Actually, the new Facebook layout/format made it LESS like Twitter is some respects.
Well, nearly every criticism I've heard about the new FB layout is that it's become more like Twitter. The "Status" became "What are you doing?" which is very much like Twitter.
Facebook is trying to keep from going the way of Friendster and even MySpace, but, the cycle for these social networking sites isn't very long as people become bored or disgusted with one service and then move on to another. Facebook has a big problem in that they want to grow the service, which requires more members that use it, while at the same time they are restricting their service to prevent people from using it "too much" which often results if the closing of perfectly legitimate member accounts. As a result, they are alienating a lot of active members who are jumping to other sites like Twitter and taking all their friends with them.
Twitter is seeing the benefit of this exodus from FB for now, but, they, too, will become obsolete one day.
Well, nearly every criticism I've heard about the new FB layout is that it's become more like Twitter. The "Status" became "What are you doing?" which is very much like Twitter.
I agree, but while the home screen is pretty similar in functionality, but that ignores the profile, group and fan pages completely.
Quote:
Facebook is trying to keep from going the way of Friendster and even MySpace, but, the cycle for these social networking sites isn't very long as people become bored or disgusted with one service and then move on to another. Facebook has a big problem in that they want to grow the service, which requires more members that use it, while at the same time they are restricting their service to prevent people from using it "too much" which often results if the closing of perfectly legitimate member accounts. As a result, they are alienating a lot of active members who are jumping to other sites like Twitter and taking all their friends with them.
FB is closing legitimate accounts? I've not heard of it, what are the circumstances? Is this something you've seen happen to someone you know, or are you going by hearsay?
Quote:
Twitter is seeing the benefit of this exodus from FB for now, but, they, too, will become obsolete one day.
Social networking sites do come and go, but Twitter is enough different that I just don't see it as something that would substitute for FB. I don't even communicate with the same kind of people with Twitter, it's not the same kind of relationship.
FB is closing legitimate accounts? I've not heard of it, what are the circumstances? Is this something you've seen happen to someone you know, or are you going by hearsay?
It has happened to three friends. One had 200+ friends, and had a bunch of people trying to be his friend, so, he kept getting automatic warnings from FB, which he thought he was abiding, then one day his account was closed. Facebook wouldn't tell him why. Two other people I know on FB had the same thing happen to them for "using the service too much," that was all they were told. They were not spammers or promoting anything. They just had lots of friend activity, and Facebook found that somehow violated their policies and permanently shut down their accounts.
You can also do a search on Google and find lots of similar stories.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Social networking sites do come and go, but Twitter is enough different that I just don't see it as something that would substitute for FB. I don't even communicate with the same kind of people with Twitter, it's not the same kind of relationship.
Twitter isn't that unique in what it does, which is essentially instant messaging. However, MySpace was also different and unique at one time, too, and prior to that it was Friendster, etc. I can guarantee you that in a few more years Twitter will be ho-hum, and everyone will be talking about _____________.
It has happened to three friends. One had 200+ friends, and had a bunch of people trying to be his friend, so, he kept getting automatic warnings from FB, which he thought he was abiding, then one day his account was closed. Facebook wouldn't tell him why. Two other people I know on FB had the same thing happen to them for "using the service too much," that was all they were told. They were not spammers or promoting anything. They just had lots of friend activity, and Facebook found that somehow violated their policies and permanently shut down their accounts.
You can also do a search on Google and find lots of similar stories.
That's odd and seems pretty silly for them to do that, it doesn't really make sense except maybe as a case of mistaken identity or looking at the situation too abstractly, like using data to read the situation without actually looking at the use.
Quote:
Twitter isn't that unique in what it does, which is essentially instant messaging. However, MySpace was also different and unique at one time, too, and prior to that it was Friendster, etc. I can guarantee you that in a few more years Twitter will be ho-hum, and everyone will be talking about _____________.
I didn't mean to say that Twitter was a unique system, just that it's very different from FB. While I can understand why a lot of people think that the home page is mimicking Twitter, it also organizes responses in a way similar to FriendFeed's method, which I think is a good thing.
I understand that there is a fad nature to social networking. I can see why FB can be used as a replacement for Myspace, but I don't see how Twitter would be considered a replacement for FB.
That's odd and seems pretty silly for them to do that, it doesn't really make sense except maybe as a case of mistaken identity or looking at the situation too abstractly, like using data to read the situation without actually looking at the use.
I believe this is all done automatically using some secret algorithm that FB uses to determine if someone is "abusing" their service or not. That's why it's nearly impossible to get a real person at Facebook to respond in a meaningful, informative way. They send out automated emails with generic responses, and there doesn't appear to be any way to appeal the decisions made by these Facebook Ban-Bots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
I can see why FB can be used as a replacement for Myspace, but I don't see how Twitter would be considered a replacement for FB.
I didn't mean to imply that Twitter is a replacement for FB (although it has become that for the people who've been kicked off Facebook). Just that, like MySpace and Facebook, it will become yesterday's news when something similar and better arrives in the future.
On Wednesday, Twitter co-founders Biz Stone and Evan Williams were on ABC's The View as part of Twitter?s current media campaign that has also included appearances on Oprah and The Colbert Report. Responding to a question from Barbara Walters about the rumors surrounding an imminent purchase of Twitter by a larger tech company, Stone responded with an unequivocal, ?No. We are not for sale.?
True. I didn't think of it in that way. They don't really have a financial model in that sense.
Still, if it were bought by anyone and made proprietary and had advertisements in the client etc. it would become instantly useless and die overnight IMO. Perhaps this is why the developers don't sell as they see it as a valuable service and don't want it to die. Apple could probably sway them by promising to keep it an open standard or something.
I haven't heard it being talked about out loud so much, but AFAIK the reason Google wanted to buy Twitter was because of search. Twitter is a far better real time search platform than anything Google or Microsoft has been trying to cobble together from scratch and it organically developed all on it's own. How many times have you been searching for results that are current to the moment as opposed to whatever Google has indexed since yesterday? Again though, this would be an "outside" monetisation of the platform as opposed to making money off the service itself.
When I first read the title of this article I thought it was absolute nonsense, but the more we talk about it, the more I think that there are valid reasons for Apple to buy Twitter, but given our complete lack of info on what's going on (if anything is even going on), it's probably meaningless to discuss it at this stage.
I guess that shows how bored we all are to be arguing back and forth about it when there is no hope of coming to any reasonable conclusion. My theory is that they will either buy it, or they won't.
I couldn't agree more that Apple buying Twitter would be a great move for Apple. Twitter is not profitable but that's because they've never had a mechanism to be profitable, until recently. Their search, once they develop a following, will be immensely profitable - just like Google Search. Apple entering the billion dollar search industry with an acquisition of Twitter makes sense.
Google and Microsoft can afford to bow out of acquisition talks because they can build their own search feature based on user input. Apple cannot, they need a jumping off point and Twitter would be it.
I couldn't agree more that Apple buying Twitter would be a great move for Apple. Twitter is not profitable but that's because they've never had a mechanism to be profitable, until recently. Their search, once they develop a following, will be immensely profitable - just like Google Search. Apple entering the billion dollar search industry with an acquisition of Twitter makes sense.
Google and Microsoft can afford to bow out of acquisition talks because they can build their own search feature based on user input. Apple cannot, they need a jumping off point and Twitter would be it.
The problem I see with that is Twitter's search only covers their own service. The internet as a whole is probably at least a few orders of magnitude larger and more complex. And their service is running pretty close to capacity as well.
The problem I see with that is Twitter's search only covers their own service.
You're missing the point of their search. I don't search Twitter to find out everything there is to know about Christopher Columbus or how to make a quiche. I search Twitter to find out if its raining in Denver right now, how big are the waves on the North Shore right now, what did Paris Hilton do last night, etc.
There is money in those searches i.e. ads for things in Denver, Hawaii, and nakedness. If Apple scoops up Twitter, dumps a few bucks into their infrastructure, helooooo mama!
Facebook is trying to imitate Twitter in many respects, much to the dismay of many users when the new features and layout were recently introduced. So, Twitter is obviously having an impact on FB's popularity. And as FB continues to throw users off who "use the service too much," they will eventually make themselves obsolete.
My prediction: Apple will not buy Twitter. Twitter will buy Facebook.
There are Apple centric social networks out there these days!
Comments
Actually, the new Facebook layout/format made it LESS like Twitter is some respects.
Well, nearly every criticism I've heard about the new FB layout is that it's become more like Twitter. The "Status" became "What are you doing?" which is very much like Twitter.
Facebook is trying to keep from going the way of Friendster and even MySpace, but, the cycle for these social networking sites isn't very long as people become bored or disgusted with one service and then move on to another. Facebook has a big problem in that they want to grow the service, which requires more members that use it, while at the same time they are restricting their service to prevent people from using it "too much" which often results if the closing of perfectly legitimate member accounts. As a result, they are alienating a lot of active members who are jumping to other sites like Twitter and taking all their friends with them.
Twitter is seeing the benefit of this exodus from FB for now, but, they, too, will become obsolete one day.
Well, nearly every criticism I've heard about the new FB layout is that it's become more like Twitter. The "Status" became "What are you doing?" which is very much like Twitter.
I agree, but while the home screen is pretty similar in functionality, but that ignores the profile, group and fan pages completely.
Facebook is trying to keep from going the way of Friendster and even MySpace, but, the cycle for these social networking sites isn't very long as people become bored or disgusted with one service and then move on to another. Facebook has a big problem in that they want to grow the service, which requires more members that use it, while at the same time they are restricting their service to prevent people from using it "too much" which often results if the closing of perfectly legitimate member accounts. As a result, they are alienating a lot of active members who are jumping to other sites like Twitter and taking all their friends with them.
FB is closing legitimate accounts? I've not heard of it, what are the circumstances? Is this something you've seen happen to someone you know, or are you going by hearsay?
Twitter is seeing the benefit of this exodus from FB for now, but, they, too, will become obsolete one day.
Social networking sites do come and go, but Twitter is enough different that I just don't see it as something that would substitute for FB. I don't even communicate with the same kind of people with Twitter, it's not the same kind of relationship.
FB is closing legitimate accounts? I've not heard of it, what are the circumstances? Is this something you've seen happen to someone you know, or are you going by hearsay?
It has happened to three friends. One had 200+ friends, and had a bunch of people trying to be his friend, so, he kept getting automatic warnings from FB, which he thought he was abiding, then one day his account was closed. Facebook wouldn't tell him why. Two other people I know on FB had the same thing happen to them for "using the service too much," that was all they were told. They were not spammers or promoting anything. They just had lots of friend activity, and Facebook found that somehow violated their policies and permanently shut down their accounts.
You can also do a search on Google and find lots of similar stories.
Social networking sites do come and go, but Twitter is enough different that I just don't see it as something that would substitute for FB. I don't even communicate with the same kind of people with Twitter, it's not the same kind of relationship.
Twitter isn't that unique in what it does, which is essentially instant messaging. However, MySpace was also different and unique at one time, too, and prior to that it was Friendster, etc. I can guarantee you that in a few more years Twitter will be ho-hum, and everyone will be talking about _____________.
It has happened to three friends. One had 200+ friends, and had a bunch of people trying to be his friend, so, he kept getting automatic warnings from FB, which he thought he was abiding, then one day his account was closed. Facebook wouldn't tell him why. Two other people I know on FB had the same thing happen to them for "using the service too much," that was all they were told. They were not spammers or promoting anything. They just had lots of friend activity, and Facebook found that somehow violated their policies and permanently shut down their accounts.
You can also do a search on Google and find lots of similar stories.
That's odd and seems pretty silly for them to do that, it doesn't really make sense except maybe as a case of mistaken identity or looking at the situation too abstractly, like using data to read the situation without actually looking at the use.
Twitter isn't that unique in what it does, which is essentially instant messaging. However, MySpace was also different and unique at one time, too, and prior to that it was Friendster, etc. I can guarantee you that in a few more years Twitter will be ho-hum, and everyone will be talking about _____________.
I didn't mean to say that Twitter was a unique system, just that it's very different from FB. While I can understand why a lot of people think that the home page is mimicking Twitter, it also organizes responses in a way similar to FriendFeed's method, which I think is a good thing.
I understand that there is a fad nature to social networking. I can see why FB can be used as a replacement for Myspace, but I don't see how Twitter would be considered a replacement for FB.
That's odd and seems pretty silly for them to do that, it doesn't really make sense except maybe as a case of mistaken identity or looking at the situation too abstractly, like using data to read the situation without actually looking at the use.
I believe this is all done automatically using some secret algorithm that FB uses to determine if someone is "abusing" their service or not. That's why it's nearly impossible to get a real person at Facebook to respond in a meaningful, informative way. They send out automated emails with generic responses, and there doesn't appear to be any way to appeal the decisions made by these Facebook Ban-Bots.
I can see why FB can be used as a replacement for Myspace, but I don't see how Twitter would be considered a replacement for FB.
I didn't mean to imply that Twitter is a replacement for FB (although it has become that for the people who've been kicked off Facebook). Just that, like MySpace and Facebook, it will become yesterday's news when something similar and better arrives in the future.
hahahaha
Please, we don't need posts from that useless site reposted here.
Ah, friendly one you are.
On Wednesday, Twitter co-founders Biz Stone and Evan Williams were on ABC's The View as part of Twitter?s current media campaign that has also included appearances on Oprah and The Colbert Report. Responding to a question from Barbara Walters about the rumors surrounding an imminent purchase of Twitter by a larger tech company, Stone responded with an unequivocal, ?No. We are not for sale.?
True. I didn't think of it in that way. They don't really have a financial model in that sense.
Still, if it were bought by anyone and made proprietary and had advertisements in the client etc. it would become instantly useless and die overnight IMO. Perhaps this is why the developers don't sell as they see it as a valuable service and don't want it to die. Apple could probably sway them by promising to keep it an open standard or something.
I haven't heard it being talked about out loud so much, but AFAIK the reason Google wanted to buy Twitter was because of search. Twitter is a far better real time search platform than anything Google or Microsoft has been trying to cobble together from scratch and it organically developed all on it's own. How many times have you been searching for results that are current to the moment as opposed to whatever Google has indexed since yesterday? Again though, this would be an "outside" monetisation of the platform as opposed to making money off the service itself.
When I first read the title of this article I thought it was absolute nonsense, but the more we talk about it, the more I think that there are valid reasons for Apple to buy Twitter, but given our complete lack of info on what's going on (if anything is even going on), it's probably meaningless to discuss it at this stage.
I guess that shows how bored we all are to be arguing back and forth about it when there is no hope of coming to any reasonable conclusion. My theory is that they will either buy it, or they won't.
I couldn't agree more that Apple buying Twitter would be a great move for Apple. Twitter is not profitable but that's because they've never had a mechanism to be profitable, until recently. Their search, once they develop a following, will be immensely profitable - just like Google Search. Apple entering the billion dollar search industry with an acquisition of Twitter makes sense.
Google and Microsoft can afford to bow out of acquisition talks because they can build their own search feature based on user input. Apple cannot, they need a jumping off point and Twitter would be it.
I couldn't agree more that Apple buying Twitter would be a great move for Apple. Twitter is not profitable but that's because they've never had a mechanism to be profitable, until recently. Their search, once they develop a following, will be immensely profitable - just like Google Search. Apple entering the billion dollar search industry with an acquisition of Twitter makes sense.
Google and Microsoft can afford to bow out of acquisition talks because they can build their own search feature based on user input. Apple cannot, they need a jumping off point and Twitter would be it.
The problem I see with that is Twitter's search only covers their own service. The internet as a whole is probably at least a few orders of magnitude larger and more complex. And their service is running pretty close to capacity as well.
The problem I see with that is Twitter's search only covers their own service.
You're missing the point of their search. I don't search Twitter to find out everything there is to know about Christopher Columbus or how to make a quiche. I search Twitter to find out if its raining in Denver right now, how big are the waves on the North Shore right now, what did Paris Hilton do last night, etc.
There is money in those searches i.e. ads for things in Denver, Hawaii, and nakedness. If Apple scoops up Twitter, dumps a few bucks into their infrastructure, helooooo mama!
Facebook is trying to imitate Twitter in many respects, much to the dismay of many users when the new features and layout were recently introduced. So, Twitter is obviously having an impact on FB's popularity. And as FB continues to throw users off who "use the service too much," they will eventually make themselves obsolete.
My prediction: Apple will not buy Twitter. Twitter will buy Facebook.
There are Apple centric social networks out there these days!