I was reading Helene's blog post about Twitter. Again, I don't get it. So I thought I'd try to answer one of my own questions - how does Twitter differ from IM? I found a link that led me to this quote, "You already know that you can interact with Twitter at our web site or by texting from your mobile phone but now you can use IM to do everything that you can do over SMS." What? So I continued to read and found another link that led me to some FAQs, specifically one that I thought would answer my questions:
Getting to know Twitter
Twitter is a service for friends, family, and co–workers to communicate and stay connected through the exchange of quick, frequent messages. People write short updates, often called "tweets" of 140 characters or fewer. These messages are posted to your profile or your blog, sent to your followers, and are searchable on Twitter search.
So now I am stuck with my original questions. Why do I need Twitter when I have a cell phone? I could just as easily call the person for an update, or leave a message, send a text, for an update? I could poke them on their Facebook account if I wanted a slower approach, but for speed, why not an IM or basic phone call? If they are there, they will opt to answer or send me to voice mail for later. If they answer, then I know. I have an outdated cell phone that even allows me to send the same text/photo message to anyone in my phone book at the same time.
Now, why Twitter?
2 comments:
Twitter allows for a party line sort of effect. What is really effective about that is that you can use Twitter in emergency situations where phone lines are jammed. I am glad yu r arguing the point, though. Frankly, I enjoyed my time with learn and play and Twitter was one of my favorites, but my job involves slinging books all day so that other people can do things like discuss Twitter or Facebook...etc etc.
IMO, one of the main reasons Twitter is preferred is that its searchable. Plus, you can add links, and its infinitely a more open/social type of service that can garner you more followers/stalkers. That's the appeal for lots of folks, but you and I aren't that connected-type of folk...at least not in that way. I've looked at Twitter a couple times and haven't found anyone worth following...including Helene and Michael Stephens...although I go to their websites frequently.
Of course, you know that I disdain Twitter for all of its bits of nothingness that are broadcast back and forth. It does have some good uses, but at the moment, I've no reason to utilize it for things such as writing notes at a conference to myself (I rarely take notes).
I think its handy for people that are always connected through phones. As I've stated in the past, I'm not interested in paying exorbitant fees to telecoms for services that I'm not going to take advantage of. Give me a smartphone that gives me huge storage capacity, wireless access anywhere/anytime, a larger (and more accurate) touchscreen like an iphone that can read any file (flash, pdf, etc.), and a reasonable subscription and I'll get on board.
Post a Comment