture its technology has spawned?

woodzowl307 16y ago

very nice

pope52 16y ago

His comments on the difference between Twitter and Facebook are particularly interesting: "Previously, developers took data out of Twitter and into the context of their own applications and services. The new design flips this on its head, bringing rich embedded content into the site from a host of brand-name web properties. (It’s worth noting that Facebook has done much the opposite: they started out with a very centralized build-it-within-our-walls model, then gradually grew their tendrils out into the web with Facebook Connect.)" I'm curious how this relates to his later observation that "walled gardens" are doomed to fail. In both instances, the walls are being chipped away, but in the former, the content is being brought in, while in the latter, content is being let out.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

larrywright 16y ago

This is a nice piece, and makes some very good points. Completely unrelated: I enjoy reading Alex's writing in the same way I enjoy reading John Gruber and Paul Graham. He's eloquent, thoughtful, and passionate.

riffic 16y ago

>Twitter needs to decentralize or it will die. told ya so

alanh 16y ago

Well worth reading the whole thing. It’s not too long, and he’s already Readability’d it for us, if you will. But if you don’t have time: • #NewTwitter will make Twitter more mainstream, and will provide advertisement opportunities. • #NewTwitter is a shift away from being a platform towards being a destination (or “place of consumption,” if you will), and as such further complicates relationships with third-party developers. • Twitter should become decentralized, but it’s clearly in Twitter’s best interested not to. • Alex circulated a document internally advocating decentralization, and executives disagreed (understandably).

zem 16y ago
and here's a readable article about newtwitter for anyone else who doesn't have the patience to watch the video: http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/14/new-twitter-tips/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/14/new-twitter-tips/
- eavc 16y ago
  I watched the video and was still in the dark.

mkramlich 16y ago

pretty classy post by a pretty key ex-employee. i wish all were like this.

merijnv 16y ago

Disclaimer: I never "got" really Twitter. The service still strikes me as mostly useless. Now this could just be me but he says: "Twitter needs to decentralize [...] my belief that all communications media will inevitably be decentralized, and that all businesses who build walled gardens will eventually see them torn down." So I heard we had this decentralized way of sharing which they call "the web" which is completely decentralized and without walled gardens. And we had these technologies called RSS and ATOM for receiving updates on those. So...he's effectively suggesting we go back to the web and RSS but with everyone writing shorter messages?

catch404 16y ago
I'd been thinking the exact same thing on the drive home today, expanding on an earlier thought I had that twitter is RSS done right. http://twitter.com/catch404/status/24605947455 http://twitter.com/catch404/status/24605947455 I think they did this by providing a consistent format (both data format and by enforcing limits), a central view and a usable api. RSS/ATOM just didn't get this right. Twitter forces people to get their message across in a small amount of characters. RSS/ATOM again is inconsistent in mainly due to it trying to be a portable medium (reading full stories in a reader). I guess the twitter model is more natural? Perhaps there is a place for adopting a twitter based format for future rss feeds and making viewers around this. I personally like the idea of sites having a dedicated twitter account to post updates to, I don't use rss feeds but like getting information via twitter.
- merijnv 16y ago
  I don't think Twitter can ever really replace RSS/ATOM. I have a handful of sites I follow (as in really read every update) and Opera having integrated RSS I get a nice reminder popup whenever there's an update. For me Twitter wouldn't work for this as the amount of incoming messages on Twitter is usually to large and it would be distracting. To be honest I don't really see any problems in the RSS system. I don't really see why enforcing a data format or enforcing limits makes it more usable? I kinda like getting comics delivered straight to my browser's RSS feeds and being able to read blog posts directly in there as well. Now Twitter would make for an exceptional social RSS where I could find one-of articles related to my interests. Which I guess seems kinda similar to FriendFeed (which I've never used since no one I find interesting is on there) or Hacker News (but without the discussion and a slightly different topic selection). The main problem I have is that people keep insisting on posting completely uninteresting tweets (such as what they're doing) or using it as a conversation tool. This kind of noise tends to drown its use as a social RSS feed for me.

dotcoma 16y ago

or, in other words: they'll keep on copying stuff other companies, like Tweetmeme, have done with their data so far.

heinel 16y ago

Is it just me but isn't it a bit too early to say Twitter is trying to wall itself in? Are they taking down the APIs? From what I can see here they just want Twitter.com to be a viable (and profitable) business. Why wouldn't anyone want that? In fact, I think it's about time Twitter finally stepped up to define just what kind of a service Twitter really is about. If anything it would be a nice stepping stone to introduce to people who don't yet get it's structure to try it out. Yes, there are third-party developers who have created their own platforms and in a sense helped define the medium. There are many such choices, but really many of the functions they provide overlap. Do we really need that many different Twitter clients with minute differences? If Twitter were to provide the basic functions itself, then I'd say that this is a good time for third-party developers to think up new ways to diversify themselves. Wasn't there just not so long ago someone posted a HTML5 tower defense game up here that has a Twitter scoreboard? Why not expand on that?

ayb 16y ago

Ultimately Twitter is a business that needs to generate ROI for its investors. The open API gave them plenty of ideas for functionality and "holes" in their system, and Twitter has made it clear that they need to fill those holes. The multiple points of entry also showed them that they needed a seamless user experience, which is why they launched their own native Blackberry app and acquired Tweetie, launched an iPad app and now relaunched their web interface. Many of the twitter.com upgrades were built by someone else on some other site first, but it is in Twitter's own interest to use those ideas to get more traffic to twitter.com and ultimately use the traffic to generate revenue. It is sad to think that Twitter fostered its ecosystem only to strong arm it and chop it down when it was ready to figure out its monetization strategy. But those are the perils of building a business off of someone else's platform. As a Twitter application developer myself I knew this was a risk, but I have become painfully aware of it over the past few months. I think their current trajectory will eventually kill off a good part of the ecosystem that helped them get to this point.

joey_bananas 16y ago

Maybe this #newtwitter is just not going down several times a day. That'd sure be revolutionary.

bhjodokast 16y ago

As the developer of one of the first microblogs (2005), I have always understood Twitter and its purpose. I prefer it over traditional blogging, since I have little to say publicly. One-liners suit me. I don't see #newtwitter as an issue because they are just plumping up their website. This shouldn't affect the API at all for third-party twitter clients, except to offer them more capabilities. They should embrace both forks: #newtwitter website and the API. I think they are doing that.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

pointillistic 16y ago

Can Twitter or Facebook become a Medium? In response to Alex Payne: http://benatlas.com/2010/09/can-twitter-or-facebook-become-a-medium/ http://benatlas.com/2010/09/can-twitter-or-facebook-become-a...