Slashdot Mirror
Is Twitter Rendered Obsolete By Google+?
suraj.sun writes with a ComputerWorld piece predicting the end of Twitter, at least in its current form. From the article: "It's only a matter of time before Twitter becomes a ghost town. While Google+ will soon do all the things Twitter does, Twitter can't support a long list of the things Google+ supports. Also on Google+, you can post pictures and videos directly in posts, launch immediately into a video chat, send your posts to nonmembers and even present all your posts marked 'Public' as a blog available to anyone with an Internet."
Can I get "an Internet"? How do you quantify one?
No.
But on Twitter I can use any name I wish ...
Just one Internet? All the cool kids have at least 2 Internets.
If were about "doing more," people would still just be using email (and email lists) over twitter. It's all the restrictions of twitter that prevent it from being a nuisance that made it stick.
This was my immediate reaction to Google + as well.
My Google+ Prediction. It'll have a small impact on Facebook. It'll destroy twitter.
Here is why I think Google+ isn't a facebook replacement and never will be: you can follow people without their permission. So that means people will be scanning your profile waiting for you to "slip up" and accidentally post to the wrong circle. Inevitably like Weiner Gate someone will.
With Facebook there is one privacy setting for who can see your posts "Friends", "Friends of Friends", "Everyone" (or you can setup a custom privacy per-post. As a result I pretty much only see friends' posts on my news feed. On Google+ I'm already getting celebrity and industry semi-celebrity wall posts. Sure you can in the back of your mind know that your post is only going to your inner-circle. But it just feels so vulnerable sitting out in a sea of very public posts streaming onto your Google+ wall. You set that post you just made to "inner-circle"... right? Riiiiightt!?
At least with Facebook you know the score. If you don't want them to see it. Don't friend them. If you didn't friend them and your defaults are setup so that only friend see your posts... you're golden. With Google+ your brother's new Baby announcement is going to be mixed with Perez Hilton's daily gossip. Perception is everything. As soon as people start using Google+ like twitter (and they will, who doesn't want to follow Steve Martin?) the perception of privacy will be gone.
Google+ is Twitter+ and it's a welcome replacement to the rediculous and archaic monster that is Twitter but you're one Weineresque DM away from never using it for anything personal ever again.
Do you feel lucky punk? Well, do ya?
https://plus.google.com/106339468652977106822/posts/NEPcKejKv2b
And nothing of value was lost.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
One Internet please!
No.
Kids! Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your home!
I thought Twitter already obsolete.
"While Google+ will soon do all the things Twitter does, Twitter can't support a long list of the things Google+ supports"
Since when has featureset been Twitter's strong point?! It's managed to own all other competition while staying remaining in and of itself a platform that you can post 140 characters of text on, nothing more.
CheShA: Manchester Breakcore / Drill and Bass Yes I'm a s
While Google+ will soon do all the things Twitter does, Twitter can't support a long list of the things Google+ supports.
Yes, Google+ has almost has all the cool features, just like the Ford Edsel.
And its designed and marketed by a billion dollar company, so you know everybody will want it.
..... lose everything without notice for choosing the "wrong" name.
...will Google lock me out of Gmail and other services if they decide my Twitter account violated the TOS?
No? Well in that case I'll keep using Twitter and they can keep Google Plus.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
That means it's sure to win. This reminds of of when OS/2 mopped the floor with Windows because it had superior multitasking and memory management!
If I wanted a sig I would have filled in that stupid box.
In a related news story, apples will replace oranges, pineapples will be outmoded by the superior engineering that is the banana, and red bull will totally replace water... except in toilets.
This signature has Super Cow Powers
when it's slow, i find the extra internets really help with the twittering speed.
Where Twitter loses is in monetizing traffic. In other words, Google knows how to use your traffic to feed you ads that sooner or later you click on. They do it well enough to make a lot of money.
This works for Google because all of their products draw you into their web space, and you can't avoid being presented with Google Ads.
The weakness of Twitter is that in many ways it's easier to use from a phone, Hootsuite, or some other client - even Google Plus with an add-on. There's never any need to actually visit the Twitter web site.
Consequently they're stuck with those idiotic "Promoted Tweets" - which in my experience are so far removed from anything that interests me that I really think they're using chimpanzees instead of algorithms to place them.
Three Squirrels
Does anyone even know what Google+ does? I got invited so I checked it out. I found it boring. As I was adding people to my circles, I discovered that most of them weren't even on Google+. There's no way to know for sure who's on it and who's not. That made no sense.
I kind of look at twitter as an rrs hosting service (for personal use) that put a web interface on the top and made a purpose built manager and search engine. Its main success was that the account was secondary to the "tweets" (so you did not need to share personal information, and you knew what you were sharing) and that they got media endorsement. The limitations lowered the barrier for the general public to use it.
Is Google+ rendered redundant by Twitter?
Can I get "an Internet"?
RFC 1918 explains how to set up your own internet.
First step is to let in the users. Need to get me an invite.
Remember when because some of your colleagues were on ICQ or AOL but some were on Yahoo Messenger but some were on MSN but some had started to move to Skype etc you ended up having to have accounts with all of them because you don't control which account the person you need to speak to likes to use? And the techies amongst us started wanting tools like Kopete to deal with our plurality of accounts? That's the direction I see social networks going in. Already there are people who are Facebook friends whose Facebook status updates come from their Twitter app. Meanwhile many Twitter posts are there to point me to blog articles on blogs that I could also individually follow using RSS. And all those social communities hasn't, for instance, stopped me doing the old fashioned form of community of visiting and commenting on sites I like, like Slashdot. One more social network does not necessarily mean death to the rest. I don't see Twitter and Facebook following Bebo and MySpace into insignificance. It means yet another system I'll need to have an account on because people I need/want to follow/talk to use it. It does not mean I have a new single account that I consider to be my identity -- "me on the web" -- it means I'll have (well, if someone sends me an invite) an additional personally identifiable account on the Web. I think interoperability between social networks is going to be the next big battleground.
I thought Twitter already obsolete.
You might be right. Have Twitter's sockpuppets posted anything in the past several months? But I guess the real name requirement will probably cut down on such sockpuppetry.
Twitter doesn't mass delete profiles like Google Plus does, so no Twitter won't go away any time soon.
If you look at Google+ and Twitter as APIs, then you can implement Twitter using the Google+ API but not the reverse. That doesn't mean things can't change, but I bet a few Twitter project managers have been sleepless lately.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Where would one acquire "an Internet" ?
GOOGLE + there are resources in the strategy far more than the FACEBOOK and TT, although FACEBOOK lasted a long time but GOOGLE's too broad, and I would like GOOGLE + will still snatch a large market...
In the TT and GOOLGE + FACEBOOK also released my own site above information http://www.tanfoot.com, traffic is completely different, TT reproduced the largest number, FACEBOOK Click for a maximum, GOOGLE + comments for a maximum of
People use Twitter for quick updates and news, not for life stories. It's RSS for everyone. As an aside, this comment would fit on Twitter.
They can both be obsolete.
Seriously, if this were in any way correct, then Facebook would have already killed Twitter.
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
Twitter will take a hit, but it will survive. It is enough different from G+ and FriendFace that it will continue to fit the needs of much of its user base. What I find most interesting is that nobody has mentioned Diaspora since Google+ launched. Is it a dead project?
I have a Facebook, don't use it. I don't need Google+. Twitter is a good niche for me because it allows me to keep some track of my friends without having to know every damn thing they are doing. It also lends to being more anonymous. I don't really want my real name out there except to people I really know well. But I have plenty of followers on Twitter who like what I post and don't care that much EXACTLY who I am. Twitter lends itself well to that since neither Facebook nor G+ allow pseudonyms.
The hypno-toad always wins.
Gently reply
Twitter can't f*ck with my gmail account. I deleted my G+ profile specifically for this reason.
But on Twitter I can use any name I wish
Yeah, like Erris, Mactrope, gnutoo, inTheLoo, willeyhill, westbake, Odder, ibane, deadzero, freenix, myCopyWrong, right handed, or GNUChop. Use any or all to promote GNU/Linux and dis M$.
+1 Internets for you (because I'm all out of mod points)
Shocking. A bunch of anti-social nerds post about how they hate social networking. I never would have seen these comments coming.
I really can't see Google+ replacing Twitter anytime soon, as Google+ has a strict requirement for real names and will even close accounts based on it. Twitter on the other side is fine with pseudonyms and gets used a lot with them, not only from people that want to keep their real names private, but also organizations and companies that use it as their news feed or just from fake personalities for commedy purposes.
Google+ seems to have some plans to allow business use in the future, but right now they doesn't and it's not clear if they only allow that for money or also for the average make-shift organization (i.e. Anonymous, Wikileaks, Free Software stuff, etc.).
As far as I see it, with it's requirement for real names Google has essentially taken a first real step to being evil, while Twitter on the other side seems to be a much more open platform that is used by a lot of people that don't want their real names to be known for one reason or another.
a random comment from google's post (https://plus.google.com/113116318008017777871/posts/VJoZMS8zVqU#113116318008017777871/posts/VJoZMS8zVqU):
Is this about advertising revenue and more accurate subscriber numbers to up ad revenue when introduced? Is the policy an attempt to give Google+ more credibility? Forgive my bluntness, but I don't believe for a moment that you truly think the naming policy is enforceable. What is the REAL reason behind the policy against anonymity here?
I think that guy hit it on the nail. google's ONLY customers are the advertising companies, the ad-men. they want to deliver 'more accurate' info to those bastards.
"oh, its so that everyone can trust each other".
liars. don't piss in my cornflakes and tell me its really milk. we are not that stupid.
and most of us who know better are NOT going to play your 'must use real names' game. the government and pretty much everyone else who wants to sniff the net LOVES the idea of removing anonymity.
don't give in. keep your pseudo name. its one of the few things we still have left in the 'free internet'. it was here long before companies came on and ruined things. we must demand that we not give this bit of freedom up!
fuck you google. just fuck you. the smarter ones here will not play your 'target me, better!' game.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
I don't really want my real name out there except to people I really know well.
Your Slashdot profile links to Jeremy Clark's homepage. Is that you?
Whoever wrote this obviously doesn't understand Twitter, or Google+- or even the Internet for that matter.
Twitter exists, and flourishes BECAUSE it's not all those things. Twitter works because it's not invasive- you share what you want 140 characters at a time, and only what you explicitly choose to share. Google+ and facebook create networks with tagging, friending, friends of friends and your choices and identity become out of your hands.
It would seem that suraj.sun needs to get himself an better Internet.
I use Twitter because of SMS, and it doesn't cost me a dime (since my plan has unlimited SMS whether I use it or not). So until Google offers SMS services, Twitter style, anyone going from Twitter to Google+ will be limiting their market. Then again, maybe I'm special.
Get all pissed off like that... ...Or...
Don't use Google+
PS: I don't reply to ACs.
Madison Avenue is not their only customer. Google remains allied with the CIA.
I for one will NEVER create a G+ 'profile'. I don't use Google for search (Ixquick actually works better when I've bothered to compare results), I don't use Chrome for anything except testing websites (web developer by trade). I've never downloaded Google Earth, Sketchup, etc. (I do have a pseudonymous gmail account that could be linked to my business, so there is that hole in my armor). For that matter, I've never had a Facebook, LinkedIn, etc. account either. Drawbacks? None that matter - in fact I would go so far as to say I experience fewer drawbacks than if I did have my personal information scattered all over the web.
Twitter was obsolete when it only allowed 140 characters.
1. The whole attraction of Twitter is its simplicity and brevity. People use Twitter precisely because they don't want an integrated, complicated system (otherwise they wouldn't have left FB in the first place for their messaging needs).
2. Twitter allows you to participate with minimal involvement with the company Twitter. You need an account, provide 0 details, end of story. Your Twitter account isn't tied to anything else. Using Google for similar purposes would require you to hand over a significantly larger chunk of your privacy for the privilege. Google will be able to tie together your tweets (or whatever the G+ substitute is), email, search history etc. It's obvious why Google would want that, but why would users want that?
Read Pynchon.
Evidently all of you who are on Google + must be the "Chosen Ones"! I have several gmail accounts and every time I've tried to get a Google + account it says sorry we have exceeded our capacity even if you have an invite, check back. Not that I'd use it any more than I use Facebook, to me social sites are social engineering and usually end up occupying all your time, so I try and stay off them, but I did want to see what all the hoopla was about with G+. I use Hootsuite or Tweetdeck for my Twitter accounts so I only check in once or twice a week to see if I have any new followers. After I build up a good base, than I weed out the marketers and spammers and those who don't follow back unless they are of special importance to me.
Does anyone else remember how there use to be 2-3 articles a day about any small feat that Linux did with a few hundred comments about how this was the nail in Microsoft's coffin and that the giant would collapse under it's own weight at any moment? That's what these articles remind me of.
People desperate to see Facebook/Twitter fail because of Google+. God only knows why they're foaming at the mouth for it but they are. Oh well, if Google+ lasts longer than Wave I'm sure we will see these kinds of articles for several more months until the next [big whatever] killer comes along and gives all the malcontents something else to cheer on as the next big tech revolution.
Keep hamming it up guys. Somedays it makes me laugh and other days it makes me yawn. But if it gives you some great purpose to your lives I guess it has some value in some twisted fashion.
Advertisers don't give a crap what your name is. They do want to know almost everything else about you though.
I love twitter. It's more like an RSS feed. Google+ is just... facebook.
Yes!
No!
Maybe?
Not if Google keep banning years-old email accounts for stupid little problems associated with Google+. I wanted to join when my sister sent me an invite (not because it looked that great, but because my sister asked me to join), but I resisted because it was too new and too closely linked to other Google services. I'm glad I did, since Gmail has been my main email provider for several years, including for work, and my Google/Gmail name is not 100% accurate. I'd hate to lose years of email due to some dumb little infringement of an unrealistic TOS agreement. Maybe eventually, but for now there are too many kinks to work out.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
I thought Facebook statuses made Twitter obsolete...
Seriously, this is 'Will Wave Eat E-Mail' all over again. No. It has long strings attached. It has plenty of bells and whistles, but this is comparing apples and fruit baskets, or a can opener with a Swiss army knife. Sometimes all you want is an apple for your teacher, and sure you can cut meat, whittle wood, read fine print, tweeze splinters and even open cans with your knife, but it'll be faster and cheaper if you just go out to the kitchen and use the tool that was designed for that and nothing else.
Or maybe an edited version?
For those of us who have never used twitter, is there an edited, "best of" to convince us to use it?
I googled "best of twitter", but it appears to be an reductio ad absurdum situation - all the top links seem to want me to follow some twitter account...
Is there compelling twitter content I am missing?
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
I'm actually on G+ and I use it kind of a lot. I thought the discussion might benefit from somebody who's actually actively using the service rather than having sampled it and written it off as "I hate social networking and this is social networking". I'm enjoying it a good bit because it's more interactive and engaging than Twitter and with a lot more obvious and up-front control over everything than on Facebook.
The integration with Picasa is excellent and I'm looking forward to the (optional) integration with the other services. I'll really be happy with it when Gmail and Voice filters can use my Circles to do useful work, i.e. let family and friends through, dump the other crap.
I'm still using Twitter, mostly because I'm still following #FuckYouWashington, but less and less. G+ easily occupies the same space as Twitter and with a little tweaking will easily replace Facebook for me.
As for the supposed privacy issues, I haven't run into anything that concerns me. When I share something Public, I take for granted that means Public. When I post to a smaller Circle, I trust it go to that smaller Circle. If they want a more accurate profile of me to present ads which I might conceivably be interested in while I'm doing my friends-and-family socializing, that works fine by me. I've dismissed about a million Zynga ads on Facebook and their ad-bot code can't take a hint so more accurate ad profiling works in my favor by being less irritating by several orders of magnitude.
Moreover, I can use any pseudonym I like as long as I don't use it on G+ which seems a reasonable trade-off. If your concern is that the CIA might get grandma's cookie recipe, then you're screwed if your family is contacting you through G+ but hopefully you're bright enough to do anything truly nefarious on a more secure channel.
I follow a couple of Googlers, a couple of celebrities I was already following on Twitter and that's just about it for now until invites are opened a little wider. In all it's low-key and fosters a more interesting kind of correspondence. Open discourse seems to pop up a lot more often and it's a lot more coherent than either a Twitter discussion or a Facebook comment thread not to mention a lot easier to join a public thread.
In all, I like it a lot and I'm looking forward to the improvements.
I just found out there's no such thing as the real world. It's just a lie you've got to rise above. - John Mayer
Is it just me and my friends or is Google+ a refuge of geeks. From just a cursory examination of various circles, it seems G+ is missing the diversity of Facebook. The older users seem to be either parents or geek power brokers, there are few teens, and most seem to have a college degree (yes, there is selection bias there if all my friends have college degrees, and yes often "degrees" plural).
It just seems if the initial rollout is catering to this crowd, Google is missing out on what the rest want or enjoy from existing services like Twitter and Facebook.
I think Twitter has Google + beat soundly based on ONE feature I can sign up for Twitter, but Google + is not open for new accounts. I think that's the most important feature in ANY online service.
i'm using a pseudonym on google+ because it's what 90% of my friends know me by. but i have an adsense account too, so not only does google know my legal name they have my tax information too :/
no account suspension yet, knock on wood~~
This is like asking whether nose-picking is going to obsolete butt-scratching. I mean, sure, there's an answer ("probably not"), but even if it does, the only discernible effect will be the usual six-month lag before TV journalists catch up to whatever bit of jargon replaces "tweet".
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
Is this a new magazine or something? I was too busy reading a Life article on how John Lennon might leave the Beatles, might have missed it.
Awesome response. Here's a coupon for one free internet for you --> Coupon inside.
This is my footer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
If I want to post something that will not be public but that my friend Alex will see, I have to remember a) in which circle I placed Alex, and b) whether Alex has added me. This doesn't sound like a lot, but if we're talking about someone that I only think of every 3 months then it could get very difficult to remember. Even remembering who is in which circle will be difficult. If I'm on Facebook, all I have to remember is the answer to one simple question: "am I friends with Alex?" On Twitter, I just have to remember whether Alex is following me.
G+ may be very useful for keeping in touch with a small amount of close friends, but it remains to be seen how well it will scale to numbers as large as a typical Facebook or Twitter account.
(for those without adblock)
I forsee a trend, ads will become like spam and look more like content. This way
people cant see the difference between ads and content.
"Listen, and understand. That Google-ads is out there.
It cant be bargained with. It cant be reasoned with. It doesnt feel pity,
or remorse, or fear.
And it absolutely will not stop, ever."
when I'm logged into Twitter, I can still perform news searches without google+ "personalizing" them for me and making them utterly useless.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2343964&cid=36854874
so no..not so much..
For my part, I don’t see the problem with Twitter. I mean, 140 characters is more than enough to develop a fully formed and well articulated
N.
You claim that google plus is better than twitter. One must wonder how much google is paying you for that assessment? With twitter, we don't have to give out our name.
- A Frog in a pond utters an azure cry. -
To be more precise, Twitter offers a measure of anonymity that neither Facebook nor google+ do. People like their screen names. :)
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
Is Twitter Rendered Obsolete By Google+?
No.
Twitter was rendered obsolete (and pointless) by Facebook years ago - not that I like facebook.
Why anyone uses that junk (twitter) - typically just to post to facebook anyway, is a mystery to me.
The only things I "like" about Twitter: You can search all the posts easily (i.e. Train Delay Chicago) and get realtime news - often you find more first hand info before any other source, this is cool...But Twitter is just out of hand - I mean really, you can't even post photos on the damn thing. It's not 1995 anymore, photos are a fact of life; grow up twitter. This one feature I like could be implemented into Facebook easily.
I think the same question applies to things like evite - I don't get them anymore - I receive facebook event invites typically - and it just makes sense, it's all in one place... Most of us have a good number of friends, organized into groups already.
Yes, one stop shopping never has all the niche features that everyone wants\needs, but for the majority, it gets the job done.
While Google+ may end up growing in popularity, I just see more fragmentation just for the sake of it. /never/ use Twitter Search.
Does Facebook have LOTS of flaws? YES. Are they terminal? NO, they could be fixed.
I'd like to see Facebook have a simple, elegant security mechanism, where you can on a per-post basis choose who is able to see your post: i.e. default level is everyone, and then when you have a post that you only want some group(s) to see, you can just check them. Seems like a simple request and would solve a lot of problems - moreover, it would allow for searching of posts like I do with Twitter - and then I would
Only a twit would waste their energy with Twitter. It's just vaporware.
Rant complete.
Does this mean that URL shortener services will die in a fire?
It will kill facebook. It will kill twitter. It will revolutionize your social atmosphere. With Google+ you'll always know what your friends are eating when they are eating it regardless of weather or not you want to. Google+ will melt your iPhone. Google+ will get your mom to stop drinking. I've only been using Google+ for a week and I've already lost 16kg. Google+ accelerates your Internet connection 15X. Google+ lets you cheat on your wife faster and smarter without any possibility of negative repercussion. Google+ knows what you want to eat and will send you coupons for it (unless you want to eat soup, because soup is for fagots and Google+ is straight edge). If you change the + in Google+ to a - your pets will mysteriously disappear. Google+ will raise your children for you. Google+ contains vitamins and sodium. Google+ will be the future government. Google+ will rape your data. Loyal Google+ members will be sent regular installments of exotic spiced meats. Google+ will teach you how to play tennis like the pros. Google+ has no confidence issues; Google+ sleeps naked. This one time, a burglar broke into Google+s' apartment and Google+ fucking killed the guy with his bare hands. Google+ eats grapefruit for breakfast. Google+ is free forever. Google+ is fresher than an ocean breeze. Google+ is radical to the max.
I personally don't belive, that Twitter is going to die. The short feeds are just pretty good for promoting stuff, thats why buissnesses love Twitter. But yeah Google + will most likely eat a bit of their Traffic.
That is the old internet 4. You want the new and better internet 6: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4193
tl;dr: I took a shit!
Although twitter is develops earlier than google+,but i don't like the user Interface, and i want the google+ can give me a new sense.
i do not understand how every body gets invited to this google plus, 99.9% of the people here around me dont even know off its existence
Last time I checked Android outsold iPhone to a significant degree. Also Apple would be in serious legal trouble if it blocked a google+ app. So twitter is slightly more integrated. Well, calling on phones is more intergrated then whatapp. Doesn't seem to stop users at all.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I use Twitter both as what it was designed for, and as a central point for dispatching to other services.
If I post to my blog (mostly, but not entirely photos taken from my phone) it posts into twitter. In turn, posts from my twitter feed are reposted into Facebook. I dislike that conversations growing from postings remain trapped in whichever site they happen to be in, but no one seems to care. I do like that people who have never met (due to being in different parts of the world, and in different social circles inside) can effectively have discussions inside shared facebook comments/links etc.
I told Google+ about my twitter account, and it did nothing about it.
I'm far from convinced Google+ will last, far from making twitter obsolete.
... and today's pet project has
Windows won because of the applications that were already available for it (Word and Excel) but not for OS/2.
It had nothing to do with the superiority of the Windows experience: in fact Windows 3.x is markedly inferior to OS/2.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
Google+ sucks, as usual, they are just reinventing the wheel and saying that their cock is bigger. Guys, believe me, if somebody advent a social network standard protocol, I will spent my time using it, and it will be useful, like irc, imap, etc.
Twitter was rendered obsolete when... they took a ridiculous
format, made it kitschy and found enough plebes to think
it's 'teh die for'.
I've sent maybe a half dozen tweets and declared the format
ridiculous. Anyone who can succinctly and continuously
spew information that (without contractions and URL shorteners)
fits in that format doesn't have much to add to the world.
As noted by just how many damn "celebrities" are on there
to spread their insidious drivel.
And oblig, "Can I haz an Internet"
-AI
Twitter will not be replaced by anything. Twitters success is it's simplicity. Although they could try and fix there creating list bugs!
If the other social networking sites are any indication. Something better will come along in about 3 - 4 years to replace google+
I think it is too early to tell if Twitter is threatened, especially with the power of inertia on the internet. If people are used to socializing in one place, they tend to stay there even when a better alternative comes along.
G+ will take a big hit out of Facebook for sure. People have many strong complaints with Facebook, but Facebook can survive.
However, Twitter users don't have any complaints with Twitter, it is more simple than G+ and the users generally like it.
I have yet to understand. All it seems to do it get people to say the word "tweet" alot and put these annoying links on every site I go to. /I'm a dying breed... a pull based client in a push world.
Right now, Twitter has some advantages that Google+ doesn't have. They aren't insurmountable, but Google+ as it stands now won't replace Twitter.
- SMS Updates: Right now, I can text 40404 with a tweet and it'll appear on my Twitter stream. Google is apparently testing this in India. No news on when/if this will appear in America and other countries.
- API/Third Party Tools: Right now, I can run Seesmic Desktop to check my tweets. I can have my blog tweet for me. I can program my own application to interact with Twitter. Twitter lets me do all this thanks to their open APIs. Google+ currently doesn't have any APIs. Once they get an API-set, then people can develop tools to let me access Google+ without actually having to go to Google's website. Until then, they'll lag behind.
- Names: I use a pseudonym on my blog and Twitter. I don't use my real name (unlike on Slashdot, but this account was from years back when I didn't care about privacy as much). Google+, however, demands that I use my real name. I don't want everyone I tweet/blog to to know my real name. I'd rather show them the pseudonym and let certain circles see my real name. If Google+ would let me choose who gets to see my real name and who doesn't, they would solve this problem. (They could require you input your real name but then have you set which circles see which names/nicknames.)
I'll keep an eye on Google+, but until they fix the above items I'm not abandoning Twitter for it.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Thought I'd feed the trolls.
Have you heard about SoylentNews?
Obviously twitter is dead.
G+ can duplicate this as a subset of functionality, when a user chooses to make all their posts public.
Reply to That ||
"It's only a matter of time before Twitter becomes a ghost town. While Facebook will soon do all the things Twitter does, Twitter can't support a long list of the things Facebook supports. Also on Facebook, you can post pictures and videos directly in posts, launch immediately into chat, send your posts to nonmembers and even present all your profiles marked 'Public' as a blog available to anyone with an Internet."
Ok, so it's not exactly the same, but twitter would've already been killed by facebook if google+ can kill twitter.
Only one thing from the summary wasn't in Google Buzz and well, 95% of Buzz is imported twitter posts, not using any of those features. Why would G+ be different?
Free as in "the Truth shall set you..."
It seems like that's a more relevant question. Facebook invites are annoying enough. The last thing I want are a new round of invites from my clueless friends who don't understand that you should never upload your real name, age, address, phone number, and list of everyone you know to someone else's servers.
Aaaaaaaaand I don't give a flying fuck about Twitter.
Yesterday they read your emails and agendas. Today they read your private instant communications. Tomorrow they'll mine right into your brains.
They haven't sent an invite to everybody that wanted one yet (me included). Damn! Starting to feel like chopped liver! The only way Twitter will go down is if Google+ opens their API to other social networking wares. I don't see that happening soon given the infant status of the site.
It's seriously creepy that Google+ will now troll the net for information about it's own account holders and make decisions on what's correct and what's not, what's public info and what's semi-private info, and so on. Why I was banned on Google+ (and how I redeemed myself). The shape of things to come. http://t.co/jkGRq1g
So the article is basically saying that Twitter is not a social network, and because it's not a social network, it can't possibly survive. Ok. I hope the authors are having fun in their happy place.
This is the real signature
(Beats those shadows on the cave wall, don't it?)