What I find stupid is that the length of usernames counts in the message. A message to @myfriend can be longer than a message to @myfriendblessednaycursedwithalongername
Twitter to Stop Counting Photos and Links in 140-Character Limit
31–40 of 196 posts
Re: Twitter to Stop Counting Photos and Links in 140-Character Limit
#32The fact that it took this long for them to make such an obvious change speaks to how afraid they are (were?) to challenge core assumptions about the product.
Agree. We've told them this directly for years. Whats next?
Re: Twitter to Stop Counting Photos and Links in 140-Character Limit
#33What I find stupid is that the length of usernames counts in the message. A message to @myfriend can be longer than a message to @myfriendblessednaycursedwithalongername
It made sense during the time period it came about. You have 160 characters for an SMS. 140 allows 20 characters for @names, commands, etc.
When my friends and I first started using Twitter, we basically used it as a group chat, similar to Hangouts/FB today.
Re: Twitter to Stop Counting Photos and Links in 140-Character Limit
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Long URLs are truncated and ellipsized, e.g.: this-is-a-long-url-with-a-very-very-very-domain-name.com/and-a-sorta-long-path-component-but-still-long-enough-to-trigger-shortening is displayed as …with-a-very-very-very-domain-name.com/and-a-sorta-lo…
Given how important domain names are for security, it would be concerning if domain names get truncated. I could craft: evil.net/this-is-a-very-very-long-path/bankofamerica.com/account-settings/blah/blah/blah Which, depending on how this is implemented, might render to ...bankofamerica.com/account-settings/blah/blah/blah
The domain and path are truncated separately. Your example would be displayed as evil.net/this-is-a-very-very-lo…
Re: Twitter to Stop Counting Photos and Links in 140-Character Limit
#35What I find stupid is that the length of usernames counts in the message. A message to @myfriend can be longer than a message to @myfriendblessednaycursedwithalongername
It made sense during the time period it came about. You have 160 characters for an SMS. 140 allows 20 characters for @names, commands, etc. When my friends and I first started using Twitter, we basically used it as a group chat, similar to Hangouts/FB today.
I don't think it did. Phone numbers are not included in the length of SMS messages - the destination is separate header data that is used in routing and not considered part of the message body. If I sent a message to a special "four digit" phone number or to a full 10-digit number, or even an international text message (not mms) with 40 digits in the address, the message length is not in any way shortened as a result. (Of course once a UDH is needed to deal with message concatenation, etc (which never really work, anyway) the limit is reduced to 153 characters - still longer than twitter's (lame) limit, in all cases.)
The whole "we need twenty characters to set aside the destination" was such a hollow rational that never made any sense. IIRC, it was revealed at some point that the 140 character message limit for tweets was basically the result of someone sitting down and doing a brief, informal testing of whatever they thought to be "the average sms message" and that's the number they ended up with.
Re: Twitter to Stop Counting Photos and Links in 140-Character Limit
#36Could this be seen as some kind of attempt to hold-off Snapchat/Instagram photo-sharing competition and keep attention in their platform? Personally I don't like the image taking away from the limit, feeling pretty indifferent on the links part. Overall my impression is that this would be a reasonable change, whereas taking a hammer to the 140 limit as a general concept might not be a proper avenue.
I doubt it. The sharing models and overall experience of Snapchat sharing and Twitter are radically different and this doesn't change it in a meaningful way.
Twiiter is in a fight for its life right now, this is definitely an attempt to retain current users and encourage usage.
Re: Twitter to Stop Counting Photos and Links in 140-Character Limit
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
It made sense during the time period it came about. You have 160 characters for an SMS. 140 allows 20 characters for @names, commands, etc. When my friends and I first started using Twitter, we basically used it as a group chat, similar to Hangouts/FB today.
I don't think it did. Phone numbers are not included in the length of SMS messages - the destination is separate header data that is used in routing and not considered part of the message body. If I sent a message to a special "four digit" phone number or to a full 10-digit number, or even an international text message (not mms) with 40 digits in the address, the message length is not in any way shortened as a result…
> the destination is separate header data that is used in routing and not considered part of the message body
Right but how could Twitter have put data into the separate header in an SMS message? They can't do that. Hence the 140 character limit (the 160 hard maximum for them being able to put into a message and then minus 20 characters for commands).
Re: Twitter to Stop Counting Photos and Links in 140-Character Limit
#38The beauty of twitter is to tweet with concise messages. I'd be disappointed if this 140 characters restriction got removed.
I find it quite frustrating. I can easily say what I want on other platforms because I can write what I need to without worrying about every single word. Twitter makes me stop and rewrite and rewrite and rewrite and finally get something that fits in 140 and makes sense for the most part after the third read if you understand me and all the context surrounding the thing I said. I suppose it's at least partially gener…
I mostly disagree. Sure, I've been frustrated at times when I can't express an idea in 140 characters, but in general, I think the limitation is a benefit. As a creator, it makes me distill my tweet to the purest essence of what I'm trying to say, and as a consumer, it lets me scan through my timeline quickly.
Also, there's nothing stopping people from tweeting an idea and including a link to a blog/gist/whatever where they add more context.
And if Twitter does expand the limit, I hope they do it in a way that is essentially a structured version of a link to something else. For example, keep the 140 character limit, but also let people attach a longer note – up to, say, 5000 characters, maybe with simple Markdown formatting. Support it in all official clients and give 3rd-party clients a way to support it too.
I have no problem with them expanding the limit as long as I can still scroll through my timeline, seeing 140-max tweets with an option to click on one to see the expanded version, without leaving my Twitter client or loading a whole webpage. A worse option would be to just show the first 140 characters of a longer note. I think there's value in forcing people to be concise, but I also get that there's value in letting people post longer messages and keeping all of that content in-network.
This long comment is ~1,360 characters.
Re: Twitter to Stop Counting Photos and Links in 140-Character Limit
#39I'm sure the spammers and hashtag abusers will be delighted at this change. More opportunity to stuff a tweet #with #all #sorts #of #extra #hashtags. /s
I think hashtags still count towards the limit.
Re: Twitter to Stop Counting Photos and Links in 140-Character Limit
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it did. Phone numbers are not included in the length of SMS messages - the destination is separate header data that is used in routing and not considered part of the message body. If I sent a message to a special "four digit" phone number or to a full 10-digit number, or even an international text message (not mms) with 40 digits in the address, the message length is not in any way shortened as a result…
> the destination is separate header data that is used in routing and not considered part of the message body Right but how could Twitter have put data into the separate header in an SMS message? They can't do that. Hence the 140 character limit (the 160 hard maximum for them being able to put into a message and then minus 20 characters for commands).
Actually it's possible to put up to 11 alphanumeric characters into the sender field.