Hacker News Reader

Comment by JCB_K | Hacker News Reader

I don't understand why people are so upset about this. It's simple: Twitter Inc. doesn't like apps which are the same as Twitter, or worse. (I don't mean to say that Twitter is bad already: just that Twitter Inc. doesn't like 1. apps recreating Twitter and 2. apps which give a low-quality UI.)

In other words: they urge devs to develop a client with added value. Wether that's apps for "Company Tweeting" or Real-Time Data, it's adding something to the core experience of Twitter.

Most importantly, I think Twitter Inc. still likes "normal" Twitter apps, as long as they have added value: a superior UI. So get devving, and make the new and better Tweetie!

View on HN

I'm not quite sure about that. Check this part:

"More specifically, developers ask us if they should build client apps that mimic or reproduce the mainstream Twitter consumer client experience. The answer is no.

If you are an existing developer of client apps, you can continue to serve your user base, but we will be holding you to high standards to ensure you do not violate users’ privacy, that you provide consistency in the user experience, and that you rigorously adhere to all areas of our Terms of Service"

This sounds to me like they don't really want "normal" Twitter apps anymore, but have just grand-fathered in the existing ones, while opening the door to closing them down if they don't follow the guidelines.

It's simple: Twitter Inc. doesn't like apps which are the same as Twitter, or worse.

From this announcement, it sounds like they also don't like clients which have different UIs than Twitter now.

I don't think that Twitter Inc. likes any 3rd party Twitter apps anymore cause these don't let them show their Dickbar and whatever will come to the official apps.

You know what I think? There is ONE solution to pass this problem: Integrate such things into the API so EVERY client has to show the Dickbar. This sounds like the logical next level.

As bad as it sounds I think they have some good points about that cause, you know, they want to make some money and integrate some annoying stuff to the official apps. 3rd party apps don't have these kind of annoying things and that means they don't earn a PENNY from those "assholes" BUT they are earning money from their apps which uses the Twitter API.

I know this sounds crazy but I think that's exactly what Twitter is thinking about. They want people to use their official Apps BUT if they use other Apps these MUST HAVE the Dickbar (or whatever) too so Twitter earns money.

Lets see in which direction this will go BUT I have to admit that this "letter" to developers is fucking sharp.

I'm not so sure they are not soliciting alternate UI:

"We need to ensure that tweets, and tweet actions, are rendered in a consistent way so that people have the same experience with tweets no matter where they are."

Then I read further down and they talk about different areas of the ecosystem. Inconsistent message. Do they want outside development or not? Are they intending to release a mandatory graphics toolkit?

Let the market decide. If developers are making clients that are worse than the standard, people won't use them. What is Twitter's product here?

If the market was completely transparent, that would be the case, but that's not how it is. For example Yfrog: it looks absolutely terrible, but still it's very popular. If I made Twitter I wouldn't be happy about that.

A new normal Twitter-user (some who doesn't read HN, basically) might think something like this: "Oh, so this is where you post images on twitter? Doesn't look great. How do I login? Ah nevermind, I'll go back to Facebook." At the same time, TwitPic adds something to Twitter, in such a way that it fits in with it.

Bottom-line: users will connect 3rd-party apps and experiences to the API provider, so Twitter is right in making clear that they don't want crappy apps.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com