Daring Fireball: Twitter’s 280-Character Own Goal


25 bookmarks. First posted by rufous november 2017.


Twitter's 280-character own goal. 🤦‍♂️
from twitter
november 2017 by donaldjenkins
You can still stay under 140 chars. If anything, the extra give you more discipline because cheating is possible. http://ift.tt/2yKnFi9
IFTTT  Buffer 
november 2017 by rjp
J.K. Rowling, on Twitter raising the per-tweet character limit to 280:
Twitter’s destroyed its USP. The whole point, for me, was how inventive people could be within that concise framework.
USP is “unique selling proposition”. By doubling the character limit, Twitter has eliminated what made them unique. Yes, there were many trade-offs with the 140-character limit, both pros and cons. But one of the pros is it made Twitter unique. Twitter timelines now look more like Facebook — but Facebook is already there for Facebook-like timelines. Twitter trying to be more like Facebook is like basketball trying to be more like football — a bad idea that won’t work.
Stephen King was more succinct:
280 characters? Fuck that.
Andy Ihnatko:
I like the word-Tetris of making a complete thought fit in a 140-character box.
John Dingell, 91-year-old retired Congressman from Michigan (who is truly excellent at Twitter):
99% of you people don’t even deserve 140 characters.
It’s no surprise that writers, in particular, object to this change. I agree with Ihnatko — the 140-character limit made it a challenge. Fitting certain complex thoughts into a mere 140 characters sometimes felt like solving a small challenge, like one of The New York Times’s tiny little 5 × 5 crossword puzzles.
But perhaps the best commentary comes from William Shakespeare:
Brevity is the soul of wit.
Given 280 characters, people are going to use them, even to express thoughts that could have fit in 140. Given unlimited characters, such as in email, people ramble aimlessly.
That’s why email feels like a dreary chore, and Twitter feels like fun. The fewer tweets that fit in a single screen at a time, the less fun Twitter feels. I’m sure Twitter considered this change carefully, but I’m convinced they’ve made a terrible mistake.
twitter  daring_fireball 
november 2017 by rgl7194
Given 280 characters, people are going to use them, even to express thoughts that could have fit in 140. Given unlimited characters, such as in email, people ramble aimlessly.

That’s why email feels like a dreary chore, and Twitter feels like fun. The fewer tweets that fit in a single screen at a time, the less fun Twitter feels. I’m sure Twitter considered this change carefully, but I’m convinced they’ve made a terrible mistake.

OF COURSE IT'S A TERRIBLE MISTAKE
twitter 
november 2017 by maoxian
[agreed] Twitter’s 280-Character Own Goal
from twitter
november 2017 by nicola
via Feedbin Starred Entries for steven.lubitz@gmail.com
Feedbin 
november 2017 by WickedGood
Twitter’s 280-Character Own Goal, J.K. Rowling, on Twitter raising the per-tweet character limit to 280 : Twitter’s destroyed its USP. The whole point, for me, was howinventive people could be…, via Instapaper
Instapaper 
november 2017 by paulp
RT : ★ Twitter’s 280-Character Own Goal:
from twitter
november 2017 by mellowfish
via Feedbin Starred Entries for joewiz@gmail.com
IFTTT  Feedbin  Starred  Entries  for  joewiz@gmail.com 
november 2017 by joewiz
J.K. Rowling, on Twitter raising the per-tweet character limit to 280 : Twitter’s destroyed its USP. The whole point, for me, was howinventive people could be…
from instapaper
november 2017 by jamies
http://ift.tt/2yKnFi9 ★ Twitter’s 280-Character Own Goal
Feedly 
november 2017 by DirkSonguer
via Starred items from BazQux Reader http://ift.tt/1cAKc9M and IFTTT
Starred  items  from  BazQux  Reader 
november 2017 by stinkingpig
★ Twitter’s 280-Character Own Goal:
from twitter_favs
november 2017 by datakille
from Daring Fireball

J.K. Rowling, on Twitter raising the per-tweet character limit to 280:

Twitter’s destroyed its USP. The whole point, for me, was how inventive people could be within that concise framework.

USP is “unique selling proposition”. By doubling the character limit, Twitter has eliminated what made them unique. Yes, there were many trade-offs with the 140-character limit, both pros and cons. But one of the pros is it made Twitter unique. Twitter timelines now look more like Facebook — but Facebook is already there for Facebook-like timelines. Twitter trying to be more like Facebook is like basketball trying to be more like football — a bad idea that won’t work.

Stephen King was more succinct:

280 characters? Fuck that.

Andy Ihnatko:

I like the word-Tetris of making a complete thought fit in a 140-character box.

John Dingell, a 91-year-old retired Congressman from Michigan (who is truly excellent at Twitter):

99% of you people don’t even deserve 140 characters.

It’s no surprise that writers, in particular, object to this change. I agree with Ihnatko — the 140-character limit made it a challenge. Fitting certain complex thoughts into a mere 140 characters sometimes felt like solving a small challenge, like one of The New York Times’s tiny little 5 × 5 crossword puzzles.

But perhaps the best commentary comes from William Shakespeare:

Brevity is the soul of wit.

Given 280 characters, people are going to use them, even to express thoughts that could have fit in 140. Given unlimited characters, such as in email, people ramble aimlessly.

That’s why email feels like a dreary chore, and Twitter feels like fun. The fewer tweets that fit in a single screen at a time, the less fun Twitter feels. I’m sure Twitter considered this change carefully, but I’m convinced they’ve made a terrible mistake.
ifttt  daringfireball 
november 2017 by josephschmitt
J.K. Rowling, on Twitter raising the per-tweet character limit to 280:

Twitter’s destroyed its USP. The whole point, for me, was how inventive people could be within that concise framework.

USP is “unique selling proposition”. By doubling the character limit, Twitter has eliminated what made them unique. Yes, there were many trade-offs with the 140-character limit, both pros and cons. But one of the pros is it made Twitter unique. Twitter timelines now look more like Facebook — but Facebook is already there for Facebook-like timelines. Twitter trying to be more like Facebook is like basketball trying to be more like football — a bad idea that won’t work.

Stephen King was more succinct:

280 characters? Fuck that.

Andy Ihnatko:

I like the word-Tetris of making a complete thought fit in a 140-character box.

John Dingell, a 91-year-old retired Congressman from Michigan (who is truly excellent at Twitter):

99% of you people don’t even deserve 140 characters.

It’s no surprise that writers, in particular, object to this change. I agree with Ihnatko — the 140-character limit made it a challenge. Fitting certain complex thoughts into a mere 140 characters sometimes felt like solving a small challenge, like one of The New York Times’s tiny little 5 × 5 crossword puzzles.

But perhaps the best commentary comes from William Shakespeare:

Brevity is the soul of wit.

Given 280 characters, people are going to use them, even to express thoughts that could have fit in 140. Given unlimited characters, such as in email, people ramble aimlessly.

That’s why email feels like a dreary chore, and Twitter feels like fun. The fewer tweets that fit in a single screen at a time, the less fun Twitter feels. I’m sure Twitter considered this change carefully, but I’m convinced they’ve made a terrible mistake.
via:daringfireball 
november 2017 by rufous