3 ms·
Watch out TinyURL, Cligs is much better for us
- timcederman 18y agoShame about the name.
- makimaki 18y agoI think the main issue for these sites is reliability. I still remember many URL shortening services that sprung up in the last few years, before quietly going offline...URLtea is an example. People use tinyurl because they know the links will stay active, at least for a long time after they are posted.
- thorax 18y agoSo is tinyurl too big to let fail? Spread the links around shortening services-- it's not like we need every URL you ever shortened to work forever. Also, some sites (like our little ri.ms site) also create a tinyurl for you so you can have those to fall back on if you need for whatever reason.
- orli 18y agowhat do you think about this service: http://tr.im/ http://tr.im/? (as an alternative)
- jsmcgd 18y agoProbably the best name yet for this kind of service.
- joshu 18y agoI despise URL shorteners. They mostly exist to triage broken email client linewrap; more recently they fit links into SMS for twitter. This is functionality that should be fixed in the mail client, or be built into twitter/whatever. Recently they add follow-counting, which I suppose makes people feel good - they want credit around sending people to a link, and they want metrics, I suppose. Again, this should be built into the app that is hosting the link. It adds a layer of unreliability to the internet. Long-term they all will almost certainly have failures, disappear, bugs, database corruption, etc, rendering email and other documents useless. They also make the link blind, so you have no sense of what you're about to see, whether it might be worksafe, etc. They're marginally useful for the linker but they're bad for everyone else.