Slashdot Mirror


Will Twitter Join Podcasting on the 'Net Sidelines'?

Ian Lamont writes "Twitter has established itself in some quarters as a must-have communications tool, and its power to connect and even incite people is hard to deny. But does Twitter have long-term, mainstream potential? Or does a poor revenue model and strong competition mean that it's destined to be a sideline Internet technology, much like podcasting has failed to live up to early hype?"

19 of 221 comments (clear)

  1. Twitter ver One by Stanistani · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Twitter needs to make a few changes, and its adoption curve could turn upwards -
    the biggest in my mind?

    Allow linked URLs.

    That would double its usefulness.

    1. Re:Twitter ver One by Stanistani · · Score: 3, Insightful

      From the Twitter FAQ:
      "Does Twitter allow html in web updates?
      No. We escape all html for security purposes. However, if you paste in a link that is less than 30 characters, we'll post it in its entirety. If it's longer than 30 characters, we'll convert it to a tiny URL."

      The link is posted, but is not clickable.

      The tiny URL has its pros and cons, as Slashdotters well know...

  2. What Happened to Podcasting? by lousyd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't see any sidelining of podcasting. I can get podcasts everywhere.

    --
    If aspiration is a virtue, achievement cannot be a vice.
  3. Social games by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All of these social networking sites are popular because they let people play the high school socialization game at any stage in life, and they make it very public. Now you don't just become popular - everyone can see how popular you are. It's a minigame for life, or at least for the lives of rather dull people.

    --
    "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    1. Re:Social games by PatboyX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I tried Twitter for a bit in order to find out what all the talk was about on TWiT. I joined and spent the day doing what I saw on Twitter - posting and commenting on my every movement and dumb thoughts that popped into my head. After a bit, I felt like it was merely an ends rather than a means to anything. I think the vast majority of stuff going on there is all about thinking of something pithy to post or feeling compelled to post your location as opposed to functional, useful information for your followers. Even the term "followers" is kind of creepy. Just as you said, tons of people are using these social networks not to keep in contact with actual friends but to simply pile up points in some strange sociopath game.

    2. Re:Social games by Stradivarius · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think there's much more to it than the more juvenile "game" aspects. Sure, you could obsess about how many "Friends" you have, or check your Facebook twenty times a day. There are certainly people who do that. I think that's kinda nuts, but there are lots of behaviors I think are strange. To each his own.

      As for the rest of us, social networking sites provide an easy (and thus well-utilized) way to maintain real-world relationships when people aren't nearby to hang out. A lot of us make good friends in college, but then move all over the country for jobs. Social-networking sites provide tools to help keep in touch, keep on top of what our friends have been doing, etc., so the relationships don't just die out. Much like people used to do with letters, but since the required effort is much smaller, people have the time and ability to keep many more friends in the loop.

      And then when you do get a chance to meet up with people you haven't seen in a while, it's not as weird. Having no contact with someone for years produces awkward social interactions when you do, as anyone who's attended a 10-year high school reunion can tell you. But if you've been occasionally communicating via social networking (or other means) during that interval, you still feel like you know the person.

    3. Re:Social games by D+Ninja · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But they are. People like and WANT to feel connected. As we become a culture that is more connected, losing that connection has real implications for the people who are disconnected. They feel as though they are being left out or that they are missing something. Many times, I wonder if people are having as much fun as they appear to be having on Facebook/Twitter/MySpace/etc. As an previous poster said, it's high school all over again.

      With all that said, being connected via someone's text updates vs. being connected by sitting down and actually interacting with someone is a very different thing. Give me a real, face-to-face conversation any day.

  4. Podcasting (sideline?) by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know what the fate of Twitter will be. It seems like it's not doing anything complicated, so even if the concept lives on, it might be that Twitter itself goes under.

    On the other hand, I'm not sure what's being said here about podcasting. I think the hype has certainly died down, but the hype on the internet in general has died down too. Gone are the days where people thought putting up a website automatically meant earning millions of dollars.

    I know some very non-technical people who download free podcasts of popular radio and TV shows to play on their iPods instead of listening to the radio. They aren't bragging about it or even talking much about it unless you bring it up, but that's only because it's become common-place enough that it's not interesting anymore. Sure, there are lots of people who don't listen to podcasts, but there are also lots who do.

    Not that I have anything investing in the argument. I don't really care whether podcasting is a "sideline" technology. I'm just not sure what it means to call podcasting a "sideline" technology. It's not a rarely-used technology, though.

    1. Re:Podcasting (sideline?) by STrinity · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't know what the fate of Twitter will be. It seems like it's not doing anything complicated, so even if the concept lives on, it might be that Twitter itself goes under.
      The real problem with Twitter is they don't have anyway of monetizing it. It's basically a standalone version of Facebook and MySpace status updates, or blogs for SMS users. You don't have to go to their site to view tweets, or use their proprietary software, so there's nowhere for them to stick ads, except in the messages themselves. And the messages have a 140 character limit, and I don't think anyone is going to use a medium where the signal:ad ratio is less than 50%.
      --
      Les Miserables Volume 1 now up with my reading of
  5. Re:wtf is twitter by h4rm0ny · · Score: 4, Insightful


    It's a system whereby people tragically sit there in pubs "twittering" to other people instead of participating in an actual conversation. At least in my experience. In practice, it's just basically IRC re-implemented over SMS messages. They even seem to have kept the old "line limit" in that your cut off at the length of a standard txt (about 140 characters, I think). In my view, all it really seems to accomplish is leaving people not quite focused on what they're doing because they keep getting "twitters" arriving. If you have something important to send, you use email (with all its inherent advantages). If you just want to make limited comments to a "chat room," you can use Twitter that other users may or may not be paying attention to, you can use Twitter.

    As mobile access to the Internet gets more pervasive, SMS will die or at least merge with other technologies anyway.

    --

    Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
  6. Re:Who says podcasting is "sidelined"? by FinestLittleSpace · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I agree. My girlfriend works in online promotion at a record label and the impact of podcasts on her ability to promote bands through these is absolutely incredible. People like the guardian will happily run long interviews with extended ad-hoc live performances (complete with a few fluff ups) because fans want to listen to them and they simply don't have time limits like on radio.

    Most people I know, geeks or not, also love to listen to their favourite radio shows on podcasts because it's EASIER and they don't have to worry about leaving the desk for 5 minutes half way through the show. In London here especially it's very handy as the radio doesn't work on the tube, but... a podcast does.

    I don't quite understand how Twitter has gained the title of 'a technology', but there you go. It's effectively a flash in the pan to many people but it's not useless... then again I've never used it and probably never will, even as an avid techie.

  7. Re:wtf is twitter by kshade · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One Twitter update via a webpage/mobile device, many people can be notified at once.
    Whoa, one-to-many communication is certainly a feature missing in E-Mail, SMS or IRC :>
  8. not sidelined- just failed for the 'technorati' by SuperBanana · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the issue is that while "Mainstream Media" (in particularly NPR/PRI) has embraced it whole-heartedly with the iPod-using masses on the bandwagon as listeners...nobody's watching/listening to the crap put out by the "technorati" and average joes. It's embarrassing to be "pioneers" and get completely steamrollered by traditional media, and ignored by the general public. Or, they think that because it's failing for them, it's "dead" for everyone else; there's this insipid belief amongst the technology-using loud-mouths that the world revolves around them. If everyone's blogging about how great jam-and-sausage sandwiches are (or more amusingly, blogging about how everyone is blogging about it), it MUST be true, right?

    I can't stand video/pod casts (or worse, "video blogs") by Joe Shmoes, or even the "big" "bloggers". Usually they take about 5 minutes to express an opinion or convey a bit of news that could have been written in one short paragraph I could have read in about 20 seconds.

    The whole thing reminds me about the comparison between Walmart and online companies; a single Walmart pulls in more profits in one DAY than most silicon valley companies do in a YEAR. That's how completely insignificant most "Web 2.0" crap truly is.

  9. Wait, what? by Phroggy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm a bit confused. Maybe I missed the hype that Podcasting has failed to live up to, but I use it every day and I think it's fantastic. Finally, the days of streaming-only RealAudio are gone!

    iTunes is used by bajillions of people worldwide, and the Podcast button is right there, prominently displayed. There's all kinds of content, from public radio shows that I can now enjoy whenever is convenient for me instead of whenever they're broadcast on the air, commercial stuff like NBC Nightly News, tons of independent stuff running the gamut from utter crap to sheer genius, great comedy like The Onion Radio News and the Weekly Radio Address, and probably more I haven't bothered to look for yet.

    Of course I understand that many people aren't interested in any of this, and that's fine, but Podcasting is certainly not a failure.

    --
    $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
    $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  10. Do I just not get it? by Joe+Random · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've always dreaded that, upon growing older, I would become one of those old folks who just don't "get it". You know, like your granddad who doesn't know what all this hype is about the Internet, or your elderly Aunt whose VCR always flashes "12:00". Thus, I've made an effort to keep abreast of current technologies and trends.

    Now I look at Twitter, and I have to wonder, has the "not getting it" finally started to overwhelm me? Is it possible that Twitter isn't something other than just broadcast instant messaging for the ADD crowd? Could it actually be something more than taking social networking to a pathetic extreme, where informing your friends of your breakfast choices and bowel movements via SMS somehow seems like a good idea? Am I going to be relegated to shaking my fists and yelling at kids to "Get off of my lawn^H^H^H^H Internets!" like some sort of crotchety old miser?

    1. Re:Do I just not get it? by n-baxley · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not just you. It's most people that don't get Twitter. The reason that twitter has become a "phenomenon" is that it appeals to the people who "report" the "news". Bloggers, video bloggers, and old-school reporters basically like to hear themselves talk. A system that lets them stream-of-conscience out to lots of people and keep score while doing it? Jackpot! The rest of the 99% of us don't need this kind of reinforcement so we "don't get it".

      "Nate"

    2. Re:Do I just not get it? by Schnapple · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If I did not listen to This Week In Tech, I would have never heard of Twitter until this article came out. I haven't tried it but I, too don't see what the big deal is. But consider this.

      TWiT is made by Leo Laporte, in Petaluma, California, a San Francisco suburb.
      Twitter is in San Francisco.
      Pownce is in San Francisco.
      Digg is in San Francisco.
      Facebook is in Palo Alto, California near San Francisco.

      The reason TWiT thinks that Twitter and Pownce are such big deals is because they're all from the same area. I love TWiT but with the exception of John C. Dvorak, everyone on that show seems to forget that Silicon Valley != The Rest Of The World. That show has people every week who go on and on about how Twitter and Facebook will change the universe, but they seem to not realize what a bubble they're living in.

      So for the same reason everyone in Texas wants to know what kind of truck you drive (I live in Texas so I get to make that generalization) everyone in Silicon Valley wants to be your Twitter buddy. Twitter will go the way of MySpace and soon be that technology no one talks about anymore.

  11. Re:Yes! by Naughty+Bob · · Score: 4, Insightful

    According to CmdrTaco, he's a tool.

    --
    "Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
  12. Re:"Podcasting" - the new name for MP4 by a.ameri · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Dude, chill out. The word has entered the OED, as well as all respectable dictionaries. Indeed, I find Webster's definition quite apt:

    a Web-based audio broadcast via an RSS feed, accessed by subscription over the Internet

    As you can see, there's no mention of 'iPod' in the definition of the word; nor has there ever been. Now, the etymology of a word is very different to its definition, and I'll grant you that etymologically speaking, podcast wasn't the most correct word to describe this technology, but if you look at the etymology of most of the words we are now using in the English language, you'll see that we are using many of our words in a very convoluted manner. Quite often, the definition we now associate to our words vastly differs with what etymologically the word should mean.

    Reading today's news articles, I'm sure when we read: Zimbabwe's Wildlife Decimated by Economic Crisis, we don't think that they are systematically killing one out of ten wildlife species in Zimbabwe, even though that's what etymologically, decimate should mean. Now, why should it be any different for podcast?

    Languages are living creatures, they evolve and change. At the end of the day, language is a means of communication, and if by saying podcast, both me and you are referring to the same thing and communicating effetively, not only is podcasting not wrong, it is quite an apt and unambiguous word.

    --
    -- /* Those who don't underestand Unix, are condemned to reinvent it poorly */