Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Twitter Gets a Tweak

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the now-141-characters dept.

The Internet 57

crimeandpunishment writes "Twitter is going multimedia. The text-messaging site has a new look with a new push. There's a new pane, making it easier for users to check out photos and videos (and in doing so, come back to the site more frequently and stay there longer, which of course means more advertising revenue). Twitter co-founder Biz Stone says, 'We are still figuring out all the new possibilities.' The new look is expected to roll out around the world over the next few days."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First Tweak! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33591346)

First Tweak!

Oh, thank you. (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33591352)

To the kind and wise and benevolent overlords of Twitter, I do humbly beseech you to focus your mighty efforts on correcting a little problem that prevents some of your modest and loyal servants from showing up in the fucking search results [twitter.com] .

Re:Oh, thank you. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33591648)

Just more Twitter Twaddle. Who needs it.

Re:Oh, thank you. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33593964)

My fucking business name Twitter account is suffering this retardedness. Creating a second lame-name account is a real PITA.

Re:Oh, thank you. (1)

daveime (1253762) | more than 4 years ago | (#33592294)

They're probably snowed under reading all the comments from fucking morons who think posting the same "tweet" 400+ times will make them fix the issue faster.

Re:Oh, thank you. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33592580)

That's actually because the stupid comment system is broken. Leave a comment. I dare you.

heh (2, Insightful)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#33591390)

I'll tweak your twit!

But seriously though...I use Twitter primarily to follow people (game developers, musicians, etc), and many of these updates make that even easier to do. Overall, pretty happy with what's been done.

Re:heh (3, Insightful)

zombieChan51 (1862028) | more than 4 years ago | (#33591418)

That's about the sane reason to use twitter. I like following people who are working on projects or movies or something intresting and I can keep myself updated. Following someone who is just going to Tweet how their day was doesn't seem all that intresting.

Re:heh (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33591510)

That's about the sane reason to use twitter. I like following people who are working on projects or movies or something intresting and I can keep myself updated. Following someone who is just going to Tweet how their day was doesn't seem all that intresting.

you know what else isn't even slightly interesting? somebody at Twitter farts and it makes Slashdot headlines.

great, so they made some minor usability improvements. good for them? this needs to be brought before an audience and discussed? really? slow. fucking. news. day. amirite?

Re:heh (1)

alen (225700) | more than 4 years ago | (#33591504)

yep

it was one thing when there was only twitpic, but now with so many picture and video and other add on services the mobile clients can't keep up and you have to open media in a browser instead of within the tweet

Re:heh (1)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 4 years ago | (#33592058)

Indeed - I use twitter to follow photographers, and anything that makes external images and media easier to view is a Good Thing.

Re:heh (4, Insightful)

Eponymous Coward (6097) | more than 4 years ago | (#33592300)

Why Twitter rather than RSS? I user a news reader to follow people but I can definitely see the trend is to using Twitter rather than RSS for announcing updates. Since Twitter is closed and RSS is open, this is a little disturbing to me.

Re:heh (3, Interesting)

nine-times (778537) | more than 4 years ago | (#33592578)

I'm guessing it's because it's easier for people. To set up an RSS feed, you generally need to set up a site and set up the feed. Then you need to figure out a way to update that feed, and find software that you want to use to follow other people's feeds.

Twitter has set up the site and the feed for you. You can get specially built software for your phone to update/follow those feeds, or else you can do it through SMS. And if you want to find other people's feeds, there's a single site you can go to.

Not that I'm defending Twitter. I don't like Twitter or Facebook or any of those social networking sites, and I think it should all be done with open protocols and open software so you can set up your own sites and configure your own privacy settings. I think most people still wouldn't bother to set up their own site, and would still want some kind of searchable index of people to follow.

Re:heh (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33595274)

You can get an RSS feed from Twitter. I follow about three people and I don't have an account, I just grab the RSS links and add them to my feed reader.

Re:heh (1)

Huntr (951770) | more than 4 years ago | (#33593066)

Same here. I mainly follow about 30 or 40 sports writers and bloggers who use twitter to fire off quick hits of info and comments. I'm not interested in anyone following me and my only tweets are usually in reply to those I'm following about something they have tweeted.

As to the question below about setting up an RSS feed, I don't know. It never crossed my mind and truthfully, twitter does all I need, which is really very little.

Limits... (5, Funny)

Shadow Wrought (586631) | more than 4 years ago | (#33591404)

Of course the pictures are limited to 140x140 pixels, and the videos are limited to 140 frames, but, other than that; its an outstanding service!

Re:Limits... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33591878)

Apparently, a picture is no longer worth a thousand words, but only 140 characters.

Re:Limits... (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#33593318)

Apparently, a picture is no longer worth a thousand words, but only 140 characters.

I honestly do not understand what it is about this post that's 'informative'. It does an ok job of sounding like something profound, I suppose.

Re:Limits... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33594146)

It does an ok job of sounding like something profound, I suppose.

You on the other hand come off sounding like a cunt.

Re:Limits... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33594270)

Oh, I'm sorry. How insensitive of me. You grew up in the 90's, right? Was I supposed to tell you you're special and that what you said was really really great?

Re:Limits... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33594778)

Hey! What I said was great, you insensitive clod!

Re:Limits... (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 4 years ago | (#33595496)

Of course the pictures are limited to 140x140 pixels, and the videos are limited to 140 frames, but, other than that; its an outstanding service!

I hear they're also renaming the site TwitBook.

Yay marketers! (1)

GillBates0 (664202) | more than 4 years ago | (#33591464)

Here come the 'sponsored' tweets for the twits to watch and twitter about!

Seriously, it was worthless before, now it's more so, except for the marketers and the twits who 'follow' them and think they're all smart and cool for using twitter.

Re:Yay marketers! (0)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 4 years ago | (#33591556)

come back to the site more frequently and stay there longer

No thanks!

Re:Yay marketers! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33591782)

come back to the site more frequently and stay there longer

No thanks!

hey jackass, when you reply to somebody try quoting text they actually said.

you were clearly replying to a random person to get your comment closer to the top of the page. that's what a douchebag would do. are you a douchebag?

Re:Yay marketers! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33592528)

Fucking moron. Why don't you fucking Twitter someone.

Re:Yay marketers! (1)

Mike Kristopeit (1900306) | more than 4 years ago | (#33591680)

why do you presume to think what others think of themselves?

i think you're dumb and lame for using slashdot.

slashdot = stagnated

Re:Yay marketers! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33591760)

HAHAHA A TWEET TWITZ!

Re:Yay marketers! (1)

NiceGeek (126629) | more than 4 years ago | (#33591898)

No one says you have to follow marketers. I've got a core group of friends who are fans of a particular singer and their feeds are usually pretty interesting, and I've actually formed some RL friendships from it.

Re:Yay marketers! (1)

Eponymous Coward (6097) | more than 4 years ago | (#33592402)

I think Twitter is talking about inserting ads into the streams of popular users. So, you may not follow a marketer, but if somebody you follow says something about coffee, that tweet could very well be sponsored by Folgers.

Re:Yay marketers! (1)

NiceGeek (126629) | more than 4 years ago | (#33592548)

*shrug* Twitter has got to make money.

Re:Yay marketers! (1)

Eponymous Coward (6097) | more than 4 years ago | (#33606892)

People pay Twitter a lot of money for access to the raw firehose. So far, that's where they have been making their money.

Re:Yay marketers! (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 4 years ago | (#33592600)

Wait, they'll be inserting fake tweets into the streams of other people, without those people's consent? Or do we know how this is supposed to work?

Reliability? (0)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 4 years ago | (#33591470)

Oh, pretty pictures, how nice! Now how about you don't failwhale every fucking 20 minutes and you always let me tweet, you unstable piece of fei-yu?

Curmudgeonly yours,
Scram.

Reliability? (0, Redundant)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 4 years ago | (#33593374)

Oh, pretty pictures, how nice! Now how about you don't failwhale every fucking 20 minutes and you always let me tweet, you unstable piece of fei-yu?

Re:Reliability? (1)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 4 years ago | (#33602750)

I'm still getting a dead input-box more often than not on twitter.com, and I'm still not hearing anything about improving reliability in this talk of upgrade to more multimedia.

And upgrades to more media never meant more reliability, quite the contrary.

This is cause for concern.

Facebook vs. Twitter (2, Interesting)

iONiUM (530420) | more than 4 years ago | (#33591656)

I'm going to be honest here, I've used both twitter and facebook. When twitter first launched, my first reaction was "how is this any different than a facebook status?" The sad part is, there still isn't really an answer to that that doesn't start rambling on.

Really, with this update it seems that twitter is converging to a full social network-ish type site, and facebook is already incorporating changes to be more like twitter. Google is trying for both sides (buzz and me). I'm starting to get confused...

Re:Facebook vs. Twitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33591866)

I link my Facebook and Twitter statuses, but usually stay on Twitter rather than Facebook. That way, I can post status updates to both while still following interesting Twitter users.

I also link my Google Buzz to Twitter, but it doesn't work quite so well.

Re:Facebook vs. Twitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33596732)

Who the hell is an interesting twitter user? Isn't that an oxymoron?

Re:Facebook vs. Twitter (2, Insightful)

D Ninja (825055) | more than 4 years ago | (#33592098)

how is this any different than a facebook status?

The answer from a semantic standpoint - nothing. The real answer is - Twitter is public by default, while Facebook is private by default (well...security/privacy concerns aside). This changes how people interact. For example, if I want to interact with developers that would otherwise not be interested in work that I am doing, Twitter provides a potential avenue. I can also specifically choose to follow only those people or organizations who I care to learn more about.

Re:Facebook vs. Twitter (2, Insightful)

Eponymous Coward (6097) | more than 4 years ago | (#33592362)

Facebook used to be private by default, but I don't think that's the case any more.

Re:Facebook vs. Twitter (1)

ion.simon.c (1183967) | more than 4 years ago | (#33597038)

It's pretty public, by default. Check out how many random people's statuses you can comment on:

http://youropenbook.org/ [youropenbook.org]

Re:Facebook vs. Twitter (1)

daveime (1253762) | more than 4 years ago | (#33592390)

my first reaction was "how is this any different than a facebook status?"

Facebook allows you 500 characters for status updates, allowing you to at least form a coherent sentence ?

Re:Facebook vs. Twitter (1)

lavacano201014 (999580) | more than 4 years ago | (#33594816)

420 characters, but yeah. And I'm more than capable of firing off coherent tweets in 140 characters. Twitter users have no excuse.

Re:Facebook vs. Twitter (3, Insightful)

eloki (29152) | more than 4 years ago | (#33598212)

No, the short difference is that friend relationships on Facebook are symmetric but on Twitter they're asymmetric. Just this minor difference changes the usage dynamic. People can be interested in my updates without my being forced to see their updates.

I'm confused (1)

wealthychef (584778) | more than 4 years ago | (#33591692)

So a service based on the ridiculous (to me) idea of incredibly short messages is now going multimedia, which is the other complete extreme, a huge use of bandwidth and time. Talk about mission creep.

Re:I'm confused (3, Insightful)

NiceGeek (126629) | more than 4 years ago | (#33591922)

Twitter probably looked at all the 3rd party sites like TwitPic, Twitvid, etc and saw there was a demand.

Re:I'm confused (1)

KingAlanI (1270538) | more than 4 years ago | (#33593694)

Yeah, integrating those features in the site seems better than people linking to sites that Twitter pretends doesn't exist [kinda]

Re:I'm confused (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 4 years ago | (#33592396)

I guess the idea is that people were using the incredibly short messages to link to other content anyway, so they're just making that linked content available without leaving twitter.

Re:I'm confused (1)

alen (225700) | more than 4 years ago | (#33592516)

twitter was originally designed for kids and serial texters to have a web based view of messages. the fact that it's replacing some forums and google for some things wasn't even dreamed about when the company started up

Twitter Overload (1)

Wiarumas (919682) | more than 4 years ago | (#33592312)

One of my problems of a user of Twitter is an overload of tweets. So, being the sane person that I am, I have no friends on Twitter other than a few news sources that I enjoy updates from. Its not many... just a couple. However, I receive about a tweet a minute. That's just way too much for me to keep up with and to be honest, I turned off notifications and abandoned it. I really wish they would provide a better way to sort, hide, and manage tweets. Maybe some sort of priority/intelligent system that bumped up new, relevant stuff over the useless but new. While I'm sure some people love having a constant stream of crap being blasted in their face 24/7, I would prefer to filter through the noise for relevance.

Re:Twitter Overload (1)

KingAlanI (1270538) | more than 4 years ago | (#33593654)

I also have way too fast of a timeline.
So sometimes I just check the page for a particular feed. That, or just looking at my at replies.

I also have all of the feeds I'm following grouped into lists; choosing a particular list to look at is an intermediate between looking at my entire timeline and looking at one feed.

MySpace (1)

christurkel (520220) | more than 4 years ago | (#33593412)

So it's becoming MySpace for next (?) generation?

Okay... (1)

KingAlanI (1270538) | more than 4 years ago | (#33593750)

Won't rail about the changes just to rail about the changes.

Re:Okay... (1)

gnapster (1401889) | more than 4 years ago | (#33619652)

No, the change away from Rails hapenned a couple of years ago [ikaisays.com] . The current changes are not at the framework level.

an even better "Better Twitter" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33598518)

404 Not Found

Not Found

The requested URL / was not found on this server.
Apache/2.3.8 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.3.8 OpenSSL/1.0.0a Server at twitter.com Port 80

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?