The media (and likely Facebook itself) thinks it's the superset of Twitter and email.
But instead, the central place for everything remains email, and Facebook and Twitter dump stuff to into it. I normally hear about an incoming Facebook message or new Twitter follower through my Gmail. Your email client remains open all day. Facebook and Twitter do not.
Wow. It's interesting your perception is that email is the central place. Email is reaching the end of it's lifespan. Ask any 17 year old how much they use email. The answer may surprise you. The RSS approach, using an aggregator such as Friendfeed, Tweetdeck, or Seesmic are the established method of notification. Getting an email for every notification is just counter-productive.
Rob - that's sort of my point. You get all these semi-useless notifications in your email, thus cluttering up your inbox. I'm not sure about what the optimum solution would be. I'd love to see all those notifications die.
I can't switch to a Reader as my main communication device, because people who are older than 17 still use email, like it or not :-)
Those who claim that email is not required either belong to the chattering classes and make their living on Twitter / Friendfeed. (Doing what, exactly?)
"Your email client remains open all day. Facebook and Twitter do not."
Much to the chagrin of my wife, who thinks I work for a living, everything is open all day: Gmail, FB, FF, LinkedIn, and two Twitters - one for me and a new one I launched for a non-profit.
Yes, Gmail notifies me when someone new pops up in either Twitter or on LinkedIn, but I find I do a lot of cross posting between FB, FF and Twitter and it has actually reduced the number of emails I send.
Clients are still on an email basis, of course, but three of my most active clients are now on Twitter, again, reducing the "traditional" email exchange somewhat.
I think you're confusing the delivery method and the hub. Just because email is the notification point doesn't mean it has any value or significance for people. It's just a means of getting somewhere else.
they are not belong together. but who cares? Each of them are very useful method and ppl need all of them in each way. they have their own core values.
I'm the Founder / CEO of reMail, a startup that wants to radically improve your mobile email experience. Update: reMail was recently acquired by Google!
Before, I was the VP Engineering at Xobni, where we invented and built a popular email tool for Outlook, and a Software Engineer at Google. I have an MS degree in Computer Science from ETH Zurich in Switzerland.
You should also check out my Posterous, and my Twitter, where I post all thoughts < 140 chars.
13 Comments:
Can you elaborate, wise one? =)
C'mon, it's pretty obvious.
The media (and likely Facebook itself) thinks it's the superset of Twitter and email.
But instead, the central place for everything remains email, and Facebook and Twitter dump stuff to into it. I normally hear about an incoming Facebook message or new Twitter follower through my Gmail. Your email client remains open all day. Facebook and Twitter do not.
i'm not so sure.
my central place for everything is my rss reader surrounded by email and twitter clients.
most people are probably not surrounded by anything, they just use websites.
könnte aber auch an meiner selektiven wahrnehmung liegen
Wow. It's interesting your perception is that email is the central place. Email is reaching the end of it's lifespan. Ask any 17 year old how much they use email. The answer may surprise you. The RSS approach, using an aggregator such as Friendfeed, Tweetdeck, or Seesmic are the established method of notification. Getting an email for every notification is just counter-productive.
Rob - that's sort of my point. You get all these semi-useless notifications in your email, thus cluttering up your inbox. I'm not sure about what the optimum solution would be. I'd love to see all those notifications die.
I can't switch to a Reader as my main communication device, because people who are older than 17 still use email, like it or not :-)
Gabor
I agree. For me, it's FriendFeed. Live updates and the ability to follow the conversation. No email required.
Those who claim that email is not required either belong to the chattering classes and make their living on Twitter / Friendfeed. (Doing what, exactly?)
Cr don't have a job.
"Your email client remains open all day. Facebook and Twitter do not."
Much to the chagrin of my wife, who thinks I work for a living, everything is open all day: Gmail, FB, FF, LinkedIn, and two Twitters - one for me and a new one I launched for a non-profit.
Yes, Gmail notifies me when someone new pops up in either Twitter or on LinkedIn, but I find I do a lot of cross posting between FB, FF and Twitter and it has actually reduced the number of emails I send.
Clients are still on an email basis, of course, but three of my most active clients are now on Twitter, again, reducing the "traditional" email exchange somewhat.
I think you're confusing the delivery method and the hub. Just because email is the notification point doesn't mean it has any value or significance for people. It's just a means of getting somewhere else.
they are not belong together. but who cares? Each of them are very useful method and ppl need all of them in each way. they have their own core values.
Alistair Croll recently posted a fascination POV on the role of email as the ultimate aggregator of online activity. Worth a peek here.
And, like it or not, for the above-17 crowd in the business world email is THE focus of life (yuck!) and is not going away anytime soon...
This is only accurate for those over 30. Email is dying.
how BORRING!
Post a Comment
<< Home