Twitter to Client Developers: Drop Dead • Hacker News Board

Re: Twitter to Client Developers: Drop Dead

#21

Post by wmf » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 1:52 AM UTC

droob wrote: post #10

dchuk wrote: post #4

"In the “good” quadrants are bullshit terms like “Social CRM”, “Social analytics”, and “Social influence ranking”." Not bullshit, these are demonstrably useful products for people who want to utilize new traffic sources in the interest of making money or growing their business. "But services like Storify and Favstar, which are actually useful and/or fun, those are no good." ummm...ok? Utility is in the eye of the beh…

This must be the Twitter analog to a Voight-Kampff test, because "social CRM" and "social influence ranking" seem to me to be the fuel for spambots, mindless marketing accounts, and other general filth. The MBA behind this plan would probably stand outside his bakery demanding payment for people stealing smells.

It's fun to bash social media douchebaggery, but I've come to the conclusion that opting in to thinly-disguised ads might be the best use of Twitter. It's not good for conversations (see Branch) or for actual socializing. I guess Twitter is also kind of good for ranting, trolling, and bragging (see RKOI), but those might be even less productive than advertising.

Re: Twitter to Client Developers: Drop Dead

#22

Post by eugenes » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 1:54 AM UTC

dchuk wrote: post #4

"In the “good” quadrants are bullshit terms like “Social CRM”, “Social analytics”, and “Social influence ranking”." Not bullshit, these are demonstrably useful products for people who want to utilize new traffic sources in the interest of making money or growing their business. "But services like Storify and Favstar, which are actually useful and/or fun, those are no good." ummm...ok? Utility is in the eye of the beh…

  "Twitter is a B2C product, so they're going to limit B2C"
  
  "Now, Twitter is not a B2B company"

Awesome. Now they aren't, and when they decide they are? And speaking of acquisitions - well, they can essentially kill you willy nilly so you better settle for the price they want.

The dangers of sharecropping are well known around these parts, Twitter has squandered their reputation and has brought these things to the forefront of anybody who would consider building a business on top of their platform. It will not end well for them.

Re: Twitter to Client Developers: Drop Dead

#23

Post by MBCook » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 1:55 AM UTC

streptomycin wrote: post #15

andrewfelix wrote: post #7

Utter hypocrisy that they're discouraging third party clients, after having acquired one. app.net suddenly looks more attractive.

app.net looks more attractive, until the same shit starts happening there in 5 years. The problem is walled garden social networks. It's a fundamentally bad idea for everyone involved, except the people who own it and can turn a profit. StatusNet/Identica is a much better solution to this problem than yet another walled garden. Free, open source, and federated. How many times does the same shit need to happen before…

The possible difference there is that app.net has both a business plan (sell access to post to the service) as well as a feedback model if they do something stupid (people will stop paying them).

Re: Twitter to Client Developers: Drop Dead

#24

Post by MatthewPhillips » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 1:55 AM UTC

streptomycin wrote: post #15

andrewfelix wrote: post #7

Utter hypocrisy that they're discouraging third party clients, after having acquired one. app.net suddenly looks more attractive.

app.net looks more attractive, until the same shit starts happening there in 5 years. The problem is walled garden social networks. It's a fundamentally bad idea for everyone involved, except the people who own it and can turn a profit. StatusNet/Identica is a much better solution to this problem than yet another walled garden. Free, open source, and federated. How many times does the same shit need to happen before…

App.net is going to support ActivityStrea.ms

Re: Twitter to Client Developers: Drop Dead

#25

Post by goronbjorn » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 1:55 AM UTC

Is this more evidence that they haven't completely figured out their own business model yet?

Re: Twitter to Client Developers: Drop Dead

#26

Post by rjsamson » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 1:57 AM UTC

I don't see this ending well for them. Alienating the very developer base that helped them grow as a platform early on is a huge mistake.

As an aside, I feel even better about backing App.net after seeing this news.

Re: Twitter to Client Developers: Drop Dead

#27

Post by iandanforth » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 1:57 AM UTC

sillysaurus wrote: post #14

ziadbc wrote: post #6

Twitter wants to give you access to the data. Their client is their main product. Thus, every 3rd party client is competing with their main product, that seems to be a fact. Theres no way to stop you from building one anyway, twitter knows that. If you go against their rules, you're a revolutionary, and if you win that revolution, they'll have to deal with you. You can't expect however, that the incumbent is going to…

Twitter had better take a long, hard look at Joel's old essay on Platforms: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Platforms.html Declaring war on your third-party developers is shortsighted at best, fatal at worst.

Perhaps there is a class of people who pay for email apps. I'm not one of them. I don't see twitter as a platform, or at least don't use it as one. It is a communication medium which, for all my usage, could have no developer ecosystem.

Professionally I would love to have free access to the Firehose, that's some juicy data. But as a consumer Twitter 'apps' are no more worth my money than email apps.

Re: Twitter to Client Developers: Drop Dead

#28

Post by bluetidepro » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 1:58 AM UTC

efsavage wrote: post #12

Twitter isn't very big in my circles, but of those that use it, none of them use the website.

Really? I honestly prefer the website experience better than any Twitter app I've ever used. But I guess that may just be me... Haha

Re: Twitter to Client Developers: Drop Dead

#29

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 2:06 AM UTC

iandanforth wrote: post #27

sillysaurus wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter had better take a long, hard look at Joel's old essay on Platforms: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Platforms.html Declaring war on your third-party developers is shortsighted at best, fatal at worst.

Perhaps there is a class of people who pay for email apps. I'm not one of them. I don't see twitter as a platform, or at least don't use it as one. It is a communication medium which, for all my usage, could have no developer ecosystem. Professionally I would love to have free access to the Firehose, that's some juicy data. But as a consumer Twitter 'apps' are no more worth my money than email apps.

[deleted]

Re: Twitter to Client Developers: Drop Dead

#30

Post by streptomycin » Fri, Aug 17, 2012, 2:10 AM UTC

MatthewPhillips wrote: post #24

streptomycin wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

app.net looks more attractive, until the same shit starts happening there in 5 years. The problem is walled garden social networks. It's a fundamentally bad idea for everyone involved, except the people who own it and can turn a profit. StatusNet/Identica is a much better solution to this problem than yet another walled garden. Free, open source, and federated. How many times does the same shit need to happen before…

App.net is going to support ActivityStrea.ms

I've never heard of ActivityStrea.ms, and their website is sufficiently obtuse that I still can't tell what it is. Can you enlighten me? Are you saying that app.net will support some kind of federation, maybe, hopefully?