In light of Twitter’s amazing integration in iOS 5 and conversations I had with Twitter employees after their developer meetup, I’d like to present a “glass half full” reinterpretation of recent events.
“…developers ask us if they should build client apps that mimic or reproduce the mainstream Twitter consumer client experience. The answer is no.” -Ryan Sarver on Twitter Development Talk
Reinterpretation: We’re about to show you some really great stuff at WWDC, please don’t all go out and create new client apps just because we’ve made it easier to do so.
That’s oversimplifying the point, but I think that the forthcoming iOS integration may have played a part in the timing and tone of Ryan’s post. Twitter’s deep integration into iOS 5 is a game-changer. As MG Siegler put it in a post on TechCrunch: “Apple Just Handed Twitter The Keys To The iOS Kingdom.”
What most people took away from Ryan’s post was that Twitter was trying to take over the Twitter experience for monetization purposes and would be actively pushing 3rd party client developers away. In person, however, Ryan was rather effusive about TweetBot and other client apps. I may have been reading too much into things, but my takeaway was that Twitter has no intention of squashing existing Twitter apps built by lifestyle businesses (Twitterrific, TweetBot, etc).
Those who read the post as a threat to Uber Media and other VC backed startups were probably much closer to the mark. When Twitter bought Tweetie and released the official Twitter app in 2010 it was clear they intend to own the primary experience of Twitter. Even more so this year with the purchase of TweetDeck. Whether this is part of their long-term monetization strategy, or a just another way to “optimize for user benefit and create an awesome experience,” it’s clear that they have been and will continue to invest heavily in their own web and native apps.
I honestly think Twitter did developers a favor by laying things out so clearly. Building a Twitter client has been a sort of “hello world” project for many developers. But competing with existing apps, especially Twitter’s, is going to be a losing proposition for most. Much more so for those who take on debt or funding to do so.
I do, however, think the post came off rather aggressive and Twitter didn’t do a very good job taking back control of the message as the press and developers had a field day with the possible ramifications. Then this:
“Apps that you use to access your direct messages will ask for your permission again. By the middle of June, applications that do not need access to your direct messages will no longer have it, and you can continue to use these apps as usual.” -Twitter blog
Reinterpretation: We have lawyers now, and those lawyers are telling us direct messages will be a huge bag of legal hurt unless we deeply change our approach.
From congressmen to Twitter’s own employees, DM Fail has been an issue for Twitter since it’s inception. However, I don’t think the legal liability of direct messages (now apparently just messages) fully set in until the trickle of subpoenas turned into a flood in 2011. For legal reasons Twitter hasn’t been very open about the frequency and source of message subpoenas, but we all heard about the Wikileaks Subpoena and I get the impression new ones are coming in on a weekly, if not daily, basis.
Though many developers, myself included, took this as evidence that Twitter would be actively pushing away existing client apps, I now think this was a legal maneuver more than anything. Even the timing of it smacks of fear. Twitter initially gave developers just a few weeks to adapt their apps to the new authentication guidelines. By publicly acknowledging the fact that messages aren’t as private as most users assume, Twitter had to quickly close the window before a rogue app took advantage of the situation.
From the aforementioned TechCrunch article: “But Sarver says this is not about screwing over those apps. ‘It honestly has nothing to do with making it harder for them,’ he said. Instead, this authentication change is about protecting users.” If he were being completely honest, I think he’d have to mention something about protecting Twitter as well, but his point stands that the decision wasn’t made with the explicit intention of pushing away existing client apps.
“But now literally every iOS developer can be a Twitter developer. We think every app is going to benefit from instant personalization from this social layer, from gaming to utilities to enterprise apps.” -Ryan Sarver in an interview with All Things D
What’s unfortunate about Apple’s unveiling of Twitter integration at WWDC is that it came at a time when most developers in the iOS ecosystem were questioning Twitter’s relationship with developers. I’m not sure Twitter fully understood the backlash to their two major API related announcements in the Spring. iOS developers talk, and even if we didn’t, John Gruber and other members of the tech press made it clear what we should think about the situation.
So, the announcement at WWDC hit many of us like a big wet kiss from an estranged lover. What the hell? Is this for real? Can I trust you or will I just get burned again?
Some of us are trying to take a more optimistic view of things while others have been so badly burned it’s hard to give Twitter another chance. My hope is that in the months preceding the launch of iOS 5, Twitter will do a better job communicating with developers and better explain some of its prior comments. This is a huge opportunity for both Twitter and the iOS ecosystem, I’d hate to see bad PR stifle excitement and innovation.