Comments on: Desktop Twitter Clients Are Pointless

By: Caroline_K

Caroline_K — Sat, 22 May 2010 06:02:02 +0000

i used tweetdeck for like 2 weeks. I found the alerts are so anoying!! I get stuck with brizly cause i like the images look in the same page. But sometimes it doesn't update your status (in fact, several times per day) so I finally decided to used chrowerty for google chrome, and i'm quite happy witjh it.

By: Josh

Josh — Mon, 03 May 2010 07:04:00 +0000

I use tweetdeck.

By: Pete

Pete — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:38:59 +0000

TweetDeck doesn't do that, when you shorten the URL it puts it in your tweet and you know how many chars you're using so the only downside I see is the API limit.

By: Scott Jarkoff

Scott Jarkoff — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:19:18 +0000

How come Adobe AIR apps are non-functional on your workstations?

By: Scott Jarkoff

Scott Jarkoff — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:18:40 +0000

It is for that reason why I listed TweetDeck specifically – it seems to have a better handle on how to handle Twitter when compared to the other existing desktop twitter clients out there.

By: Scott Jarkoff

Scott Jarkoff — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:17:16 +0000

The problem I ran into with the URL shortening services is that even though they're "built-in" to the client, you still can't really tell if you've hit the 140 character limit because the shortening is taken care of after you submit your tweet. To me, that seems entirely counter-productive.

I've also felt the wrath of being rate-limited due to massive sequential tweeting. Not a good thing methinks!

By: JoshuaRJones

JoshuaRJones — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 19:07:40 +0000

I couldn't live without Quicksilver. Did a post on what I use it for most if your curious - http://joshuajonesdesign.com/blog/?p=60

I fell in love with Tweetie, but still want to see some improvements added to the device.

By: Paul W. Swansen

Paul W. Swansen — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 15:39:21 +0000

Since the Adobe AIR apps don't work on either my Intel iMac or my Netbook running Windows XP, desktop apps are where it's at.

By: Scott Jarkoff

Scott Jarkoff — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 14:44:46 +0000

Thanks for stopping by Mike. Glad to see you around this part of town. :-)

I've been following your client development on Twitter, and am quite eager to see what you've put together. It sounds like you *are* doing something novel, which is way more than can be said for most Twitter clients these days. Any ETA on a beta?

By: Scott Jarkoff

Scott Jarkoff — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 14:41:30 +0000

Never tried using Quicksilver for tweeting. Although, I never really got in to Quicksilver – can't, for the life of me, understand how to use it to my advantage.

What Twitter iPhone client do you prefer?

By: shelly

shelly — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 09:11:38 +0000

I use TweetDeck currently. In the past, I've used Spaz and Twhirl. I prefer a client over updating via the web (though I've done both).

* One can see new tweets instantly, and reply to or retweet them instantly.
* I don't check the website often, unless I want to see any new followers, or if I need to block someone (usually a spam account). Without a web client, my Twitter use would be lessened.
* The ability to make URLs shorter is built in.
* When using Twhirl and Spaz, I could also post to Pownce (when it was around), if I wanted to.
* Tweetdeck separates regular tweets from replies and re-tweets, which I find much more organized.

By: finkel

finkel — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 07:32:46 +0000

I find the grouping feature of Tweetdeck pushes it my to the top of my list of preferred Twitter interfaces. Notifications and alerts can be turned off easily enough. I was about to create separate accounts for follwoing @breakingNewsOn and the like, because they were saturating my feed, and I was losing track of my friends, but they still provide information I want to see. This was compounded by the following of several design magazines and coding sites and services. I use IconFactory's fine Twitteriffic client on my iPod touch, and it is a great interface for when I am away from my desktop (nights and weekends). But until clients and/or the twitter web site itself provide the simple function of grouping your followers into categories, Tweetdeck's going to stay at the top of my list, because segregation of content via grouping is easier than using/managing multiple accounts.

By: MonTemplar

MonTemplar — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 05:58:51 +0000

I'm currently using TweetDeck, and the ability to separate out tweets from my close friends, and also things like news feeds, into separate columns is very valuable to me. I can quickly scroll through messages, answer some, favourite or retweet a few more, then mark them all read and move on. :)

I was using Twitterfox before, but as I don't always have Firefox open or in the foreground during the work day, I tended to miss out on tweets. With TweetDeck, they're all stored up for the next time I click on the little birdie to bring them to the foreground.

There are a few things I would like to see, most notably the ability to expand short-urls when I hover over them in TweetDeck. Other than that, I'm pretty happy.

By: Pete

Pete — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 05:24:01 +0000

I currently do use a desktop client in the form of Tweetdeck for a couple reasons. Firstly it has the in-built ability to do URL shortening which I find extremely useful. Ok I could go to tinyurl and do it myself but it's nice to do it inside the one app. The other reason I think I use it probably why you don't, I'm not always browsing.

When I'm at home I do some browsing then go off and do whatever, I leave tweetdeck open in my 'Chat' space on my laptop and check it to keep up with what's going on as I watch TV or whatever. I think that's where they're useful. At work, I use either the site or Twitterfox as I can't install any applications.

As you say the are valid points either side though I think the one achillies heel for the desktop application is that there is a limit on API calls. Once exceeded you have to use the website till it resets an hour later. So if you tweet a lot, the web method is your friend!

By: Mike Rundle

Mike Rundle — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 04:51:19 +0000

So I'm a guy that 1) doesn't use desktop Twitter clients, but is 2) writing a desktop Twitter client for the Mac, one that I'll actually use.

Say what?

I totally agree that most desktop Twitter clients are pointless because they don't *add* any functionality or provide any kind of unique experience. They don't expound on the feature set already included in the web version of Twitter, they normally just let you access the data in a slightly different way. On the iPhone it's a matter of convenience so you can get away with a similar experience, but on the desktop, there should be something additional since you can just as easily and quickly access the web interface.

I'm writing my own Twitter client because it does something that I can't get on the web interface -- it lets me temporarily hide tweets from certain people I follow, and highlight tweets from other folks I follow. It lets me more easily cut through the chaff and get to the good stuff which is especially useful when I only check Twitter occasionally since I'm trying to get work done during the day.

So in my mind, the bottom line is that unless a desktop Twitter client offers a feature (or features) that makes it *more* useful than the web interface, then there's just no point.

By: Xander / Narfmaster

Xander / Narfmaster — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 04:03:27 +0000

To some extent I agree with you, lots of Twitter desktop clients are just overbloated and ultimately make using it less productive. I tried Tweetdeck and while it's functionality was impressive, I can do everything with the Twitter homepage.
I use the Twitterific app on my Mac because of it's simplicity- your main stream and a submission form. Being able to click it's icon in the top bar and input it there and then is personally a lot quicker than heading to twitter.com, and it hides itself when not in use. That's all I need from an App.

By: YorickPeterse

YorickPeterse — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 03:14:29 +0000

I use Twitter the old way, through a browser. Main reason for that is that I simply don't need a special client for it, it's a total overkill :]

By: JoshuaRJones

JoshuaRJones — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 03:13:50 +0000

I agree. The most I ever pursued when coming to a desktop client was using Quicksilver to Tweet. Never got it working, so stopped trying. The Web site works fine for me. You hit it dead on when talking about information overload.

The majority of my Twitter use is via iPhone when I'm on the go, which has always led me to believe that Twitter was created for mobility. They always have had the ability to update via txt messaging as well.