Twitter moves away from 140 characters, ditches confusing and restrictive rules
1–10 of 28 posts
Re: Twitter moves away from 140 characters, ditches confusing and restrictive rules
#2Removing the ".@" syntax is a mistake. I don't always want to broadcast replies. I still don't understand why URLs are still included within the 140 char limit either. Can someone explain that better than the article?
Re: Twitter moves away from 140 characters, ditches confusing and restrictive rules
#3About damn time!
Re: Twitter moves away from 140 characters, ditches confusing and restrictive rules
#4Removing the ".@" syntax is a mistake. I don't always want to broadcast replies. I still don't understand why URLs are still included within the 140 char limit either. Can someone explain that better than the article?
From the blog, replies aren't broadcasted. Only new tweets that use "@" are broadcasted.
Re: Twitter moves away from 140 characters, ditches confusing and restrictive rules
#5The way I understand it, the 140 character limit still holds. They just stopped counting things like mentions and URLs.
Re: Twitter moves away from 140 characters, ditches confusing and restrictive rules
#6Removing the ".@" syntax is a mistake. I don't always want to broadcast replies. I still don't understand why URLs are still included within the 140 char limit either. Can someone explain that better than the article?
Urls where fixed to 22, then 23, lately 24 chars. It's the length of the actual shortened url.
I've been working with people helping social media for a bit, and one common issue in preparing a list of tweets to schedule is making sure the length is ok. So you end up with silly xls files where you have a url column, a text column, etc. and weird formulas to compute the size.
I think Twitter just wants to simplify the life. You can send 140 chars of text/comment. Mentions, urls, images, etc. are not counted because normal people aren't counting like that.
Re: Twitter moves away from 140 characters, ditches confusing and restrictive rules
#7Wow I have been using Twitter since 08/09 and I never knew about the ".@" reply.
Re: Twitter moves away from 140 characters, ditches confusing and restrictive rules
#8The way I understand it, the 140 character limit still holds. They just stopped counting things like mentions and URLs.
But if they didn't use a misleading title you wouldn't have clicked the link...
Re: Twitter moves away from 140 characters, ditches confusing and restrictive rules
#9Wow I have been using Twitter since 08/09 and I never knew about the ".@" reply.
There was nothing special to them though. Convention was just ".@user" but you could also have used "Hello @user!" The point was to force Twitter from treating it as a recipient-only message.
Re: Twitter moves away from 140 characters, ditches confusing and restrictive rules
#10I almost completely ditched Twitter because I got sick of attempting to condense my thoughts into blurbs a toddler with ADD could understand.
On twitter, I have thousands of followers and I'm lucky to get even one reply or mention.
On Facebook, however, I have about 300 friends, and I can post an actual paragraph along with a photo or a video. I often get 30 likes and 20 comments on the posts.
Facebook does a much better job of facilitating real conversations, and yet it still allows people to post 140 character blurbs (if they want to).
I get it though. Twitter is what it is, and there are tons of people who love it. I'm not one of those people.