Whats the point of Twitter?

[Gal]

Indeed Di.

Suff, ok you don't like it and have given your reasons, but many of us are not as techy as yourself and for day to day information, it is - IMO - much better than any other site for instant updates. That is how I find it, and millions of others like me. OK not everyone 'gets' it, but millions do and it is there 'go to' place before any other. Like most internet places, it is what you make it, how you use it, and what you expect of it.

[Suff]

You see there goes the whole communication thing. I wrote two parts to my reply. One was about the technology and one was about the way that "Information" is used.

I have spent 2 decades trying to teach people not to size and scope the information they are going to deliver (it could be the lunch menu or a simple note to say you missed a phone call, it does not matter), in the wrong mould.

To me Twitter may be fast and it may be pervasive to a certain proportion of the population, but it is the wrong size and shape for the job it's trying to do. So, eventually, it will wind up morphing into something it should always have been in the first place. It is no mistake that it's called twitter. It was specifically designed for people to prattle on about inconsequential rubbish and bleat it out to as many people as they possibly could. That was it's initial mission statement. Allow people to connect and babble.

Of course it has already morphed into something else. It can hold pictures and is evolving with targeting.

Gal you say that it keeps you instantly updated. Only because you have installed a twitter app. Twitter came to prominence when it was preinstalled on a whole range of mobile phones. If you don't have a twitter app bleating at you every few seconds, then it's deaf dumb and blind as far as you are concerned and it doesn't play pinball either. Once every few years I go look at Twitter and find whatever drivel is on there which I then remove ready to receive the information I'm interested in. It's not instant and it's not always up to date and it's not even very accurate half the time. But it is better than what I see on the TV (sometimes).

Like Facebook Twitter is a solution to one thing looking to be the solution to all things in order to make money. Google+ was everything FB should have been from day1. Yet, because FB got there first and a billion people registered with it, the momentum is almost impossible to overcome. FB is, as each year goes by, becoming what it should have been from day1. Google+, which is the solution that we really need, is on life support.

If Mrs S were to use Twitter too, it would be the perfect medium for us to send each other tweets when we are travelling (almost the only thing either of us use text messages for). However, how would you tweet to your wife/husband, only, when you have 1,000 followers? Something Google+ solved from day1.

Twitter will have to evolve radically before it can replace directed text messages.

Believe me when I say this is not technical stuff. This is organisational, environmental and usage stuff. Most techies don't have a clue about that which is the main reason Twitter is as limited as it is today.

Most of my problem with Twitter is that it has been taken up by organsiations who see a "faster" way of talking to people. Without truly understanding what they are doing or the situation they are creating.

Where will you find that vital council tweet which explains how to get to a specific part of their website to carry out a vital service, which they didn't bother to put in the FAQ on the website because they "tweeted it"...... 10 Years ago!

That is the mess Twitter is going to create. Someone like me will, eventually, be called in to fix it at some time in the future when they finally realise what kind of mess they have got themselves into.

The response Aggers got from the Police is a prime red flag on that one for me. Question: "Can you tell me where your service information is" Answer: "We Tweet it on Twitter". Wrong answer on every level.

This is not technical. It is process. Any file clerk in a library could anticipate the end result of that mess.

[Gal]

However, how would you tweet to your wife/husband, only, when you have 1,000 followers? .

Via a direct message.

I like Twitter.

[Suff]

Hmmm, their description leaves a LOT to be desired. It talks about sending to the group and the group receiving it.
The implication is that everyone you want to send a direct message to has to have a group created for them, but I'm willing to bet that a contact on it's own is a group.

The documentation tells you the ethos of the tool. As you see I'm not even current because it has been forced on Twitter that people actually want to talk 1:1. You see I don't use it and I don't really keep up. I use tools where you don't have to search for the function which allows you to do what you want. But that's just me.

Try imagining this forum on twitter. It's my main objection to it. Whilst, in some ways, twitter is analogous of a forum like this, it is only really a messaging tool. "Hey, go look over there, there's something worth reading/discussing".

When you use a messaging tool to have a conversation, it is not possible to have any meaningful conversation as the message size is too small. You either wind up saying short inane things or what you are trying to say is broken up and lost as everyone else chimes in. If you think I'm being overboard about it, I was one of the hosts reading the comments about the DM restriction to 2,000 characters when they changed the format. Twitter is 140!

One of the things I love doing to people who refuse to respond to any form of communication than instant messaging is to write a large communication in notepad. I then copy and paste it in blocks which fit into the short message tool. Far too fast for anyone to get in a word in edgeways until I've had my say.

People who use tools like Twitter HATE that because they want their say before the person who is talking is finished..... I also type at 30 - 50wpm depending on the keyboard and that can really, really, be difficult for others. I have a friend in France who can write at 15 characters per minute with one finger. Talking to him on Skype instant messaging I have to find something else to do whilst he's replying.

I know that twitter works very well for some. But Twitter has half a billion people twittering away the vast majority of whom only seem to be saying "hey I have something to say".

I know that's not you Gal, but it does not mean that people are not up to date or do not understand. Some just don't like it and others refuse to abuse a tool for something it was not designed for, we've already bought the T shirt on that one far too many times.

[Kaz]

Good heavens, this is all a bit heavy!

I think the message here is, each to their own

[Gal]

I said that way back up Kaz.

I have just typed a long response but you know what, I can't be bothered to post it because at the end of the day, I have my opinion Suff and you have yours. Neither of us has to like it, just accept that we like different things.

[miasmum]

Oh blimey wish I'd never asked now

When something happens and someone says 'you know what? If you'd had Twitter that would have been so much easier, quicker whatever" then I'll think again. For now, my life is fine without it.

But thats just me

[Suff]

Sorry I'll keep my heavy stuff for the news board.

It may seem to be a simple subject but it really is not.

However, as I don't partake generally, and I don't partake of FB at all, then I guess it's better to leave it at that.