Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Social Networks Twitter Cloud Communications Media

Twitter Moves To Curb Instagram Links 114

Hammeh writes According to a report on Mashable, Twitter have sent out messages to some of their high profile users prompting them to share images using Twitter's own service rather than Instagram links. The news comes 2 years since Instagram pulled support for Twitter cards and has been part of the continuing battle between the two social networks. With Instagram now having overtaken Twitter in terms of users, this may be a move to try and use high profile users to show off Twitter's own image and content tools.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Twitter Moves To Curb Instagram Links

Comments Filter:
  • Never forget... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 24, 2015 @11:33PM (#48896657)

    Never forget: You are the product, not the customer.

    • This.

      Regarding the march of social media and search engines, it is the prime mover that explains everything.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    How many people here actually use Twitter?

    I created an account years ago, never posted anything, and I don't read anything off of twitter... I'm 26.

    • by raymorris ( 2726007 ) on Sunday January 25, 2015 @12:50AM (#48896915) Journal

      I never post anywhere. I don't post on Twitter, Facebook, Google+, Slashd ... oh crap.

      Seriously though, I don't have a Twitter account. I looked at Twitter once or twice and I found it lacking either of two things that would make it useful. I might find it useful if I could either find stuff by topic or through a social NETWORK, but it doesn't seem to be made for searching or exploring, only for following a specific celebrity you've already chosen. I might be interested in feeds about a certain topic. Twitter doesn't do that. I might be interested in seeing what old friends are up to, finding all the people I went to high school with like Facebook. Maybe when I look up what my friend is doing I would click to see whatever happened to his hot sister.

      Twitter may have changed since I last looked at it, or those functions might have been there, but not just intuitive how to do those things.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Twitter definitely supports search. I've gotten noticed for tweets mentioning Cryptonomicon, Vonnegut, the Voyager Golden record...one of those has led to something resembling a friendship.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I use Twitter instead of SMS for alert messages,.This was because I had *three jobs in a row* where the chief architect and me, as a new lead systems guy, got more than 300 alerts per day for which the architects always said "just pay attention to the important ones", and refused to define what was "important". Then they'd flip out when I didn't respond to the "critical" alerts within 15 minutes, because Verizon insisted on waiting up to an hour to send all the messages as a flood, rather than when they wer

        • by Anonymous Coward

          That's not verizon's fault. That's fundamentally how SMS works.
          SMS at the protoco8%l level is best effort, and delivery is not guaranteed or cancelled for up to 6 days.
          If you have a full SS7 gateway, and know the destination of your end-user, you can manually set the routing the message will take, but otherwise, it goes through best effort routing to
          a) your physical location as defined by area-code/exchange; then
          b) from there, it gets routed to any phon-number-migration if you're not still on the original

      • by zlogic ( 892404 )

        Twitter is useful for rapidly searching for news: accidents, network issues at a local ISP, realtime coverage of press conferences, that sort of thing. Also, many companies and websites have their own Twitter accounts and post news there - something like RSS replacement which is realtime and quick to browse (because messages are limited).

    • How many people here actually use Twitter?

      I created an account years ago, never posted anything, and I don't read anything off of twitter... I'm 26.

      I'm 51 and created (parked) an account in 2012 and have one tweet posted from April 2014 -- after they changed the site style/layout and started nagging people with a sample "first tweet" for those w/o any tweets. It says: "Shut up Twitter; I'll tweet when I want to."

      Sometimes, I post a tweet or two, but usually delete them after a while once any current relevance passes. Ya, that's not how you're suppose to use it, but so what. If you're not promoting something and/or yourself, Twitter is just a pointl

    • by tepples ( 727027 )

      I'm @PinoBatch [twitter.com].

      But this list [slashdot.org] mentions Erris, Mactrope*, gnutoo, inTheLoo, willeyhill*, westbake*, Odder*, ibane, DeadZero, freenix, myCopyWrong, right handed, GNUChop, trimmer, and wiiiyhiii*. Or, rather, Twitter uses them. All of them [slashdot.org]. And this Twitter can post more than 140 characters [slashdot.org].

      * These are typosquatted versions of other Slashdot users' usernames.

    • At least you managed to make an account. I'm not sure how you do that on Instagram: it points you to some app that doesn't run on Linux.
  • by Iamthecheese ( 1264298 ) on Saturday January 24, 2015 @11:55PM (#48896733)
    Social networking sites have forgotten the reason they exist, and the reason people use them. People don't go to a social networking site to be monetized, they tolerate being monetized so long as the social network provides sufficient value.

    It's a similar situation to the early days of searching. People didn't go to early Yahoo.com to get the things Yahoo wanted to push, people went to search the internet and tolerated having things pushed at them as long as the search was good enough. But as soon as Google offered a good search with minimal advertising the market spoke very loudly about that kind of thing. I feel like there's a pent-up demand in social networking for low friction, low-bullshit connecting of people. The first social network that offers a superior product and doesn't stand in peoples' way will make a killing.
    • ... will make a killing.

      How?

      • by Iamthecheese ( 1264298 ) on Sunday January 25, 2015 @12:40AM (#48896889)
        How?

        When old Yahoo made money from its search engine it did so by pushing paid sites as search results, cluttering up the interface with advertisements, and otherwise being intrusive and unpleasant. And it lacked the self-awareness to change this behavior. Rather than saying, "How can we make things better for the user?" they said, "How can we make more money from the user?" So while better search results was on their radar an interface like Google's just never came up as a possibility. That's why they were blown completely out of the water. Google made money as a search provider without using Yahoo-esque tactics by being the first to do what present social networks are doing (analytics) but more importantly by being a place users wanted to go. Twitter is already doing this successfully. Look at their interface: light, efficient, smooth, and fast. And they're very successful. By limiting user actions now they're eating the seed corn. The'll make more money in the short term but in the long term they're pushing users to less limited places.

        But I digress. By "social networking" I meant Facebook-esque networking. Attempts to allow comprehensive social collectives to happen. Facebook has fallen far down the monetization rabbit hole in the same way old Yahoo did. The way Facebook thinks is of where to put ads, how to better manipulate users into sub-optimal decisions (such as mis-click capture), how to make games that will best entangle users ... Rather than saying, "How can we make things better for the user?" they say, "How can we make more money from the user?" The money is in having many users and in letting them do what they do, with a completely unobtrusive, subtle advertising network offering things they like and want. When a social network focuses to a massive extent on making the user experience as excellent as possible even if that's less immediately profitable they'll get more than enough market share to make up the difference.
        • There's a problem with your business plan, and that's the paradigm shift from private company to public corporation.

          Once social media and search engine companies go IPO, the business model changes and the suits arrive.

          While two of the dynamics don't change, in that the user is the product and the client is the advertiser, the ownership shift changes dramatically.

          During initial growth, the interest of the user is the primary consideration as companies work to gain critical mass.

          After the IPO, shareholder sho

    • But as soon as Google offered a good search with minimal advertising the market spoke very loudly about that kind of thing.

      Google wasn't the first search engine with a minimalist site design; Altavista started that, and I think you're right about it being an important driver for their success. This was in the days of dial-up, and the difference between loading the Yahoo page and the Altavista one was quite a few seconds.

      The model for today's social networks appear to be to deliberately start with low-friction, low-bullshit, come-in-we're-open policies (sometimes after a beta-for-the-leet-only period), become popular, then c

      • The model for today's social networks appear to be to deliberately start with low-friction, low-bullshit, come-in-we're-open policies (sometimes after a beta-for-the-leet-only period), become popular, then cash in and pile on the restrictions, rules, ads and dataraping.

        A lot of this is because at a certain point the realize / understand that the vulture capitalists who invested the bizziolns of cash for the cool office space and retro pinball machines want a return on their investment. The other part is that many or even most of these start-ups have from the word "go" operated under the plan of developing a product and than offloading it to Facebook for a billion or two. It's all about the money, and you can't make money without "monetizing" the product.

  • by slashmydots ( 2189826 ) on Sunday January 25, 2015 @12:21AM (#48896827)
    140 characters ISN'T ENOUGH! That's not enough to say anything of substance. 300 characters is sufficient and almost as quick to read. If there was a service that came out with 300 characters as a limit, it would crush Twitter. They should get it through their thick heads that superior services will demolish their business if they don't listen to the number one complaint about Twitter from their users!
    • by inflex ( 123318 ) on Sunday January 25, 2015 @12:33AM (#48896859) Homepage Journal

      +1 to this.

      I appreciate the terseness of Twitter's 140char limit, but it's a little *too* restrictive. I agree it makes people creative, but after a while the shine goes off that when you're just trying to get something important out there which could be better said with a few more characters rather than making people jump via a URL to somewhere else.

      Maybe they should just abolish the limit entirely. Not like we're confined to the restrictions of SMS as the data carrier any more.

    • 140 characters ISN'T ENOUGH! That's not enough to say anything of substance.

      With you so far.

      If there was a service that came out with 300 characters as a limit, it would crush Twitter.

      And now you lost me. Twitter isn't for "anything of substance". It's either insubstantial stuff, or links to substantial stuff. People don't use it as, or want it to be, a place for "anything of substance". Leave that to the blogs.

    • TL;DR

      Twitter is not about a thesis on your life. It's about a quick thought.

    • by marcansoft ( 727665 ) <hector&marcansoft,com> on Sunday January 25, 2015 @01:03AM (#48896939) Homepage

      140 characters isn't enough ... in English. You should see the novels that Japanese people post on Twitter. Japanese is about 2x denser per character than English, so you can fit in a lot more stuff. I was amazed when I was able to compose an elaborate explanation for someone in Japanese and it still fit in one tweet (I'm learning the language).

      • I don't know, 140 seems like a lot to me when you consider hobbies like six word stories [sixwordstories.net]. (not trying to plug the site, it was just the first one that came up in a search, there are a few others that do various numbers of word "stories").

    • the problem of twitter is only text based tweet thats why now instagram is going on top of the lists in todays news visitor is going up of Instragram upto 50% more than 10% of twitter.twitter should update his rule to become a jungle lion of internet visit http://www.sscbankgk.in/ [sscbankgk.in]
    • by aliquis ( 678370 )

      Even removing all the people it's a reply to and the image or url links would had helped a lot.

      At least when it become used for discussion rather than just saying something short.

      Guess birds don't discuss.

      Most useless service of the popular ones.

      SMS always sucked too btw.

    • by swell ( 195815 )

      An example of why the limit is useful. You might have said it in 140 characters but you wasted my time. Learn to use language effectively. [138 chars]

      • Actually that took you 150 chars, considering your character count was part of your point. Better luck next time. [127 chars]

    • I agree, however, I got bored and wanted to find out how much potential storage twitter posts use on a daily basis.
      500Million Tweets a day : http://www.internetlivestats.c... [internetlivestats.com]
      * 140 bytes = 70Billion Bytes, or, 70Gigabytes roughly a day

      If you double the char array to 280, thats only 140Gigabytes a day for just tweets.

      Twitter have the money and network infrastructure to do this without question. I think its more a case that Twitter believes the 140 character limit is part of their "ethos", changing it would pi

    • One of the beauties about 140 characters is you have to think about what you want to say and how you say it. Editing for brevity often makes it punchier and better phrased. Many are the occasion when I have written a joke or insight for facebook, modified it for twitter, and then posted the twitter version in both cases because the twitter version was just better.

      300 characters is not almost as quick to read it is quite clearly twice as long to read. For me, that would mean that instead of having time to

    • 140 characters ISN'T ENOUGH! That's not enough to say anything of substance.

      140 chars is enough for a pithy soundbyte. Those pay better than analysis. Blog if you want to write a manifesto.

    • by Sebby ( 238625 )
      I agree with this too. I understand their desire to make sure people don't post things that are "too long", but 140 is too damn short! I way to potentially solve the problem: give one @-user mention and 1 URL link free - that don't count towards the limit; that would make conversations a lot more useful without adding stupid bloat.
    • If there was a service that came out with 300 characters as a limit, it would crush Twitter.

      You mean like Tumblr or Blogspot or LiveJournal or just about any other blogging platform?

      superior services will demolish their business if they don't listen to the number one complaint about Twitter from their users

      I thought the biggest complaint about Twitter was sockpuppetry [slashdot.org]. See Twitter use thirteen different characters [slashdot.org].

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I personally boycott centralized tools/services as much as I can. It's like eating junk food- or maybe even poison. You won't catch me on facebook, twitter, instagram, skype, or gmail. There are better options for which you don't have to sacrifice your freedoms and liberties. I use roundcube on a virtual private server for instance and xmpp for messaging. I also use golblin for youtube/facebook like replacement. And saying nobody is one these systems is just being lazy. Of course nobody is on them if you do

  • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus ( 1223518 ) on Sunday January 25, 2015 @01:25AM (#48896981) Journal
    "Twitter vs. Instagram" is a frankly solid entrant for 'year's most meaningless first world battle' and we haven't even made it out of January. Nice work.
  • by pak9rabid ( 1011935 ) on Sunday January 25, 2015 @03:28AM (#48897263)
    Mark Zuckerberg: Neat *grabs popcorn*
    • by _xeno_ ( 155264 )

      Zuckerberg owns Instagram (well, Facebook owns Instagram), so Zuckerberg isn't exactly on the sidelines for this thing.

  • It's dead, Jim!

  • Twitter's request is asinine. Twitter is only set up to share with other Twitter users. When I post something to Instagram, I get to share with people on Instagram, Twitter, Facebook and Tumblr. I do occasionally use VSCO and send things to each service individually (usually when I want to preserve the aspect ratio of an image; the lower res square that Instagram demands doesn't always work best).

    If Twitter wants people to use their service for images, they have to make it easier to share outside of their network. People interested in sharing usually want to cover all their bases, not just one population.

    But this is what's wrong with Twitter's current managementâ"they don't understand their own service and the people that use it. And they don't seem to get that if you want to grow, you have to reach outside of the network and bring people in, not broadcast to the people that are already there. I have friends that have joined Twitter because of my own active cross-posting (using third party tools)â"if Twitter made that part easier, maybe they could convince people to give them a shot. (That and doubling back and making third party clients easier to develop again; the official app is trash compared to Tweetbot. If they want ads, just make it part of the stream that the clients can't skip. It's not so hard.)

"Paul Lynde to block..." -- a contestant on "Hollywood Squares"

Working...