I know I am a technology guy, and I am very logical and literal. Because of this I get annoyed when people use conversation and Twitter, Microblogging, or Status Updates as synonyms. Have you ever tried to have a conversation on Twitter or Identi.ca?
Part of the reason for my annoyance this morning are two blog posts regarding Twitter and Facebook. First, Nick O’Neill at AllFacebook has a very good post regarding Facebook and Twitter traffic during the inauguration. Shortly after that, I read the Inquisitr post by Duncan Riley about Twitter’s rumored funding round. The combination of the two posts made me cranky. First, I completely agree with Duncan’s sentiments:
The bigger question: what do they need another round for? They’ve raised $20 million already, with the last round being $15 million in June 2008. Either they plan on acquiring a revenue model, or they’ve run out of money already, and if that’s the case, why are they getting more exactly? Insanity.
Twitter has been succeeding in spite of their actions. I have nothing against the team, and I wish them success, but they have made various mistakes. The bloggers of the world seem to be convinced that one microblogging platform will rule conversations. There are two problems with this. First, conversations through “status updates” is ridiculously hard. Conversations consist of a back and forth of coherent thoughts, not short burts of thoughts. The other problem is that if Facebook decides that it wants to win this “war”, they just need to open up a little more. Imagine if the Facebook platform was simpler to develop for. How many third party applications would jump at the reported 220 million users that Facebook has? Twitter may be exploding right now, but it is far from the mainstream acceptance that Facebook has.
Status updates may not be conversation, but people still seem to like these things. If Twitter gets an offer from Facebook, I would recommend they take it. Otherwise, Facebook may wake up one day and squash them.