21–30 of 35 posts
seems like twitter found a viable business model.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
http://www.bing.com/twitter You're right that it still remains to be seen who puts the data to better use in the long term, though.
FWIW that page looks absolutely horrible. I'd be ashamed if I had produced that. Being first to market is good, as long as the product doesn't make people recoil in horror. >> "Twitter search results are currently unavailable." Presumably it's not live yet, or else broken.
First to market is worth something, if you actually have a product. If you're only first to market with an announcement and an empty page you make yourself look a little foolish to jump the gun like that.
I'm reasonably sure that when google announces their twitter search that it will at least work.
Time will tell though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps it's more telling that Bing thought they had one up on Google, only to find out that Google was already there.
That's an interesting way to spin it in Google's favor, but: 1) When MS signed a non-exclusive agreement with Twitter, they must have been 99% sure that Google would be in on the Twitter action as well (i.e. I doubt they ever thought they were one up on Google), and 2) The point is that Google is not already there . All they have to show for themselves is an agreement so far. (MS has http://www.bing.com/twitter up an…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. This looks like an embarrassingly reactive move.
It's better to do something properly than be first to market. Better to think through exactly how best to present the information to the users. http://bing.com/twitter is pretty ugly, and seems to not be working currently.
Searching "ac milan" on Google does at least bring up their last Serie A result and a news story about how they came from behind to beat Madrid this afternoon. I'm pretty sure Google will find a good way to integrate real-time tweets and status updates into its regular search results.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google wasn't the first search engine, either.
Neither Bing. Whatever that means.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps it's more telling that Bing thought they had one up on Google, only to find out that Google was already there.
That's an interesting way to spin it in Google's favor, but: 1) When MS signed a non-exclusive agreement with Twitter, they must have been 99% sure that Google would be in on the Twitter action as well (i.e. I doubt they ever thought they were one up on Google), and 2) The point is that Google is not already there . All they have to show for themselves is an agreement so far. (MS has http://www.bing.com/twitter up an…
seems like twitter found a viable business model.
If Google agreed to pay twitter for this information, this may set a precedent that google would rather not have and that some publishers have been pushing for for a while, that Google pay people to have their content crawled.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you try using Bing? I got: Twitter search results are currently unavailable.
Not working for either. As many others I think that both (MS and Google) tried to win the other with lame PR and a broken application. The result is embarrassing for both.
In other words, Google has yet to release an unpolished product, unlike MS who released what is already better done on Twitter itself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Google agreed to pay twitter for this information, this may set a precedent that google would rather not have and that some publishers have been pushing for for a while, that Google pay people to have their content crawled.
This isn't a crawl deal; this is a deal for access to "the firehose," the realtime data of all public tweets that Twitter most certainly does not give away anymore.