9 ms·

Twitter to developers: no new Twitter clients

451 points by samstokes 16y ago

olivercameron 16y ago
Wow, this is written in a really weird tone, especially considering it's coming from an official Twitter representative. It doesn't feel clear at all what they want developers to do. Either way, it feels very hostile.
- jdp23 16y ago
  Yeah really. It's hard to see this working out well for Twitter.
- edw 16y ago
  It seems like Ryan Sarver, along with the senior and/or PR people who most likely collaborated with him, is trying to channel the tone of Steve Jobs’s “we don't need any more fart apps” speech. If nothing else, I think it’s advice developers should seriously consider heeding if they want to create value (and generate revenue) using the Twitter ecosystem. Regarding whether the tone is “hostile” or the message represents “a kick in the teeth,” I think people need to keep some perspective: A hundred and how many million tweets a day?! That's a lot! If I were responsible for the big picture at Twitter, supporting your junior high science fair project Twitter client would not be at the top of my to-do list.
  - RickHull 16y ago
    > supporting your junior high science fair project Twitter client What are the support costs? I would think you publish the API and it's up to the client to manage it from there.
    - bergie 16y ago
      Which reminds me, a Twitter client is almost a standard programming tutorial example now. What will replace those?
  - pyre 16y ago
    It's hostile because it's purposefully ambiguous. They would catch a lot of bad PR for coming out and stating that they are terminating all unofficial Twitter clients, so they are trying to dance around the bush. There is now a lot of grey area with respect to what is kosher and what is not.
    - icarus_drowning 16y ago
      Ironically, it is the ambiguity that is causing so many problems in the first place. It is ambiguity over where they plan to extract revenue that is causing 3rd party devs to choose Twitter-based business models that later threaten Twitter's new revenue model. It is ambiguity in their rules/TOS that is getting 3rd party devs banned (see: Twitdroyd). Etc. At this point, Twitter needs to realize that the ambiguity isn't helping their PR, its the reason they have a PR problem in the first place. EDIT: Minor grammatical correction.
- travisjeffery 16y ago
  No, it's perfectly clear what they want developers to do: Fuck off.
MatthewPhillips 16y ago
Yep. Last paragraph says it all: Use the API for something besides clients.
rmason 16y ago
On the contrary this helps quite a bit. There was a cloud hanging over anyone doing anything with Twitter whether they would find their product in competition with the Mother ship itself. It also explains apps suddenly losing access to the API and then regaining it. Twitter was asserting its control over standards. I think if you aren't building a client, following the rules and adding value you don't have anything to worry about. To me that is great news.
olivercameron 16y ago
"More specifically, developers ask us if they should build client apps that mimic or reproduce the mainstream Twitter consumer client experience. The answer is no.". How can a company who's user base has grown to such an amount because of third party clients say something like this? Talk about showing a little appreciation. As someone who develops a Twitter client, it is a huge kick in the teeth.
- joelhaasnoot 16y ago
  Not only is it a kick in the teeth to developers, but the reason Twitter has traction, spread and growth is because of the diversity of tools around Twitter. The user experience is not all in their hands, and isn't it ironic that this comes a week after the "dickbar" incident? Twitter hasn't really proven they can keep the user experience the way it should be. There was a post last week here on HN about how Tweetie used to never crash and the lastest release was awful... Get your act together Twitter or don't be the elephant in the room, or act that way.
  - b0sk 16y ago
    The conspiracy theorist in me thinks that Dickbar and the backlash it received contributed to this. For instance, the iOS official app is the best Twitter client so far despite shoving promoted trends down our throats. One could come up with a better client with no dickbar and everyone would be flocking there. By discouraging new clients, they are discouraging our ability to turn off dickbar.
    - sequoia 16y ago
      >shoving promoted trends down our throats. And are they also "shoving" an extremely popular, free service with ongoing development "down your throat?" I am a fan of free software etc. (even set up a diaspora account... lol), but I don't understand how people expect businesses such as twitter to run forever without a viable revenue stream. Of course, they shouldn't kill the goose that laid the golden egg, but after a while you have to wonder if these eggs aren't just tin someone took a can of spray paint to! What "gold"? Tons of users are nice insofar as they lead to money. Users are not an end in themselves. Sorry for the rant but please, people, stop acting like twitter owes you something. (My comments are vis-a-vis users, I do think what they are doing to developers is not right, from a courtesy point of view.)
boredguy8 16y ago
As an end user (and by no means a power user) of Twitter, I have to say that I don't want a consistent user experience. I want the best user experience for how I use Twitter. Right now that means TweetDeck, but if something better came along, I'd jump to it. It lets me do things I can't do in Twitter's tools (or that I don't easily see how to do). So from an 'outsider' on this topic: boo!
ekanes 16y ago
Surprising: "According to our data, 90% of active Twitter users use official Twitter apps on a monthly basis."
- frankdenbow 16y ago
  They put out some statistics on this last year: http://blog.twitter.com/2010/09/evolving-ecosystem.html http://blog.twitter.com/2010/09/evolving-ecosystem.html
- jellicle 16y ago
  You can read that as, 90% of active twitter users visit the twitter.com website at least once per month.
- ashbrahma 16y ago
  Not sure how this matches up to the 90% number: http://twittersource.info/lastweek http://twittersource.info/lastweek This is based on tweets composed.
danilocampos 16y ago
It's the old casino analogy: When you're betting on a platform you don't own, the house always wins. I don't know much about Twitter politics, but we've got: - Developer hostility this week - User hostility last week, with the dickbar So maybe this is just how it goes now that Costolo is in charge. "Fuck the loyalists, we're here to make some money. Getting sick of these third party tools charging coin for our damn API while we get nothing." If so, the question becomes: who creates more value on Twitter? Is it the old guard, who use it as a communications and community medium? Or is it the mainstream, following celebrities and talking about sandwiches they're eating, eyeballs to be sold to the highest bidder? (edit: My hunch is that, too late, the Pareto principle will be discovered hard at work: 20% or less of Twitter users actually generate 80% of the value. I just can't see it as a bland, empty consumption tool. There's surely peril in optimizing toward that.) It sounds to me like Twitter wants to round up its user-cattle and drive them on down to monetization gulch. Anyone who gets in the way of this is going to be flattened.
- jdp23 16y ago
  Well said. Twitter's got a lot of goodwill but seems intent on running it down.
- dandelany 16y ago
  >It sounds to me like Twitter wants to round up its user-cattle and drive them on down to monetization gulch. Uh, yeah. Is that really surprising? We're all being driven to Monetization Gulch to escape the absolutely fatal Winter of Unprofitability.
  - danilocampos 16y ago
    > Uh, yeah. Is that really surprising? Your sarcastic grunting aside, it's utterly shocking. Imagine Google, circa 2001, with crass, interstitial banner ads between search and SERP. It would have destroyed them. The opportunity for heaps and heaps of money, gone in a single, vulgar puff of smoke. Twitter has the opportunity to leverage a critical mass of enthusiastic users. This is a rare, golden gift. Last time this happened, Facebook minted some billionaires while discovering a sustainable, user-virtuous business model. There were growing pains, especially with the early, spammy apps, but overall, Facebook has managed to balance the needs of a lot of people without screwing up the magic of their product. The time before that, Google did the same thing. Sadly, rather than pushing toward a business model that makes the most of the very impressive ecosystem they've cultivated, it looks as though they want to break down the most interesting portions of it and then find money in whatever turns out on the other side. The lasting virtue of Twitter, to me, always seemed to be that it would always be whatever any given user needed it to be, thanks to the wealth of apps that dip into its API. If that goes away, Twitter's shelf life is curtailed. To me, it seems nutty, and not terribly imaginative. Ask Digg: pissing off your core constituency so you can hopefully make money is not the same as actually making money.
ffumarola 16y ago
On one hand, I agree in terms of providing a consistent user experience. On the other hand, I disagree and think people should be able to build whatever experience they want.
noinput 16y ago
This just got some more coverage TechCrunch: http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/11/twitter-ecosystem-guidelines/ http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/11/twitter-ecosystem-guideline... TheNextWeb: http://thenextweb.com/twitter/2011/03/11/twitter-tells-developers-to-stop-developing-new-twitter-clients/ http://thenextweb.com/twitter/2011/03/11/twitter-tells-devel...
borism 16y ago
consistency and ecosystem opportunities couldn't he just write "you're fucked, we're the boss" without all this corporate BS speech?
guptaneil 16y ago
It definitely sounds hostile, but I can see where they're coming from. They want to encourage more creative uses of their API, rather than just flooding the market with hundreds of mostly subpar client apps. They've basically reached critical mass as far as third party clients go. Any additional clients are not going to increase their user base anymore. What they really need is more use cases for the Twitter stream. I don't particularly agree with this strategy of leaving a lot of developers feeling like they just got slapped across the face, but it will be interesting to see where the API goes now.
taylorbuley 16y ago
A Consistent User Experience. I believe I've heard that somewhere before... http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/AppleHIGuidelines/XHIGIntro/XHIGIntro.html http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/UserEx...
zaidf 16y ago
When companies started releasing awesome APIs for free, we kinda wondered "what's the catch?". Years later, we're finding out. The hype surrounding free APIs without formal agreements is the biggest farce in the Valley. We are now in that phase of the cycle where this will become more and more apparent as these companies with awesome APIs get serious about making money(and the free API impeding their revenue plans). Free APIs--especially the powerful ones--should be seen as "cute things" with little purpose beyond experimental side projects. If you ACTUALLY want to build a company off someone's API, get a formal agreement with that company especially if that company insists you don't need one. So much has changed since the 90s when access to APIs meant paying huge $. And yet, so little has really changed.
- ultrasaurus 16y ago
  I think that's the bubbliest part of the startup bubble, a lot of cool startups could be crushed overnight if the big player who they orbit changes the free API they sprung up to use.
- technomancy 16y ago
  > When companies started releasing awesome APIs for free, we kinda wondered "what's the catch?". Years later, we're finding out. H.264, anyone?
  - po 16y ago
    H.264 was never without licensing fees and I don't think it can be considered a bait-and-switch. The catch is right there in the licensing terms.
    - chc 16y ago
      It's currently offered "for free" to many people. That's one of the big arguments people always make in the H.264 vs. Google debate — H.264 is just as free for most users, and surely the MPEG-LA would never turn around and change that.
    - _delirium 16y ago
voxmatt 16y ago
That is the deafening thud of the other shoe dropping
fingerprinter 16y ago
I think what we are seeing is quite a bit of chasm crossing from the platforms. When that happens, the early technical users (who they don't make much money from, btw) get pushed out or at least _feel_ pushed out. Yes, we helped build the ecosystem and make it a viable company...but if you read "Crossing the Chasm", it is almost a blueprint for what these platforms are going through and doing...they rely on early technical folks to build a base...but eventually need to reject those early users or marginalize them for sake of profit...very interesting read.
- dasil003 16y ago
  Yeah, as much as this post makes me not want to touch Twitter with a 10-foot pole, I have to admit that they're not going to go any further as a company by catering specifically to developers concerns. I am, however, counting the days until Evan's departure.
kmfrk 16y ago
Man, TapBots just can't catch a break. First they are about to announce TweetBot[1], when Twitter for iPhone (a free, first-party alternative to competitors) is announced, and they recently announced the coming of a re-imagined TweetBot[2]. On another note, I don't understand why Twitter are so callous to throw away their community goodwill on a whim. They already have a lot - just look how they took a stand when the data for one of their users was requested by the U.S. government. And then they do something like this. (After [this](http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2313152 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2313152).) And the dickbar! [1]: http://tapbots.com/blog/business/say-hello-to-tweetbot http://tapbots.com/blog/business/say-hello-to-tweetbot [2]: http://tapbots.com/blog/tweetbot/tweetbot-is-coming http://tapbots.com/blog/tweetbot/tweetbot-is-coming
mikeryan 16y ago
I have to believe that this means that Twitter is looking at turning on the revenues and likely with in stream "sponsored tweets" or some other similar type of nonsense and they don't want third parties stripping out these ads. Its always been strange that they'd let 3rd parties be a primary interaction model since its very hard to monetize other peoples clients.
- VladRussian 16y ago
  >since its very hard to monetize other peoples clients Google API key seems to be at least one way to do it.
ajg1977 16y ago
"Thanks for all your help getting us where we are. Now, get out and shut the door behind you".
jellicle 16y ago
Twitter doesn't want you to build a twitter client that automatically filters out ads in the twitstream, or doesn't have ads on the sidebar like the official client, or in some other way is superior to the official client. That is, Twitter is planning to monetize by making their product worse, and they don't want anyone offering a service on the level of what Twitter used to offer.
- icarus_drowning 16y ago
  What is particularly galling is that Twitter has been saying for years that they want to monetize without slapping ads over everything. Now they're monetizing by... slapping ads over everything. And ensuring that no one can threaten the business model they supposedly didn't want to use. All of this would have been better had Twitter just started off by slapping ads on their service and making it clear how they were going to protect it. Instead, they've grown their userbase (at least among the technorati) by asserting that they weren't going to pursue the exact model they seem so ardently chasing now. Sure, 3rd party app devs might be "suckers" for having latched on early, but I don't think that excuses Twitter for such a (to use a Gruberism) dick move.
  - whatevermatt 16y ago
    I was about to upvote you until you used the word Gruberism to describe a phrase that is probably older than he is.
    - RyanMcGreal 16y ago
      Gruber refined the meaning so that it applies to such a move by anyone other than Steve Jobs.
    - icarus_drowning 16y ago
      Of course its older than he is. I was referring to his apparent affinity for inserting "dick" in front of everything. Pedantically nitpick much? ;)
  - 16y ago
phil 16y ago
This has got to be at least partially about UberMedia. Still makes me glad I don't depend on Twitter's platform at all.
JCB_K 16y ago
I don't understand why people are so upset about this. It's simple: Twitter Inc. doesn't like apps which are the same as Twitter, or worse. (I don't mean to say that Twitter is bad already: just that Twitter Inc. doesn't like 1. apps recreating Twitter and 2. apps which give a low-quality UI.) In other words: they urge devs to develop a client with added value. Wether that's apps for "Company Tweeting" or Real-Time Data, it's adding something to the core experience of Twitter. Most importantly, I think Twitter Inc. still likes "normal" Twitter apps, as long as they have added value: a superior UI. So get devving, and make the new and better Tweetie!
- brown9-2 16y ago
  It's simple: Twitter Inc. doesn't like apps which are the same as Twitter, or worse. From this announcement, it sounds like they also don't like clients which have different UIs than Twitter now.
- mentat 16y ago
  Let the market decide. If developers are making clients that are worse than the standard, people won't use them. What is Twitter's product here?
  - JCB_K 16y ago
    If the market was completely transparent, that would be the case, but that's not how it is. For example Yfrog: it looks absolutely terrible, but still it's very popular. If I made Twitter I wouldn't be happy about that. A new normal Twitter-user (some who doesn't read HN, basically) might think something like this: "Oh, so this is where you post images on twitter? Doesn't look great. How do I login? Ah nevermind, I'll go back to Facebook." At the same time, TwitPic adds something to Twitter, in such a way that it fits in with it. Bottom-line: users will connect 3rd-party apps and experiences to the API provider, so Twitter is right in making clear that they don't want crappy apps.
- Timothee 16y ago
  I'm not quite sure about that. Check this part: "More specifically, developers ask us if they should build client apps that mimic or reproduce the mainstream Twitter consumer client experience. The answer is no. If you are an existing developer of client apps, you can continue to serve your user base, but we will be holding you to high standards to ensure you do not violate users’ privacy, that you provide consistency in the user experience, and that you rigorously adhere to all areas of our Terms of Service" This sounds to me like they don't really want "normal" Twitter apps anymore, but have just grand-fathered in the existing ones, while opening the door to closing them down if they don't follow the guidelines.
radley 16y ago
I read it this way: There's now 75k registered Twitter apps. You're not going to be successful making a generic client. Think bigger: there's plenty of room for success in other Twitter verticals. (and boooo for the fake FUD headline)
- bradly 16y ago
  Not all twitter apps are clients. I would guess that most are not clients.
  - mkramlich 16y ago
    Agreed. I've got a few little Python and shell scripts laying around that have talked to their API at one point. By a loose standard, each is a client. Perhaps there are 74,800 little shell scripts or integration adapters out there, but not what an ordinary person would call a client app. That I'd believe.
- barrkel 16y ago
  And yet Twitter interaction needs to be the "same way everywhere", "consistent", "same experience", rigorous adherence, etc. Seems anti-innovation to me. I think it's rather that they want to own the client space, and are setting a "high bar" - i.e. a way of removing the competition by fiat. But if you supply content that they can make money off of, by all means, continue to sharecrop.
whatevermatt 16y ago
From the announcement: - Display of tweets in 3rd-party services. We need to ensure that tweets, and tweet actions, are rendered in a consistent way so that people have the same experience with tweets no matter where they are. For example, some developers display “comment”, “like”, or other terms with tweets instead of “follow, favorite, retweet, reply” - thus changing the core functions of a tweet. While I don't like the idea of 3rd-party services treating Twitter as a white-label medium, it's hard to believe this is coming from the same service that is famous for letting its users establish convention, and then supporting that convention. (@, #, etc) (Edit: s/email/announcement/)
jazzychad 16y ago
Ugh, that tears it. I'm not doing any more Twitter development unless Twitter acquires me. Not hires me, acquires me. I love Twitter and have several friends that work there, but I am losing all confidence in developing on the platform when I am not a big-name company with an official partnership. Signed, A 3rd party twitter dev since 2007
- calloc 16y ago
  Just a heads up, the website in your profile, tweethook has an expired SSL certificate.
  - jazzychad 16y ago
    yeah... Since the service is now in violation of Twitter API TOS (tweet data resyndication, now only samctioned through Gnip), I've decided to shut it down shortly... no need to renew cert I'm afraid.
    - evanjacobs 16y ago
      As a tweethook customer, I'm sad to hear it.
      - jazzychad 16y ago
        As the creator I'm sad to say it :( however I will give plenty of notice before this happens. Still running for now.
arpit 16y ago
Does anyone think this could rejuvenate something like Status.net (http://status.net/ http://status.net/) or any other open system for status updates? (I always hopeful about that)
mkramlich 16y ago
Funny timing considering how there's been a noticeable degradation in the Twitter app quality since Atebits got Borg-ified by them. Their plan thus far seems to be: 1. identify best client out there 2. buy it 3. ruin it 4. outlaw all other (well, new) clients 5. ... 6. profit!
snissn 16y ago
Anybody who in the first place developed and designed a product around a third-party's ecosystem and API has what they have coming
- VladRussian 16y ago
  in principle, you're right. In practice, i must bring MS as a positive (!) example. Not that they were saint or anywhere close to it, yet they didn't even come close to use legal sh!t like EULA/Terms of service to hit developers on their platform. MS provided their own competitive products and used [sometimes dirty] tricks to win.
VladRussian 16y ago
"in the name of user(experience)". Back in the Soviet Union a lot of things were happening "by request of the workers", for example an unpaid [and mandatory] additional day of work on Saturday sometimes.
- bl4k 16y ago
  That, and I don't know why they can't just be straight out and say what they mean, instead of wrapping every quasi-statement in 'developers ask us if they can..'
  - muuh-gnu 16y ago
    Being straight out when planning a unpopular move would do them more damage then lying. Pretending to do the exact opposite of what you plan to do has been a standard tactic in sports, politics, warfare or any kind of games for ages. * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_fake http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_fake
whatevermatt 16y ago
To expect enduring openness from a privately-owned medium or enduring stability from a single point of failure is naïve.
kpanghmc 16y ago
While I understand Twitter's motivation for doing this -- and no, I don't believe it's about consistency -- I think they could have expressed at least some token of appreciation for the devs who helped get them to where they are now.
dholowiski 16y ago
March 11, 2011 - Twitter was fatally injured by a gunshot wound to the foot. Initial reports are indicating this was not an accicdental shooting. Twitter will be mourned and missed by a wide variety of tech enthusiasts.
- waterlesscloud 16y ago
  Interesting that it caught fire during one sxsw and then poisoned itself during another one.
  - dholowiski 16y ago
    Yup, and there's a dozen hungry startups who are ready to eat their lunch.
code_duck 16y ago
Fred Wilson pretty much announced that the status quo was over for Twitter API developers in an article published last April, "The Twitter Platform's Inflection Point": http://avc.com/a_vc/2010/04/the-twitter-platform.html http://avc.com/a_vc/2010/04/the-twitter-platform.html Notable quote: "I think the time for filling the holes in the Twitter service has come and gone. It was a great period for Twitter and its third party developers."
maxer 16y ago
has google not bought twitter yet?
akmiller 16y ago
"As we point out above, we need to move to a less fragmented world, where every user can experience Twitter in a consistent way. This is already happening organically - the number and market share of consumer client apps that are not owned or operated by Twitter has been shrinking. According to our data, 90% of active Twitter users use official Twitter apps on a monthly basis." If this is true, then what's the point of this announcement. They make it sound like they are already getting what they want...people moving at a rapid pace towards the official Twitter applications. Yet in the same release they come off as scared that the fragmentation is growing. I don't get it.
trustfundbaby 16y ago
It was bound to happen ... and about time, hopefully it gives someone enough inspiration to come up with something to compete against twitter. I want to see someone give twitter a run for their money. They're sloppy.
famousactress 16y ago
According to our data, 90% of active Twitter users use official Twitter apps on a monthly basis. I notice the omission of the words only or even mostly. I'm curious about the raw percentage of tweets from official/non-official apps.. and the percentage of users who use official applications say, 90+ % of the time.
- minikomi 16y ago
  Good catch. How many people included in this 90% use, say, the official web client from the Apple store in a pinch or perhaps from work on the sly?
- zach 16y ago
  Presumably, twitter.com is by definition an "official Twitter app." So if you follow a web link to a tweet while logged in or authorize with oAuth, you've used an official Twitter app. Given that possibly expansive criterion, 90% is on the low end of what I'd expect.
fedd 16y ago
i guess that's what investors call 'feature' as opposing to a standalone product - turns out that many of these clients funded by them are features of twitter
Tichy 16y ago
That's a shame, because I am still in the market for a good Android client. Guess there won't be one, ever.
- nailer 16y ago
  Tweetdeck is pretty good.
  - Tichy 16y ago
    Thanks, will try.
otterley 16y ago
Can anyone point to language in the revised API Terms of Service (http://dev.twitter.com/pages/api_terms http://dev.twitter.com/pages/api_terms) that implies "no new Twitter clients"? I'm reading it, but I can't find the smoking gun.
- dustyreagan 16y ago
  I believe that was pulled from Ryan's email: "... developers ask us if they should build client apps that mimic or reproduce the mainstream Twitter consumer client experience. The answer is no." ... "If you are an existing developer of client apps, you can continue to serve your user base"
  - otterley 16y ago
    That's fine, but that's just the author's commentary. The blog piece is just an announcement about the new ToS, which is the defining policy. We need to look for the language in there, not his blog piece.
alanh 16y ago
As much as this sounds like the beginning of the end, I do have to agree with one gripe: > For example, some  developers display “comment”, “like”, or other terms with tweets instead of   “follow, favorite, retweet, reply” - thus changing the core functions of a  tweet. Very true. I have accidentally tweeted by “logging in with Twitter” and then “commenting” on comments. Despicable behavior, and it should be stopped. (Alert! Previous statement is narrow in scope!)
kouiskas 16y ago
Can't wait for Twitter to join Myspace in the slow death club. This move is certainly a step in that direction.
jfager 16y ago
I don't get it. If twitter already provides the top 5 twitter clients, and 90% of users interact with twitter through those clients, where's the fractured landscape and user confusion coming from? And if the organic trend is towards official twitter client adoption, why are they taking the risk of coming out and bitching at developers to stop making clients? Everyone already noticed the market for these sorts of apps drying up, and has started wondering how serious twitter actually is about keeping a robust 3rd-party platform for the long haul. This just adds fuel to that fire, for no gain whatsoever. I get what their goal is. They're positioning to make a serious push to get ads/promoted tweets/etc in users' faces, and they want everything in place to be able to shut down or prevent the 3rd party clients that pop up to filter all that out. Okay, fine. But why make the big announcement like this? Why explicitly freak out all of your developers while you're still on a trajectory of solving the problem organically? Why not wait until it's actually a problem, when you're actually seeing increased adoption of 3rd-party clients that ruin your plans? It's always interesting to watch a company work hard to solve a problem they perceive from their perspective that's completely at odds with the problem the rest of us see from ours. See also: record/movie companies and DRM, Rupert Murdoch and Google, MS and Internet Explorer, etc, etc, etc.
- ryanhuff 16y ago
  A Friday afternoon release of bad news is a typical PR move to blunt the blow.
  - jmathai 16y ago
    Too bad only nerds will care and nerds will be online over the weekend.
guilleiguaran 16y ago
I just remembered an article written by Alex Payne (al3x), former engineer at Twitter (and used to work in the API): http://al3x.net/2010/09/15/last-thing-about-twitter.html http://al3x.net/2010/09/15/last-thing-about-twitter.html
nhangen 16y ago
This is why Twitter is soon to be bankrupt. They don't understand how to stop insulting the people that actually provide the content and value. The value isn't the technology, but the people developing and using it.
erikpukinskis 16y ago
I think the biggest material difficulty this will present Twitter is in hiring engineering talent. I used to get the feel that they wanted to let the ecosystem develop naturally so it could realize it's full potential. That "build great stuff and we'll win" mentality. Now it feels like they've got a "strategy" that they're executing. Without that light touch it just doesn't seem as fun a place to work.
- bad_user 16y ago
  build great stuff and we'll win Does that strategy work at all? To me it seems companies like Google that did that are rather the exception that confirms the rule - building a great business model should be a top priority. You know what I consider a fun place to work? A company that doesn't have to borrow money to stay alive that also happens to work on cool projects. Even Mozilla is profitable; and even if their partnership with Google goes away in flames at some point, how fucked up is that?
  - erikpukinskis 16y ago
    Does that strategy work at all? Sometimes! Twitter has done pretty well with it so far. Depending on the specifics of your product you might fail. But my intuition is that making stuff people care about, and only monetizing where it's painless is a pretty airtight strategy, yes. A company that doesn't have to borrow money to stay alive that also happens to work on cool projects So you think the only two options are "sacrifice your community's goodwill" and "having enough money to stay alive"? I think there's a middle ground where you can leave some money on the table in order to stay focused on the stuff you care about, but still pay your bills.
elvirs 16y ago
Twitter became twitter thanks to its community that always created value and contributed most to its future path. The invention of hashtag and @ were also contributed by community. the power users that always contributed high quality content and conversations to twitter. The developers that contributed best applications for twitter ecosystem. but now that it has justin bieber and other celebrities along with millions of their followers twitter feels like it does not need that core contributing community anymore. To me it looks like start of demise for twitter.
jrockway 16y ago
Well, I'm done using Twitter. Their engineered experience sucks, but I do like third-party clients.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
mthreat 16y ago
So if no new twitter clients are allowed, but existing ones are "grandfathered" in, does this mean there will be a market of buying and selling these grandfathered twitter clients?
jeffpalmer 16y ago
This is an interesting turning point for Twitter and for API's of free services in general. Building apps based on an ecosystem that you have no control over has always seemed like a substantial risk to me, and this assumption is starting to take shape. Twitter's recent move is an example of what happens when a company is ready to monetize their content and wants to cut out the "middle man" so to speak. It's pretty clear that they don't want third parties encroaching on their ad revenue, and while sad, it was inevitable. I see this as a very disappointing move by Twitter for the fact that they are alienating the very developers that helped build their brand. This is a glaring warning sign for all applications that are based on an external platform. If nothing else, this should serve as a lesson to all developers that free API's should be utilized with discretion.
itsnotvalid 16y ago
There is no surprise with the aid of #dickbar. I am not going to use Twitter for any serious purpose anymore. This bottom line has violated by basic requirement of information freedom. Just seeing this issue I really think that there is still spaces for even more Twitter clients. Last months or so there is one called littlecosm.com which is a client+game type. It is like they simply don't want people to avoid looking at their public timeline without promoted tweets and dickbar. What a shame.
pyrmont 16y ago
Translation: Look, the VCs are expecting a payout at some point and the only way we've worked out for making money is through ads. Now that's not going to fly if people can just get some sort of 'ad free' client from you guys. Our hands are tied. PS. Thanks for helping us get this far!
nir 16y ago
This is becoming an increasingly common mistake for tech CEOs: adopt Steve Jobs' attitude without being Steve Jobs.
QuantumGood 16y ago
Twitter claims preventing user confusion as a motive yet the move from old to new Twitter on the web is the biggest source of confusion. I mean, come on. Teaching people an interface isn't rocket science. Do something simple, such as put out a video a week showcasing use of the new interface. Heck, have user contests to come up with videos showcasing the new interface. Or go all out and develop an awesome training and help system, and integrate it into the interface. If users have a problem, do something about it!
chegra 16y ago
USERS>>EMPLOYEE>PROFIT>DEVELOPER The precedence of things.
aDemoUzer 16y ago
But I don;t want consistent experience. I dislike the experience and want it done my own way!

451 points by samstokes 16y ago

Wow, this is written in a really weird tone, especially considering it's coming from an official Twitter representative. It doesn't feel clear at all what they want developers to do. Either way, it feels very hostile.

jdp23 16y ago
Yeah really. It's hard to see this working out well for Twitter.
edw 16y ago
It seems like Ryan Sarver, along with the senior and/or PR people who most likely collaborated with him, is trying to channel the tone of Steve Jobs’s “we don't need any more fart apps” speech. If nothing else, I think it’s advice developers should seriously consider heeding if they want to create value (and generate revenue) using the Twitter ecosystem. Regarding whether the tone is “hostile” or the message represents “a kick in the teeth,” I think people need to keep some perspective: A hundred and how many million tweets a day?! That's a lot! If I were responsible for the big picture at Twitter, supporting your junior high science fair project Twitter client would not be at the top of my to-do list.
- RickHull 16y ago
  > supporting your junior high science fair project Twitter client What are the support costs? I would think you publish the API and it's up to the client to manage it from there.
  - bergie 16y ago
    Which reminds me, a Twitter client is almost a standard programming tutorial example now. What will replace those?
- pyre 16y ago
  It's hostile because it's purposefully ambiguous. They would catch a lot of bad PR for coming out and stating that they are terminating all unofficial Twitter clients, so they are trying to dance around the bush. There is now a lot of grey area with respect to what is kosher and what is not.
  - icarus_drowning 16y ago
    Ironically, it is the ambiguity that is causing so many problems in the first place. It is ambiguity over where they plan to extract revenue that is causing 3rd party devs to choose Twitter-based business models that later threaten Twitter's new revenue model. It is ambiguity in their rules/TOS that is getting 3rd party devs banned (see: Twitdroyd). Etc. At this point, Twitter needs to realize that the ambiguity isn't helping their PR, its the reason they have a PR problem in the first place. EDIT: Minor grammatical correction.
travisjeffery 16y ago
No, it's perfectly clear what they want developers to do: Fuck off.

MatthewPhillips 16y ago

Yep. Last paragraph says it all: Use the API for something besides clients.

rmason 16y ago

On the contrary this helps quite a bit. There was a cloud hanging over anyone doing anything with Twitter whether they would find their product in competition with the Mother ship itself. It also explains apps suddenly losing access to the API and then regaining it. Twitter was asserting its control over standards. I think if you aren't building a client, following the rules and adding value you don't have anything to worry about. To me that is great news.

olivercameron 16y ago

"More specifically, developers ask us if they should build client apps that mimic or reproduce the mainstream Twitter consumer client experience. The answer is no.". How can a company who's user base has grown to such an amount because of third party clients say something like this? Talk about showing a little appreciation. As someone who develops a Twitter client, it is a huge kick in the teeth.

joelhaasnoot 16y ago
Not only is it a kick in the teeth to developers, but the reason Twitter has traction, spread and growth is because of the diversity of tools around Twitter. The user experience is not all in their hands, and isn't it ironic that this comes a week after the "dickbar" incident? Twitter hasn't really proven they can keep the user experience the way it should be. There was a post last week here on HN about how Tweetie used to never crash and the lastest release was awful... Get your act together Twitter or don't be the elephant in the room, or act that way.
- b0sk 16y ago
  The conspiracy theorist in me thinks that Dickbar and the backlash it received contributed to this. For instance, the iOS official app is the best Twitter client so far despite shoving promoted trends down our throats. One could come up with a better client with no dickbar and everyone would be flocking there. By discouraging new clients, they are discouraging our ability to turn off dickbar.
  - sequoia 16y ago
    >shoving promoted trends down our throats. And are they also "shoving" an extremely popular, free service with ongoing development "down your throat?" I am a fan of free software etc. (even set up a diaspora account... lol), but I don't understand how people expect businesses such as twitter to run forever without a viable revenue stream. Of course, they shouldn't kill the goose that laid the golden egg, but after a while you have to wonder if these eggs aren't just tin someone took a can of spray paint to! What "gold"? Tons of users are nice insofar as they lead to money. Users are not an end in themselves. Sorry for the rant but please, people, stop acting like twitter owes you something. (My comments are vis-a-vis users, I do think what they are doing to developers is not right, from a courtesy point of view.)

boredguy8 16y ago

As an end user (and by no means a power user) of Twitter, I have to say that I don't want a consistent user experience. I want the best user experience for how I use Twitter. Right now that means TweetDeck, but if something better came along, I'd jump to it. It lets me do things I can't do in Twitter's tools (or that I don't easily see how to do). So from an 'outsider' on this topic: boo!

ekanes 16y ago

Surprising: "According to our data, 90% of active Twitter users use official Twitter apps on a monthly basis."

frankdenbow 16y ago
They put out some statistics on this last year: http://blog.twitter.com/2010/09/evolving-ecosystem.html http://blog.twitter.com/2010/09/evolving-ecosystem.html
jellicle 16y ago
You can read that as, 90% of active twitter users visit the twitter.com website at least once per month.
ashbrahma 16y ago
Not sure how this matches up to the 90% number: http://twittersource.info/lastweek http://twittersource.info/lastweek This is based on tweets composed.

danilocampos 16y ago

It's the old casino analogy: When you're betting on a platform you don't own, the house always wins. I don't know much about Twitter politics, but we've got: - Developer hostility this week - User hostility last week, with the dickbar So maybe this is just how it goes now that Costolo is in charge. "Fuck the loyalists, we're here to make some money. Getting sick of these third party tools charging coin for our damn API while we get nothing." If so, the question becomes: who creates more value on Twitter? Is it the old guard, who use it as a communications and community medium? Or is it the mainstream, following celebrities and talking about sandwiches they're eating, eyeballs to be sold to the highest bidder? (edit: My hunch is that, too late, the Pareto principle will be discovered hard at work: 20% or less of Twitter users actually generate 80% of the value. I just can't see it as a bland, empty consumption tool. There's surely peril in optimizing toward that.) It sounds to me like Twitter wants to round up its user-cattle and drive them on down to monetization gulch. Anyone who gets in the way of this is going to be flattened.

jdp23 16y ago
Well said. Twitter's got a lot of goodwill but seems intent on running it down.
dandelany 16y ago
>It sounds to me like Twitter wants to round up its user-cattle and drive them on down to monetization gulch. Uh, yeah. Is that really surprising? We're all being driven to Monetization Gulch to escape the absolutely fatal Winter of Unprofitability.
- danilocampos 16y ago
  > Uh, yeah. Is that really surprising? Your sarcastic grunting aside, it's utterly shocking. Imagine Google, circa 2001, with crass, interstitial banner ads between search and SERP. It would have destroyed them. The opportunity for heaps and heaps of money, gone in a single, vulgar puff of smoke. Twitter has the opportunity to leverage a critical mass of enthusiastic users. This is a rare, golden gift. Last time this happened, Facebook minted some billionaires while discovering a sustainable, user-virtuous business model. There were growing pains, especially with the early, spammy apps, but overall, Facebook has managed to balance the needs of a lot of people without screwing up the magic of their product. The time before that, Google did the same thing. Sadly, rather than pushing toward a business model that makes the most of the very impressive ecosystem they've cultivated, it looks as though they want to break down the most interesting portions of it and then find money in whatever turns out on the other side. The lasting virtue of Twitter, to me, always seemed to be that it would always be whatever any given user needed it to be, thanks to the wealth of apps that dip into its API. If that goes away, Twitter's shelf life is curtailed. To me, it seems nutty, and not terribly imaginative. Ask Digg: pissing off your core constituency so you can hopefully make money is not the same as actually making money.

ffumarola 16y ago

On one hand, I agree in terms of providing a consistent user experience. On the other hand, I disagree and think people should be able to build whatever experience they want.

noinput 16y ago

This just got some more coverage TechCrunch: http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/11/twitter-ecosystem-guidelines/ http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/11/twitter-ecosystem-guideline... TheNextWeb: http://thenextweb.com/twitter/2011/03/11/twitter-tells-developers-to-stop-developing-new-twitter-clients/ http://thenextweb.com/twitter/2011/03/11/twitter-tells-devel...

borism 16y ago

consistency and ecosystem opportunities couldn't he just write "you're fucked, we're the boss" without all this corporate BS speech?

guptaneil 16y ago

It definitely sounds hostile, but I can see where they're coming from. They want to encourage more creative uses of their API, rather than just flooding the market with hundreds of mostly subpar client apps. They've basically reached critical mass as far as third party clients go. Any additional clients are not going to increase their user base anymore. What they really need is more use cases for the Twitter stream. I don't particularly agree with this strategy of leaving a lot of developers feeling like they just got slapped across the face, but it will be interesting to see where the API goes now.

taylorbuley 16y ago

A Consistent User Experience. I believe I've heard that somewhere before... http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/AppleHIGuidelines/XHIGIntro/XHIGIntro.html http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/UserEx...

zaidf 16y ago

When companies started releasing awesome APIs for free, we kinda wondered "what's the catch?". Years later, we're finding out. The hype surrounding free APIs without formal agreements is the biggest farce in the Valley. We are now in that phase of the cycle where this will become more and more apparent as these companies with awesome APIs get serious about making money(and the free API impeding their revenue plans). Free APIs--especially the powerful ones--should be seen as "cute things" with little purpose beyond experimental side projects. If you ACTUALLY want to build a company off someone's API, get a formal agreement with that company especially if that company insists you don't need one. So much has changed since the 90s when access to APIs meant paying huge $. And yet, so little has really changed.

ultrasaurus 16y ago
I think that's the bubbliest part of the startup bubble, a lot of cool startups could be crushed overnight if the big player who they orbit changes the free API they sprung up to use.
technomancy 16y ago
> When companies started releasing awesome APIs for free, we kinda wondered "what's the catch?". Years later, we're finding out. H.264, anyone?
- po 16y ago
  H.264 was never without licensing fees and I don't think it can be considered a bait-and-switch. The catch is right there in the licensing terms.
  - chc 16y ago
    It's currently offered "for free" to many people. That's one of the big arguments people always make in the H.264 vs. Google debate — H.264 is just as free for most users, and surely the MPEG-LA would never turn around and change that.
  - _delirium 16y ago

voxmatt 16y ago

That is the deafening thud of the other shoe dropping

fingerprinter 16y ago

I think what we are seeing is quite a bit of chasm crossing from the platforms. When that happens, the early technical users (who they don't make much money from, btw) get pushed out or at least _feel_ pushed out. Yes, we helped build the ecosystem and make it a viable company...but if you read "Crossing the Chasm", it is almost a blueprint for what these platforms are going through and doing...they rely on early technical folks to build a base...but eventually need to reject those early users or marginalize them for sake of profit...very interesting read.

dasil003 16y ago
Yeah, as much as this post makes me not want to touch Twitter with a 10-foot pole, I have to admit that they're not going to go any further as a company by catering specifically to developers concerns. I am, however, counting the days until Evan's departure.

kmfrk 16y ago

Man, TapBots just can't catch a break. First they are about to announce TweetBot[1], when Twitter for iPhone (a free, first-party alternative to competitors) is announced, and they recently announced the coming of a re-imagined TweetBot[2]. On another note, I don't understand why Twitter are so callous to throw away their community goodwill on a whim. They already have a lot - just look how they took a stand when the data for one of their users was requested by the U.S. government. And then they do something like this. (After [this](http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2313152 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2313152).) And the dickbar! [1]: http://tapbots.com/blog/business/say-hello-to-tweetbot http://tapbots.com/blog/business/say-hello-to-tweetbot [2]: http://tapbots.com/blog/tweetbot/tweetbot-is-coming http://tapbots.com/blog/tweetbot/tweetbot-is-coming

mikeryan 16y ago

I have to believe that this means that Twitter is looking at turning on the revenues and likely with in stream "sponsored tweets" or some other similar type of nonsense and they don't want third parties stripping out these ads. Its always been strange that they'd let 3rd parties be a primary interaction model since its very hard to monetize other peoples clients.

VladRussian 16y ago
>since its very hard to monetize other peoples clients Google API key seems to be at least one way to do it.

ajg1977 16y ago

"Thanks for all your help getting us where we are. Now, get out and shut the door behind you".

jellicle 16y ago

Twitter doesn't want you to build a twitter client that automatically filters out ads in the twitstream, or doesn't have ads on the sidebar like the official client, or in some other way is superior to the official client. That is, Twitter is planning to monetize by making their product worse, and they don't want anyone offering a service on the level of what Twitter used to offer.

icarus_drowning 16y ago
What is particularly galling is that Twitter has been saying for years that they want to monetize without slapping ads over everything. Now they're monetizing by... slapping ads over everything. And ensuring that no one can threaten the business model they supposedly didn't want to use. All of this would have been better had Twitter just started off by slapping ads on their service and making it clear how they were going to protect it. Instead, they've grown their userbase (at least among the technorati) by asserting that they weren't going to pursue the exact model they seem so ardently chasing now. Sure, 3rd party app devs might be "suckers" for having latched on early, but I don't think that excuses Twitter for such a (to use a Gruberism) dick move.
- whatevermatt 16y ago
  I was about to upvote you until you used the word Gruberism to describe a phrase that is probably older than he is.
  - RyanMcGreal 16y ago
    Gruber refined the meaning so that it applies to such a move by anyone other than Steve Jobs.
  - icarus_drowning 16y ago
    Of course its older than he is. I was referring to his apparent affinity for inserting "dick" in front of everything. Pedantically nitpick much? ;)
- 16y ago

phil 16y ago

This has got to be at least partially about UberMedia. Still makes me glad I don't depend on Twitter's platform at all.

JCB_K 16y ago

I don't understand why people are so upset about this. It's simple: Twitter Inc. doesn't like apps which are the same as Twitter, or worse. (I don't mean to say that Twitter is bad already: just that Twitter Inc. doesn't like 1. apps recreating Twitter and 2. apps which give a low-quality UI.) In other words: they urge devs to develop a client with added value. Wether that's apps for "Company Tweeting" or Real-Time Data, it's adding something to the core experience of Twitter. Most importantly, I think Twitter Inc. still likes "normal" Twitter apps, as long as they have added value: a superior UI. So get devving, and make the new and better Tweetie!

brown9-2 16y ago
It's simple: Twitter Inc. doesn't like apps which are the same as Twitter, or worse. From this announcement, it sounds like they also don't like clients which have different UIs than Twitter now.
mentat 16y ago
Let the market decide. If developers are making clients that are worse than the standard, people won't use them. What is Twitter's product here?
- JCB_K 16y ago
  If the market was completely transparent, that would be the case, but that's not how it is. For example Yfrog: it looks absolutely terrible, but still it's very popular. If I made Twitter I wouldn't be happy about that. A new normal Twitter-user (some who doesn't read HN, basically) might think something like this: "Oh, so this is where you post images on twitter? Doesn't look great. How do I login? Ah nevermind, I'll go back to Facebook." At the same time, TwitPic adds something to Twitter, in such a way that it fits in with it. Bottom-line: users will connect 3rd-party apps and experiences to the API provider, so Twitter is right in making clear that they don't want crappy apps.
Timothee 16y ago
I'm not quite sure about that. Check this part: "More specifically, developers ask us if they should build client apps that mimic or reproduce the mainstream Twitter consumer client experience. The answer is no. If you are an existing developer of client apps, you can continue to serve your user base, but we will be holding you to high standards to ensure you do not violate users’ privacy, that you provide consistency in the user experience, and that you rigorously adhere to all areas of our Terms of Service" This sounds to me like they don't really want "normal" Twitter apps anymore, but have just grand-fathered in the existing ones, while opening the door to closing them down if they don't follow the guidelines.

radley 16y ago

I read it this way: There's now 75k registered Twitter apps. You're not going to be successful making a generic client. Think bigger: there's plenty of room for success in other Twitter verticals. (and boooo for the fake FUD headline)

bradly 16y ago
Not all twitter apps are clients. I would guess that most are not clients.
- mkramlich 16y ago
  Agreed. I've got a few little Python and shell scripts laying around that have talked to their API at one point. By a loose standard, each is a client. Perhaps there are 74,800 little shell scripts or integration adapters out there, but not what an ordinary person would call a client app. That I'd believe.
barrkel 16y ago
And yet Twitter interaction needs to be the "same way everywhere", "consistent", "same experience", rigorous adherence, etc. Seems anti-innovation to me. I think it's rather that they want to own the client space, and are setting a "high bar" - i.e. a way of removing the competition by fiat. But if you supply content that they can make money off of, by all means, continue to sharecrop.

whatevermatt 16y ago

From the announcement: - Display of tweets in 3rd-party services. We need to ensure that tweets, and tweet actions, are rendered in a consistent way so that people have the same experience with tweets no matter where they are. For example, some developers display “comment”, “like”, or other terms with tweets instead of “follow, favorite, retweet, reply” - thus changing the core functions of a tweet. While I don't like the idea of 3rd-party services treating Twitter as a white-label medium, it's hard to believe this is coming from the same service that is famous for letting its users establish convention, and then supporting that convention. (@, #, etc) (Edit: s/email/announcement/)

jazzychad 16y ago

Ugh, that tears it. I'm not doing any more Twitter development unless Twitter acquires me. Not hires me, acquires me. I love Twitter and have several friends that work there, but I am losing all confidence in developing on the platform when I am not a big-name company with an official partnership. Signed, A 3rd party twitter dev since 2007

calloc 16y ago
Just a heads up, the website in your profile, tweethook has an expired SSL certificate.
- jazzychad 16y ago
  yeah... Since the service is now in violation of Twitter API TOS (tweet data resyndication, now only samctioned through Gnip), I've decided to shut it down shortly... no need to renew cert I'm afraid.
  - evanjacobs 16y ago
    As a tweethook customer, I'm sad to hear it.
    - jazzychad 16y ago
      As the creator I'm sad to say it :( however I will give plenty of notice before this happens. Still running for now.

arpit 16y ago

Does anyone think this could rejuvenate something like Status.net (http://status.net/ http://status.net/) or any other open system for status updates? (I always hopeful about that)

mkramlich 16y ago

Funny timing considering how there's been a noticeable degradation in the Twitter app quality since Atebits got Borg-ified by them. Their plan thus far seems to be: 1. identify best client out there 2. buy it 3. ruin it 4. outlaw all other (well, new) clients 5. ... 6. profit!

snissn 16y ago

Anybody who in the first place developed and designed a product around a third-party's ecosystem and API has what they have coming

VladRussian 16y ago
in principle, you're right. In practice, i must bring MS as a positive (!) example. Not that they were saint or anywhere close to it, yet they didn't even come close to use legal sh!t like EULA/Terms of service to hit developers on their platform. MS provided their own competitive products and used [sometimes dirty] tricks to win.

VladRussian 16y ago

"in the name of user(experience)". Back in the Soviet Union a lot of things were happening "by request of the workers", for example an unpaid [and mandatory] additional day of work on Saturday sometimes.

bl4k 16y ago
That, and I don't know why they can't just be straight out and say what they mean, instead of wrapping every quasi-statement in 'developers ask us if they can..'
- muuh-gnu 16y ago
  Being straight out when planning a unpopular move would do them more damage then lying. Pretending to do the exact opposite of what you plan to do has been a standard tactic in sports, politics, warfare or any kind of games for ages. * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_fake http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_fake

whatevermatt 16y ago

To expect enduring openness from a privately-owned medium or enduring stability from a single point of failure is naïve.

kpanghmc 16y ago

While I understand Twitter's motivation for doing this -- and no, I don't believe it's about consistency -- I think they could have expressed at least some token of appreciation for the devs who helped get them to where they are now.

dholowiski 16y ago

March 11, 2011 - Twitter was fatally injured by a gunshot wound to the foot. Initial reports are indicating this was not an accicdental shooting. Twitter will be mourned and missed by a wide variety of tech enthusiasts.

waterlesscloud 16y ago
Interesting that it caught fire during one sxsw and then poisoned itself during another one.
- dholowiski 16y ago
  Yup, and there's a dozen hungry startups who are ready to eat their lunch.

code_duck 16y ago

Fred Wilson pretty much announced that the status quo was over for Twitter API developers in an article published last April, "The Twitter Platform's Inflection Point": http://avc.com/a_vc/2010/04/the-twitter-platform.html http://avc.com/a_vc/2010/04/the-twitter-platform.html Notable quote: "I think the time for filling the holes in the Twitter service has come and gone. It was a great period for Twitter and its third party developers."

maxer 16y ago

has google not bought twitter yet?

akmiller 16y ago

"As we point out above, we need to move to a less fragmented world, where every user can experience Twitter in a consistent way. This is already happening organically - the number and market share of consumer client apps that are not owned or operated by Twitter has been shrinking. According to our data, 90% of active Twitter users use official Twitter apps on a monthly basis." If this is true, then what's the point of this announcement. They make it sound like they are already getting what they want...people moving at a rapid pace towards the official Twitter applications. Yet in the same release they come off as scared that the fragmentation is growing. I don't get it.

trustfundbaby 16y ago

It was bound to happen ... and about time, hopefully it gives someone enough inspiration to come up with something to compete against twitter. I want to see someone give twitter a run for their money. They're sloppy.

famousactress 16y ago

According to our data, 90% of active Twitter users use official Twitter apps on a monthly basis. I notice the omission of the words only or even mostly. I'm curious about the raw percentage of tweets from official/non-official apps.. and the percentage of users who use official applications say, 90+ % of the time.

minikomi 16y ago
Good catch. How many people included in this 90% use, say, the official web client from the Apple store in a pinch or perhaps from work on the sly?
zach 16y ago
Presumably, twitter.com is by definition an "official Twitter app." So if you follow a web link to a tweet while logged in or authorize with oAuth, you've used an official Twitter app. Given that possibly expansive criterion, 90% is on the low end of what I'd expect.

fedd 16y ago

i guess that's what investors call 'feature' as opposing to a standalone product - turns out that many of these clients funded by them are features of twitter

Tichy 16y ago

That's a shame, because I am still in the market for a good Android client. Guess there won't be one, ever.

nailer 16y ago
Tweetdeck is pretty good.
- Tichy 16y ago
  Thanks, will try.

otterley 16y ago

Can anyone point to language in the revised API Terms of Service (http://dev.twitter.com/pages/api_terms http://dev.twitter.com/pages/api_terms) that implies "no new Twitter clients"? I'm reading it, but I can't find the smoking gun.

dustyreagan 16y ago
I believe that was pulled from Ryan's email: "... developers ask us if they should build client apps that mimic or reproduce the mainstream Twitter consumer client experience. The answer is no." ... "If you are an existing developer of client apps, you can continue to serve your user base"
- otterley 16y ago
  That's fine, but that's just the author's commentary. The blog piece is just an announcement about the new ToS, which is the defining policy. We need to look for the language in there, not his blog piece.

alanh 16y ago

As much as this sounds like the beginning of the end, I do have to agree with one gripe: > For example, some  developers display “comment”, “like”, or other terms with tweets instead of   “follow, favorite, retweet, reply” - thus changing the core functions of a  tweet. Very true. I have accidentally tweeted by “logging in with Twitter” and then “commenting” on comments. Despicable behavior, and it should be stopped. (Alert! Previous statement is narrow in scope!)

kouiskas 16y ago

Can't wait for Twitter to join Myspace in the slow death club. This move is certainly a step in that direction.

jfager 16y ago

I don't get it. If twitter already provides the top 5 twitter clients, and 90% of users interact with twitter through those clients, where's the fractured landscape and user confusion coming from? And if the organic trend is towards official twitter client adoption, why are they taking the risk of coming out and bitching at developers to stop making clients? Everyone already noticed the market for these sorts of apps drying up, and has started wondering how serious twitter actually is about keeping a robust 3rd-party platform for the long haul. This just adds fuel to that fire, for no gain whatsoever. I get what their goal is. They're positioning to make a serious push to get ads/promoted tweets/etc in users' faces, and they want everything in place to be able to shut down or prevent the 3rd party clients that pop up to filter all that out. Okay, fine. But why make the big announcement like this? Why explicitly freak out all of your developers while you're still on a trajectory of solving the problem organically? Why not wait until it's actually a problem, when you're actually seeing increased adoption of 3rd-party clients that ruin your plans? It's always interesting to watch a company work hard to solve a problem they perceive from their perspective that's completely at odds with the problem the rest of us see from ours. See also: record/movie companies and DRM, Rupert Murdoch and Google, MS and Internet Explorer, etc, etc, etc.

ryanhuff 16y ago
A Friday afternoon release of bad news is a typical PR move to blunt the blow.
- jmathai 16y ago
  Too bad only nerds will care and nerds will be online over the weekend.

guilleiguaran 16y ago

I just remembered an article written by Alex Payne (al3x), former engineer at Twitter (and used to work in the API): http://al3x.net/2010/09/15/last-thing-about-twitter.html http://al3x.net/2010/09/15/last-thing-about-twitter.html

nhangen 16y ago

This is why Twitter is soon to be bankrupt. They don't understand how to stop insulting the people that actually provide the content and value. The value isn't the technology, but the people developing and using it.

erikpukinskis 16y ago

I think the biggest material difficulty this will present Twitter is in hiring engineering talent. I used to get the feel that they wanted to let the ecosystem develop naturally so it could realize it's full potential. That "build great stuff and we'll win" mentality. Now it feels like they've got a "strategy" that they're executing. Without that light touch it just doesn't seem as fun a place to work.

bad_user 16y ago
build great stuff and we'll win Does that strategy work at all? To me it seems companies like Google that did that are rather the exception that confirms the rule - building a great business model should be a top priority. You know what I consider a fun place to work? A company that doesn't have to borrow money to stay alive that also happens to work on cool projects. Even Mozilla is profitable; and even if their partnership with Google goes away in flames at some point, how fucked up is that?
- erikpukinskis 16y ago
  Does that strategy work at all? Sometimes! Twitter has done pretty well with it so far. Depending on the specifics of your product you might fail. But my intuition is that making stuff people care about, and only monetizing where it's painless is a pretty airtight strategy, yes. A company that doesn't have to borrow money to stay alive that also happens to work on cool projects So you think the only two options are "sacrifice your community's goodwill" and "having enough money to stay alive"? I think there's a middle ground where you can leave some money on the table in order to stay focused on the stuff you care about, but still pay your bills.

elvirs 16y ago

Twitter became twitter thanks to its community that always created value and contributed most to its future path. The invention of hashtag and @ were also contributed by community. the power users that always contributed high quality content and conversations to twitter. The developers that contributed best applications for twitter ecosystem. but now that it has justin bieber and other celebrities along with millions of their followers twitter feels like it does not need that core contributing community anymore. To me it looks like start of demise for twitter.

jrockway 16y ago

Well, I'm done using Twitter. Their engineered experience sucks, but I do like third-party clients.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

mthreat 16y ago

So if no new twitter clients are allowed, but existing ones are "grandfathered" in, does this mean there will be a market of buying and selling these grandfathered twitter clients?

jeffpalmer 16y ago

This is an interesting turning point for Twitter and for API's of free services in general. Building apps based on an ecosystem that you have no control over has always seemed like a substantial risk to me, and this assumption is starting to take shape. Twitter's recent move is an example of what happens when a company is ready to monetize their content and wants to cut out the "middle man" so to speak. It's pretty clear that they don't want third parties encroaching on their ad revenue, and while sad, it was inevitable. I see this as a very disappointing move by Twitter for the fact that they are alienating the very developers that helped build their brand. This is a glaring warning sign for all applications that are based on an external platform. If nothing else, this should serve as a lesson to all developers that free API's should be utilized with discretion.

itsnotvalid 16y ago

There is no surprise with the aid of #dickbar. I am not going to use Twitter for any serious purpose anymore. This bottom line has violated by basic requirement of information freedom. Just seeing this issue I really think that there is still spaces for even more Twitter clients. Last months or so there is one called littlecosm.com which is a client+game type. It is like they simply don't want people to avoid looking at their public timeline without promoted tweets and dickbar. What a shame.

pyrmont 16y ago

Translation: Look, the VCs are expecting a payout at some point and the only way we've worked out for making money is through ads. Now that's not going to fly if people can just get some sort of 'ad free' client from you guys. Our hands are tied. PS. Thanks for helping us get this far!

nir 16y ago

This is becoming an increasingly common mistake for tech CEOs: adopt Steve Jobs' attitude without being Steve Jobs.

QuantumGood 16y ago

Twitter claims preventing user confusion as a motive yet the move from old to new Twitter on the web is the biggest source of confusion. I mean, come on. Teaching people an interface isn't rocket science. Do something simple, such as put out a video a week showcasing use of the new interface. Heck, have user contests to come up with videos showcasing the new interface. Or go all out and develop an awesome training and help system, and integrate it into the interface. If users have a problem, do something about it!

chegra 16y ago

USERS>>EMPLOYEE>PROFIT>DEVELOPER The precedence of things.

aDemoUzer 16y ago

But I don;t want consistent experience. I dislike the experience and want it done my own way!