The Case That Twitter is for (Nearly) Everyone, From an Anti-Twitter Convert

I joined Twitter in February of 2009, and it seemed like I was late to the party – a party I wasn't just skipping, it was something I was actively avoiding. If you are against joining Twitter, I ask that you consider what this article has to say with an open mind and we'll go from there.

Twitter isn't for everyone, but it probably isn't what you think it is either. In short, Twitter is for you if you have a hobby, interest, friends who share content, or a topic you follow or share about. Sound hyperbolic? It really isn't.

What Twitter Isn't 

The things that Twitter is not are, in my opinion and that of many of the people I have converted, perhaps more important than what Twitter is. So let's outline some key items that Twitter is not.

• Twitter isn't a stream (or firehose) of stuff you don't care about.
• Twitter doesn't have to be time consuming, many enjoy it so much they choose to use it a lot though.
• Twitter isn't Facebook or glorified group SMS (it technically can be the latter, but relatively few use it in that way).
• Twitter doesn't require you to post anything. Ever.
• Twitter doesn't require a real life identity, it can be as anonymous as you want.
• Twitter isn't public unless you want it to be.
• Twitter isn't a two-way sharing of information unless you explicitly want it to be. You can anonymously exist on Twitter and follow topics that interest you with no one ever knowing who you are.

What Twitter Is

The shortest description is that Twitter can be anything you want it to be. 

• A stream of headlines you care about on any topic or group of topics you're interested in. There's a Twitter feed for everything imaginable. Cute cats, gardening tips, and monster trucks? Follow @emergencykittens, @Gardening_Ideas, and @theallmonster. Done – easy.
• Private. If you want to post to only people following you, it's easy to do. Or you can never post at all. Your call.
• Following is one way. If someone follows you, you don't have to follow them. You'll never see their updates if you don't follow them, and they'll never see yours if they don't follow you. This is one of the biggest differentiators from many social networks.
• An extraordinary source for breaking news in any particular region or all regions. News outlets were way behind and embarrassingly inaccurate during the tragic Boston Marathon Bombings, but the right Twitter sources were timely and accurate.
• Real time local news. I have learned about school lock downs, break ins, and road closures with up to the minute accuracy by following local sources, local police, etc.
• One-way flow of information - either in or out. You don't have to follow anyone and you don't have to let anyone follow you. If you want to broadcast, you can broadcast. If you want only to receive information from your curated list, you can do that too. I know several people that only use Twitter to gather information.
• At-a-glance and in-depth information. You can opt to glean information at a glance reading headlines and 1 sentence blurbs or you can use it to dive into detail on a topic, perform research, or read endlessly. When I'm getting gas I read headlines for 45 seconds, when I'm at the DMV I read interesting things for hours.
• No one has to know you joined Twitter. You don't have to use your real name. You can disable being discovered by your email address. You can exist on Twitter without anyone ever knowing it is you.
• Multiple account support. If you want one account to follow friends and one to follow news, you can easily do that all within a single app.
• Amazing apps. Twitter, unlike Facebook, can be accessed through the official Twitter apps or countless third party apps. You can find an app that is designed the way you like, with features that you like, with customizations that you like. More on this below.

When to Twitter

One of the remarks against Twitter is the lack of a need for more streams of information. Another counter point is that there is little time for yet another social network. Mix these with the misconception that you don't have control over how much content you see in Twitter, and there's a pretty strong case against it. I believe that is misguided though. I (and my convert friends) went from believing these things to genuinely loving Twitter.

You have absolute control over how much is in your Twitter feed. You chose who to follow and you don't see anything else. You can disable one person's retweets (when they re-post someone else, you can disable that to only see their own content). You can also mute people; for example I have instituted a 24 hour mute on @gmail because of their overzealous April Fool's Day posting – it was getting old, but I know I still want to follow them long term.

Since following is one way, there's no obligation to "Like" posts, no social pressure to comment, no two-way pressures at all. If you never read a Tweet, no one cares. This makes Twitter perfect for waiting in line, sitting on the bus, filling your car with gas, etc; whether you have 4 seconds or 45 minutes, it doesn't matter. Check it once per month, or every 5 minutes, your choice.

If you have any amount of time to follow or share information on any friend, family, hobby, or interest, then Twitter is for you in some capacity.

Mobile Twitter Clients

There are countless apps to access Twitter, though some of the most prolific should suffice for just about any Twitter user (not to put down the small developers, if you have a Twitter app you'd like me to review, please contact me). There are also desktop clients and tablet clients (some below are hybrid phone/tablet). My focus here is smartphone since I find that's the best way to interact with Twitter.

iOS Clients

• Tweetbot ($4.99) - My absolute favorite app for the iPhone – period. That easily makes it my favorite Twitter client. The iOS 7 redesign has only made it to the iPhone version, but that's alright. This app is worth 5x the asking price.
• Twitter (Free) - The official Twitter app is capable enough if you don't want to spend the money. It supports things like two factor authentication where any desktop login request has to get verified via this app.
• Twitterific (Freemium) - A great Twitter app that is free with in-app purchases to turn off ads, enable push notifications, etc.
• More - There are countless Twitter apps, so I encourage you to explore. I highlight these key players to give you a good first experience with Twitter to figure out if Twitter is for you before diving into the world of finding the right client (if these aren't quite right).

Android Clients

I asked for some feedback from some faithful Twitter users and Android device owners since my experience on the platform has been more limiting than I wish. Any of these people that once had an iOS device first remarked strongly wished Tweetbot existed for Android. It doesn't, so here are the top choices.

• Twitter (Free) - The official Twitter app seems to be a top choice. It supports things like two factor authentication where any desktop login request has to get verified via this app.
• Tweedle (Freemium) - Clean interface, simple to use, solid set of features.
• Talon ($1.99) - Feature rich, nice design.
• Fynch (Freemium) - Twitter client that offers summary views to get a higher level idea of the content of your Twitter feed.

Lingo

There is some Twitter lingo that helps to be aware of. Thankfully if you Google just about any weird thing you see and surround your search query with "what is" and "on Twitter", you'll probably find the answer.

• RT - retweet. You're re-sharing a tweet that someone else posted. You used to have to manually do this, but now there is a retweet button.
• MT - modified retweet. Same as a retweet but modified slightly. Often used to truncate someone else's tweet to append your own thoughts.
• .@<handle> - A leading period before the @ is used to disable Twitter's conversation threading. Without the period, a reply is only seen by those that follow you and whomever you reply to. More details here.
• HT - hat tip and/or heard through. Used to indicate that the information was heard through the mentioned source.
• More - Check out the complete guide to Twitter lingo.

Contemplating Facebook's Strategy Based on Acquisitions

Facebook has been making waves lately, tidal waves in fact. After $19 billion for WhatsApp and $2 billion for Oculus, some are left scratching their head and asking some very good questions. Why? How are these related?

I think the answer is simpler than many have offered. I believe it boils down to Facebook wanting to stay relevant long term, no matter what technology or platform enables it.

WhatsApp

Messaging is a (or the?) primary means of communicating for billions of people, and Facebook Messenger was largely a flop. In a sense, messaging is the simplest highly private social network; you share very specific things with very specific people. I firmly believe that messaging with reign supreme as a top, if not the top, use of mobile phones for the foreseeable future.

Oculus

Virtual reality (VR) has been attempted repeatedly for decades. The idea is usually focused on gaming, but I suspect it will eventually grow beyond that. Technology is finally getting to a point where it is nearly ready for the masses, previously it has been more of a cool demo. There is little doubt that VR will play a role in technology for many years to come, and many believe it'll be a common household technology in the not-to-distant future.

Facebook isn't Your Regular Tech Company

Facebook is run by a forward looking CEO that has zero interest in becoming a "normal" technology company. Legacy tech companies move surprisingly slowly when growing, expanding into new markets, or acquiring companies. Zuckerberg is running a new type of technology company. Move faster, innovate more quickly, and skate to where the puck is going rather than where it has been before anyone else does. 

Parts of this remind me of Apple, but even Apple seems to have more of a sluggish corporate feel. Facebook was happy to cannibalize Messenger because it knows WhatsApp was better. Facebook isn't operating with the baggage of a bunch of executives that have been in the industry for long careers and are applying that knowledge to each decision. They move quickly and with a sense of how vastly different the technology landscape is today compared to just a few years ago, and how fast it is changing.

Keep Up

This isn't to say that Facebook's methods will yield the results they hope, but it is a very fast-paced and aggressive approach. It sends the message "I dare you to keep up" to the other major tech companies out there. Only time will tell if they can keep up, if they even want to keep up, or if Facebook's fast-paced trajectory is even headed in the right direction.

Subjective-C: Studying Beautiful Design →

Thanks to ProductHunt.co I've been made aware of a site that embodies the passion for incredible design. Subjective-C, a wonderful word play on the software language that iOS apps are written in -- Objective-C, is a site that finds little details of apps where the designers spent a tremendous amount of time to perfect a small detail.

These types of details enhance the user experience, though many people will never even explicitly notice them. The site is new, but hopefully will grow quickly. There are many apps that deserve the recognition and designers/developers that deserve the recognition for the time and passion they spent sweating the details.

I highly recommend taking a look at Subjective-C by Sam Page.

Evaluating If and How Apple's Strategy is Still Like a Startup

Apple has famously flown a pirate flag, dismissed conventional business practices, and run the company in nontraditional ways. It seems to be working so far. This isn't an argument that Apple is exactly like a startup, but there are some key indicators that highlight how Apple is run differently when compared to any other multibillion dollar technology company such as Google, IBM, or Microsoft.

The $475B Startup(ish)

Focus

The number of technology product categories that Apple participates in in shockingly small for a company that size. It could be argued that Apple's focus on their products has never been better. Their newer products are selling in record numbers with their older products outpacing their respective industries. This focus is far more aligned with a startup mentality - "If we can just do this one thing perfectly..." The focus is very apparent, even to a fault in some cases.

It is unfortunate that given this focus on products, often the services often come across as afterthoughts. iWork's overhaul last summer stripped several features from the Mac version to align it with the iOS version, and rumors suggest it was because they didn't have time to bring the iOS version up to align with the Mac version. iMessages have improved significantly, but there are still reports of problems when 2-3+ devices are involved (I haven't had a single issue since iOS 7 + Mavericks using iPhone/iPad/Mac).

Betting the Rent Money

With every hardware product Apple makes, they pour their heart and soul into it, and they don't have a Plan B. When they design a product there are plenty of other similar designs that were passed over, but they aren't Plan B. They weren't "perfect" and therefore will not be produced. 

Apple has had the "bet the rent money" approach ever since Jobs' return to the company when they literally were betting their final dollars that they could turn it around with stunning products. It is inspiring to see just how much of that still remains given the size of the wallet backing them.

Perhaps the same drive that used to be fueled by the possibility of going out of business is now fueled by meeting expectations. Apple has made it clear they hold themselves to a higher standard, so it makes sense that the world around them has done the same. Whatever it is, it has the outward appearance of them betting the rent money on each new product.

Product Comes First

Startups are concerned with monetizing their product eventually, but first they need to have a product to monetize. The overwhelming trend these days seems to be getting funding to allow you to work on the product, refine it, make it the best possible version you had in mind, then release it. Once it has a hold in the market, it is time to plan for long term monetization.

It isn't exactly an approach that works in traditional business historically, but times have changed. One million visitors to a new restaurant would be impossible, but one million users of a new app is just getting started for the new age Silicon Valley startup. 

Apple is similar, though not identical. The mechanism for profit is very clear. There are two ways to see that - it either means they're operating like a startup and saying "the best or nothing" without worrying about anything besides the product or they're in a privileged position and don't need to worry about anything besides the product. Apple fans want to believe the former, but plenty of people could argue the latter.

It might be too early to tell, but the strongest indicator I think of is what happens longer term. Apple has had plenty of money for quite some time now, if they keep the focus and keep the bar high, then it suggests to me that they're operating more like a startup, putting the product before everything. If they grow stagnant, uninspiring, or boring, then we'll know it was the latter.

Saying No

This is worth highlighting outside of the "focus" section because it is the cornerstone to how their design cycle works. There have been countless articles written about how new iOS devices are stagnant, uninspiring, and boring. In fact, just about every iOS device has been accused of such things. The sales of the devices suggest those people are wrong, but their comments have some validity.

For many, the length of the list of features is paramount. The key difference between those that believe iOS devices aren't progressing fast enough and the way Apple designs them is that Apple says "no" when competitors say "yes". It doesn't result in a product for everyone, but it does result in a beautifully simple product. No NFC, no big screened phone, no 3rd party access to Touch ID, no inter-app sharing, etc. All of these were carefully considered, but not implemented (some yet, some ever).

You can have the simplicity that has made Apple's products stand out and sell by the millions, or you can have the laundry list of features. I don't believe Apple's style of doing business would survive long term if they abandon their ability to say "no". One of my favorite quotes from Jobs highlights it nicely (notice how he calls them good ideas):

People think focus means saying yes to the thing you've got to focus on. But that's not what it means at all. It means saying no to the hundred other good ideas that there are. You have to pick carefully. I'm actually as proud of the things we haven't done as the things I have done. Innovation is saying no to 1,000 things. - Steve Jobs

Only Time Will Tell

It is far too early to know how this story ends. Their rise from the ashes has been astonishing, but they haven't been at the top for that long. A decade in the technology industry is a long time, but in the business world it is not. It is at a time like this that their actions will tell us what kind of company they are - a hungry "startup" that picks a target and ferociously works to beat it (even if that target is a product of their own) or the complacent rich kid who doesn't appreciate how they got to where they are.

Apple-Comcast Negotiations Could Open the Flood Gates Like Apple-AT&T did in 2007

UPDATE: Updated the title to be more representative of the content of the piece, will leave the link so previous links aren't broken.

I've written previously that the current television market is antiquated and that no progress on the Apple TV (whether literally a television set or just a new set top box with far advanced capabilities) can be made until that changes. I strongly believe this to be the case and, if I had to guess, is the only reason we haven't seen a new Apple TV that goes from being "just a hobby" to another leg on the Apple product "stool".

Rumors are flying this week about ongoing negotiations between Apple and Comcast. This situation is reminiscent of the smartphone industry before the iPhone. Prior to the iPhone, the carriers held the power, they controlled the phone software, they controlled the "apps" (I have a hard time calling those apps when we know what real apps are like today), they controlled everything. Apple came in and took back control, because without that control they cannot own the user experience. Apple has mastered owning the user experience and has repeatedly offered products that succeed because of this curated, clean, and enjoyable experience. 

The television content/distribution market today is an extremely similar landscape to the smartphone industry before the iPhone. As I said in Reality Check: Disrupting the TV Industry, the content owners currently hold the power. Comcast is an owner and a distributor. Comcast is now in the role that AT&T was in back in 2006/2007 for the original iPhone.

If Apple plays their cards right the consumers stand to gain from this in truly magnificent ways. I say the consumer because if Apple succeeds, content owners will be working aggressively to add other partners (Amazon, Google, and Microsoft come to mind) to avoid letting Apple have too much power over them. With multiple partners and multiple platforms, the growth and advancement will come at a drastically increased pace. Consider the delta in smart phones from 2004 to 2007 and then again from 2009 to 2012; now imagine that growth in the television industry (not a one-to-one comparison, but this stands to have a flood gate effect like the iPhone created).

This also goes hand in hand with why I don't believe Apple needs to make an actual television set to transform the television industry. Their reach will be far greater if they offer this revolution in the form of a reasonably priced set top box, though I'd assume above their current $99 Apple TV price tag.

I believe we're on the cusp of a revolution in television, we just need the flood gate to open a little bit and the rest will take care of itself.