Wired gets Leisa Riechtl's

18 Jul 2007 - 7:09pm
9 years ago
1 reply
565 reads

>From: Christopher Fahey <chris.fahey at behaviordesign.com>
>Moving away from products: You can't judge a restaurant until you go
>there multiple times, on different days and times and ordering different
>food. You can't judge a club until you go to some meetings and meet some
>So Twitter is a *social* app, not just software code. To understand it,
>you have to do the socializing part. And socializing takes time --
>socializing *is* time.

I think there's a bridge point lost here.

You *can* judge the car without driving it, or the restaurant after a single meal, or the club without becoming involved -- but only on the highest level. (I refrain from say the most "superficial" level, since that word has overtones to it.)

You can judge "I don't like the look of the Aztek, with that horrible high back" or "The spices used at that Ethiopian restaurant are too intense and make me sneeze" or even baser, "I have no use for a Vespa club, since I don't ride scooters". I don't need to drive one or eat there or join the club (for a month!) to know that I'm not going to enjoy it.

As yet, that's all I need to judge Twitter to a level suitable for me: "Nothing I've read or otherwise experienced about Twitter has intrigued me enough to pursue it deeper, and some things have actively kept me away. Not worth my time."

(But I also recognize that (a) that's just me and (b) I may change my mind some day. A few years ago, I tripped over an old e-mail I sent to someone in 1994 or so. He told me I really needed to check out this thing called the World Wide Web, that it was really going to be something some day, and I said nah, I don't see the appeal. Twitter could become my career some day!)

-- Jim


18 Jul 2007 - 7:18pm

>From: Josh Seiden <joshseiden at gmail.com>
>If it's true that you can't judge a social app until you've put in
>a significant amount of time using it, then how will these
>applications ever be adopted?

Probably by people who don't give a flying XYZ about reviews and objective judgments and crap like that. They just dive in and try it.

(I get dinged by some people about being reserved about seeing a film until I've read reviews. It's the same thing. Some want to dive right into Harry Potter; others want to hold off on spending $20 and 2.5 hours of life until they know that someone has something good to say about it.)

>The great unwashed want value, and few will dedicate (waste?) a month test-driving the
>twitters of the world.

What is "value", though? Value can be being part of the "in" crowd, scoping out a new band before they may it big (and becomes sellouts), being able to say "I've got an iPhone", knowing who lost last night on Dancing with the Stars, seeing a film at midnight in the front row. (I suggest avoiding films with subtitles for that, though. I still don't know what half the Russians said in "Red Heat".)

The "great unwashed" don't care about "value" much in practical terms, or they wouldn't watch trash sitcoms and reality shows.

-- Jim

Syndicate content Get the feed