Hello, For a few days now I've read what people have said in reply to the update from Ryan. There are some crazy reactions and responses to what Ryan has said. In essence, the entire reaction is my opinion is completely overblown.
Not in any sense what-so-ever have Twitter said that you can no longer post updates on behalf of users. Its ludicrous to suggest so. What they have have said (and in my opinion - quite clearly) is that it is better to direct your time and effort into a product that is not just a simple client and does more than just provide viewing and posting of tweets. There are so many half-arsed clients out there that do little more than just show and post tweets. If by chance a user was to use these low grade applications as their first experience of Twitter, it would probably put them off using it in the long term. I do fully believe that is why they have released their own branded clients for iOS, Macs and other devices. It provides a consistent experience for the end-users. The other thing that people seem to completely overlook is that Twitter are providing a freely accessible API at no charge to developers. It pains me to see so many developers standing the moral high ground. If you were paying for access to a service or product and it changes, you have a very valid reason to complain. To complain about a service provided free of charge for you to use at the end of the day frustrates me to no end. No single developer has a god given right to have access to the API, perhaps that should be remembered. Scott. On 13 Mar 2011, at 00:16, Adam Green wrote: > Interesting that neither Ryan or anyone else from Twitter has replied once to > any of the questions here, (way to go on showing your interest in the > developer community, Ryan), so I'll address this question to everyone else > in the group. I don't read Ryan's message as demanding that apps are no > longer allowed to send tweets on behalf of users. Is that supposed to be what > he said? I think he is saying that apps should be more than *just* clients > that let you read and post tweets. How to tell the difference, I have no > idea, but I think in Ryan's mind there is a difference. > > I'll ask it as clearly as I can. Is it still allowed for an app to accept a > tweet from a user and post it into their account? > > Is the /statuses/update api call still allowed in an app? > > Let's not wait for Twitter to respond, since they clearly don't want to any > longer. Let's try and figure this out ourselves. What does everyone think? > Can apps still send tweets? > > If yes, there is still a market for Twitter API developers. If not, the > Twitter API is over. It is that simple. > > Maybe Ryan or anyone from Twitter can also find the time to answer this. > > On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Duane Roelands <duane.roela...@gmail.com> > wrote: > Wow. "Thanks for getting so many people interested in Twitter. Now > get lost." > > This is appalling. > > -- > Twitter developer documentation and resources: http://dev.twitter.com/doc > API updates via Twitter: http://twitter.com/twitterapi > Issues/Enhancements Tracker: http://code.google.com/p/twitter-api/issues/list > Change your membership to this group: > http://groups.google.com/group/twitter-development-talk > > > > -- > Adam Green > Twitter API Consultant and Trainer > http://140dev.com > @140dev > > -- > Twitter developer documentation and resources: http://dev.twitter.com/doc > API updates via Twitter: http://twitter.com/twitterapi > Issues/Enhancements Tracker: http://code.google.com/p/twitter-api/issues/list > Change your membership to this group: > http://groups.google.com/group/twitter-development-talk -- Twitter developer documentation and resources: http://dev.twitter.com/doc API updates via Twitter: http://twitter.com/twitterapi Issues/Enhancements Tracker: http://code.google.com/p/twitter-api/issues/list Change your membership to this group: http://groups.google.com/group/twitter-development-talk
