5 ms·

Twitter in its early days made zero sense to end-users, and it was only through the effort of third party developers that it went mainstream. I am getting tire

by dalton 14y ago

Twitter in its early days made zero sense to end-users, and it was only through the effort of third party developers that it went mainstream. I am getting tired of arguing with people about this. We will just have to agree to disagree. I am willing to take the risk of failure because I saw this exact developer-centric approach work before. UPDATE: Regarding the comments below, if you read my original announcement post, I made the point that this is architected by be financially sustainable on a critical mass, small user-base: http://daltoncaldwell.com/an-audacious-proposal http://daltoncaldwell.com/an-audacious-proposal I cited this Paul Graham post discussing the strength of a core geeky userbase: http://paulgraham.com/ambitious.html http://paulgraham.com/ambitious.html Let's say that someone followed PGs advice on that proposal. Wouldn't the same criticisms about not appealing to normies also apply?

jenius 14y ago
I didn't mean to argue with you about this Dalton, just to offer my shot at a reason why it's not taking off like you wanted it to. I am in support of what you're doing and hope it's successful, on a personal note. Twitter in the beginning: "Post what you are doing & see what people you like are doing in 140 characters or less." This is very tangible and makes plenty of sense to normal people, immediately. This is just something to think about, hope you don't take it as an attack or an argument. I'm clearly not the only one who has this opinion - it might be worth mulling over humanizing the project even if just a little bit.
citricsquid 14y ago
> Twitter in its early days made zero sense to end-users, and it was only through the effort of third party developers that it went mainstream. Sorry if you've explained it elsewhere (I've not been paying much attention) but can you cite/explain that claim? My experience might be different, but most of the "normal people" I know of that use Twitter use it through the apps for their mobile (eg: iPhone, Blackberry) and they use it because that's the device they use, not because the apps are incredible and make Twitter appealing, the Twitter network is appealing. Based on this wouldn't the correct argument be that making Twitter available to everyone easily is what caused Twitter's mainstream success? I think you explained the problem yourself: At day 0 Twitter made no sense to users and Twitter had 0 barriers to entry, all you had to do was sign up! How can app.net get over that problem while charging $50? If I'm correct that ease of access/use is what made Twitter mainstream wouldn't that mean you're doing the exact opposite of what made Twitter successful? I really love the idea and hope it succeeds, but I don't see how you can appeal to anyone outside of the tech circle when charging for access.
enra 14y ago
I think the OP means that it's not something non-developers want/care. Even if twitter went mainstream with 3rd developers, it was still apparently something people wanted. PG also advices is that you should make things people want, people as users who use the app. People don't care about the tech or how nice it's for developers. If you build something that people like to use, and have nice API terms, people will use it and developers will develop on top of it. Probably the only reason why people would care is that the apps and the whole network would be better, but that's huge chicken&egg problem. If you look at the state on Windows Phone platform, Microsoft is even paying to people to develop on it, but no-one still care's because there are no users.
- dalton 14y ago
  Twitter devs are being systematically intimidated, acquired and shutdown. There are credible rumors that the most popular 3rd-party clients will be summarily de-activated soon. What are they supposed to do now?
  - lazerwalker 14y ago
    People will complain, and the vast majority of Twitter users will continue to use Twitter, albeit via first-party clients. It sucks for third-party devs, and it sucks for us power Twitter users who like our third-party clients, but look at every time Facebook introduces major changes: people huff and puff about switching to something else (Google+, etc), but the status quo doesn't actually change because the value is in the relationships they've formed on the service, not the way they interface with the service.
benatkin 14y ago
> I am getting tired of arguing with people about this. We will just have to agree to disagree. I am willing to take the risk of failure because I saw this exact developer-centric approach work before. I hope you didn't mean this, and it was just a reaction to being irritated. Because if you consistently are this defensive, you'll have a hard time engaging the third-party developers.
- dalton 14y ago
  Rather than edit my earlier comment, which some would classify as sneaky, let me paraphrase what I am trying to say: "I get it, this may not work. I have repeatedly admitted this is a crazy plan. If http://join.app.net http://join.app.net doesn't reach 100% and thus fails, then we can say we tried. In any event, we will have learned something and no money will actually have changed hands."
  - benatkin 14y ago
    Good, glad you didn't mean it the way I interpreted it (I could have interpreted it wrongly, too). I liked how you replied in earlier threads. Please save being defensive for rare occasions when it's worth the risk that people might think you aren't open to discussion. You may need to just skip replying to some comments.
  - MatthewPhillips 14y ago
    As an aside, I'm thrilled that you are blogging about the process and hope you continue to do so. At the end of the road, whenever that might be, it would be amazing to go back and re-read everything as a post-mortem.
nl 14y ago
Twitter in its early days made zero sense to end-users, and it was only through the effort of third party developers that it went mainstream. Umm. I was an early Twitter user (April 07 - almost exactly a year before @daltonc), and I've never used any third party apps (except for Brizzly for a short period). I think you are dramatically overestimating the impact 3rd part developers had. Twitter went mainstream when Ev went on Oprah. 3rd party devs worked on Twitter (initally) to scratch their own itches and because other people liked their work, not to make money.

by dalton 14y ago

jenius 14y ago

I didn't mean to argue with you about this Dalton, just to offer my shot at a reason why it's not taking off like you wanted it to. I am in support of what you're doing and hope it's successful, on a personal note. Twitter in the beginning: "Post what you are doing & see what people you like are doing in 140 characters or less." This is very tangible and makes plenty of sense to normal people, immediately. This is just something to think about, hope you don't take it as an attack or an argument. I'm clearly not the only one who has this opinion - it might be worth mulling over humanizing the project even if just a little bit.

citricsquid 14y ago

> Twitter in its early days made zero sense to end-users, and it was only through the effort of third party developers that it went mainstream. Sorry if you've explained it elsewhere (I've not been paying much attention) but can you cite/explain that claim? My experience might be different, but most of the "normal people" I know of that use Twitter use it through the apps for their mobile (eg: iPhone, Blackberry) and they use it because that's the device they use, not because the apps are incredible and make Twitter appealing, the Twitter network is appealing. Based on this wouldn't the correct argument be that making Twitter available to everyone easily is what caused Twitter's mainstream success? I think you explained the problem yourself: At day 0 Twitter made no sense to users and Twitter had 0 barriers to entry, all you had to do was sign up! How can app.net get over that problem while charging $50? If I'm correct that ease of access/use is what made Twitter mainstream wouldn't that mean you're doing the exact opposite of what made Twitter successful? I really love the idea and hope it succeeds, but I don't see how you can appeal to anyone outside of the tech circle when charging for access.

enra 14y ago

I think the OP means that it's not something non-developers want/care. Even if twitter went mainstream with 3rd developers, it was still apparently something people wanted. PG also advices is that you should make things people want, people as users who use the app. People don't care about the tech or how nice it's for developers. If you build something that people like to use, and have nice API terms, people will use it and developers will develop on top of it. Probably the only reason why people would care is that the apps and the whole network would be better, but that's huge chicken&egg problem. If you look at the state on Windows Phone platform, Microsoft is even paying to people to develop on it, but no-one still care's because there are no users.

dalton 14y ago
Twitter devs are being systematically intimidated, acquired and shutdown. There are credible rumors that the most popular 3rd-party clients will be summarily de-activated soon. What are they supposed to do now?
- lazerwalker 14y ago
  People will complain, and the vast majority of Twitter users will continue to use Twitter, albeit via first-party clients. It sucks for third-party devs, and it sucks for us power Twitter users who like our third-party clients, but look at every time Facebook introduces major changes: people huff and puff about switching to something else (Google+, etc), but the status quo doesn't actually change because the value is in the relationships they've formed on the service, not the way they interface with the service.

benatkin 14y ago

> I am getting tired of arguing with people about this. We will just have to agree to disagree. I am willing to take the risk of failure because I saw this exact developer-centric approach work before. I hope you didn't mean this, and it was just a reaction to being irritated. Because if you consistently are this defensive, you'll have a hard time engaging the third-party developers.

dalton 14y ago
Rather than edit my earlier comment, which some would classify as sneaky, let me paraphrase what I am trying to say: "I get it, this may not work. I have repeatedly admitted this is a crazy plan. If http://join.app.net http://join.app.net doesn't reach 100% and thus fails, then we can say we tried. In any event, we will have learned something and no money will actually have changed hands."
- benatkin 14y ago
  Good, glad you didn't mean it the way I interpreted it (I could have interpreted it wrongly, too). I liked how you replied in earlier threads. Please save being defensive for rare occasions when it's worth the risk that people might think you aren't open to discussion. You may need to just skip replying to some comments.
- MatthewPhillips 14y ago
  As an aside, I'm thrilled that you are blogging about the process and hope you continue to do so. At the end of the road, whenever that might be, it would be amazing to go back and re-read everything as a post-mortem.

nl 14y ago

Twitter in its early days made zero sense to end-users, and it was only through the effort of third party developers that it went mainstream. Umm. I was an early Twitter user (April 07 - almost exactly a year before @daltonc), and I've never used any third party apps (except for Brizzly for a short period). I think you are dramatically overestimating the impact 3rd part developers had. Twitter went mainstream when Ev went on Oprah. 3rd party devs worked on Twitter (initally) to scratch their own itches and because other people liked their work, not to make money.