Rumor: Apple seeks to invest 'hundreds of millions' in Twitter [u]

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 72
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    I think Apple should take a stake in Twitter if for no other reason than to keep another big company from scooping them up. Oh and because it would throw the MS and Google fans into a tizzy. :lol:
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 42 of 72
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    waverunnr wrote: »
    Dvorak makes a good point about Twitter lately...

    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2407756,00.asp

     
    It's a long way from its roots, and doesn't look like it will recover on its road to obsolescence. 
     

    1) It's hard to take any site seriously that still use such an archaic manner to name a URL.

    2) He starts off my saying that only 30 of the 264 world leaders tweet for themselves. ONLY! ONLY!! How many of them have public Facebook pages or had MySpace pages or LiveJournal pages? The fact that 30 leaders from around the around the world are using Twitter — themselves — to communicate with the world at large shows just how powerful a medium it is.

    3) Make no mistake, Twitter is a very useful tool, but if you don't believe me just remember that Dvorak thinks it's going to fail: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1923144,00.asp
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 43 of 72
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    rogifan wrote: »
    I think Apple should take a stake in Twitter if for no other reason than to keep another big company from scooping them up. Oh and because it would throw the MS and Google fans into a tizzy. :lol:

    That is a reason for a healthy investment in the service. They could get a contract with Apple that prevents them from selling the company (or doing other things) with assurances that Apple's needs are met.

    For example, I can see Apple wanting to integrate Twitter in their ITS more deeply. It can be hard to find new music but if a friend can easily tweet that they like a song to Twitter (this is very common in other apps, BTW) or see an artist is trending then it might get interesting.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 44 of 72
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    jensonb wrote: »
    Wall Street Journal says New York Times is one year behind on this story, and it's not happening.

    Which is what I thought as soon as I read he headline.

    You certainly caught that quickly! AI updated the article to reflect this fact. What a way to make a headline huh.
    waverunnr wrote: »
    Dvorak makes a good point about Twitter lately...

    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2407756,00.asp

     
    It's a long way from its roots, and doesn't look like it will recover on its road to obsolescence.

    Good article, thanks for the link. And I concur; Twitter, just like Facebook, are things people really should be using. It takes away real communication, it doesn't have a fundamental good thing in it: it merely is for self-promotion. Something people should do without as one can promote themselves by doing good.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 45 of 72


    Microsoft also invested "hundred of millions" in Apple, back in 1997. All it did was help create a stronger competitor. And we all know how much Microsoft needs competition to innovate.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 46 of 72
    macvictamacvicta Posts: 346member


    So the NYSlimes gets it wrong again.  If only the WSJ was less business oriented and more of a regular paper, I'd take it over the Slimes any day.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 47 of 72
    jason98jason98 Posts: 768member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    Please buy Twitter outright, Apple. Thanks



     


    Yeah right, please spend 10B for even more "Tweet this and Tweet that" instead of investing them in say battery or camera tech.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 48 of 72
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    jason98 wrote: »
    Yeah right, please spend 10B for even more "Tweet this and Tweet that" instead of investing them in say battery or camera tech.

    1) Hundreds of millions has now become billions?

    2) With a company that has over $100 billion in cash there is no either/or scenario between an investment in Twitter and improving their HW. They don't even have to take people off developing HW to make the Twitter investment, unless with Mac OS was delayed due to iPhone OS.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 49 of 72
    applezillaapplezilla Posts: 941member
    Fantastic! Just buy it! Twitter is the new RSS for me.

    Google+ can suck it!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 50 of 72
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by stevenoz in 2001 View Post

    It's always a bad idea when a company strays from their core business.




    Apple makes hardware and operating systems.


     


    This stupid new music player, iPod? What's the point of that?



     


    I don't support a Twitter buyout or even an investment. Just putting things into perspective.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 51 of 72
    jason98jason98 Posts: 768member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    1) Hundreds of millions has now become billions?


     


     


    Do you always pick on comments taken out of context?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 52 of 72
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    philboogie wrote: »
    It takes away real communication, it doesn't have a fundamental good thing in it: it merely is for self-promotion. Something people should do without as one can promote themselves by doing good.

    I think the early examples of Asthon Kutcher and Miley Cyrus posting what they're doing and where they are was a turn off for a lot of people. I certainly couldn't see how it would be useful to me or make communication better but there were plenty of intelligent people I respected that loved it so I gave it a shot. I still didn't get it but finally, months later, it clicked.

    I forget exactly what it was but I found that it was a tool that could make my life better. A tool that could help me communication better. I forget where he wrote/said this but Stephen Fry, a prolific Twitterer basically said that when you only have 140 characters to make a point you learn to write better. You learn to consolidate and focus your points better. You learn to edit your comments, much like a stand-up comedian might retool a joke to be more concise to make it flow better.

    Now that is a personal benefit one might get for posting outside of Twitter (and certainly not one I'm adhering to with this post ????) but there are plenty of other valuable reasons to use Twitter. For me, the number reason is for news. I use RSS less and less because of Twitter. Being able to skim through recent tweets or recent tweets from a certain name is faster and more efficient than having to scour hundreds of recent RSS feeds to find an article I want to read. It's just fast and convenient. A shortcut to finding more info that interests me.

    There are also other benefits like posting something to all your followers, which for me means a few dozen friends as I protect my tweets. It also means seeing what's trending at a given time. When a tragedy strikes Twitter users know first because that will trend. I know what's on the NBC network right now just because of what's trending for the Olympics. A lot of professional bloggers and writers use Twitter to interact with their followers. You can find David Pogue, Arnold Kim, Ricky Gervais, John Gruber, Horace Deidu, Andy Ihnatko and many others responding to users who are commenting on their articles. You can also find them all making comments that they wouldn't have otherwise made a blog or article about.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 53 of 72
    cgjcgj Posts: 276member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tylerk36 View Post


    Honestly I dont like twitter.  Can't see what the benny is for investing in it.  I like FaceBook way more than Twitter.



    I suppose they were better than NBC's interview with Ryan Seacrest that disgracefully cut out the tribute to the victims of the 7/7 bombings.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 54 of 72
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    jason98 wrote: »

    Do you always pick on comments taken out of context?

    If your intent isn't as I rebutted then please clarify your position.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 55 of 72
    hallcr3hallcr3 Posts: 7member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Waverunnr View Post


    Dvorak makes a good point about Twitter lately...


     


    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2407756,00.asp

     


    It's a long way from its roots, and doesn't look like it will recover on its road to obsolescence. 





     





    This is more than a little ridiculous. "World leaders" don't actually send out their own tweets? For shame!


     


    Or people use Twitter to promote their work? Oh my god! The horror!

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 56 of 72
    jason98jason98 Posts: 768member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    If your intent isn't as I rebutted then please clarify your position.


     


    Sure:


     


     


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post




    Apple has considered an investment in the hundreds of millions of dollars, one that could value Twitter at more than $10 billion



     


    Quote:


    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    Please buy Twitter outright, Apple. Thanks



     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jason98 View Post


     


    Yeah right, please spend 10B for even more "Tweet this and Tweet that" instead of investing them in say battery or camera tech.



     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    1) Hundreds of millions has now become billions?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 57 of 72
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    jason98 wrote: »
    Sure:

    Mea culpa. I wasn't connecting that presumed value of its worth to Ireland's comment. Thanks for the reply.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 58 of 72
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    evoken wrote: »
    What makes you think so?

    I don't think so, I know so. I have some sources very close to the matter that told me so. Unnamed of course cause they signed all those NDA thingies.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 59 of 72
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,421member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MacVicta View Post


    So the NYSlimes gets it wrong again.  If only the WSJ was less business oriented and more of a regular paper, I'd take it over the Slimes any day.



    Actually, the "regular paper" part of WSJ is its best part. It's about as thorough and careful as reporting can possibly be in the US, IMHO.


     


    Their op-ed pages, OTOH, are good for not much more than a chuckle.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 60 of 72
    SpamSandwichspamsandwich Posts: 33,407member


    So now that the story has essentially been debunked, how about deleting it entirely or retitling the story?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.