140Char

Should Twitter let you post more than 140 characters, include more metadata in tweets, or include embedded images?

Two prominent internet voices, Dave Winer and Robert Scoble have both recently posted their views on how Twitter should improve it’s core product. Dave Winer proposes that using the basis of SMS as a reason for not expanding the core capabilities of the service is wrong, and that Twitter is really SMS 2.0.

Meanwhile Robert Scoble uses the claim Twitter’s web traffic is flat to suggest 14 ways for the service to become more engaging. Number 1 is to remove the 140 character limit and to allow photos and videos in line to ‘communicate something more than the metaphorical equivalent of a grunt.’

The question is whether either of them is right – from a more technical standpoint, I think there’s a valid viewpoint that Twitter could expand the data accompanying a tweet in some way to give more value when it’s referenced by other services.

But I think it’s an incredibly bad idea for Twitter to lose the 140 character limit, and allow inline photos and videos.

For starters, a service already exists for that, called Facebook. Scoble references it as a more entertaining service for that reason, but I wouldn’t agree. Twitter is fun and engaging in creating conversations and quick observations – for both work and pleasure, whereas Facebook is a way to catch up on all the intimate details of your close family and friends.

It also ignores the myriad of ways that people interact with Twitter already – if I want the basic web service on PC or mobile it’s available. If I want greater adaptability, there’s Tweetdeck, Seesmic or many of the other clients. A huge number of clients are available to cater to almost every need – therefore removing the problem of Twitter attempting to do it. Every change made by a major social network is analysed endlessly, and attempting to please everyone results in something which pleases noone.

Increasing the scope of Twitter also infringes on the Twitter ecosystem of third party businesses – embedding images instantly removes the need for the likes of Twitpic, and suddenly increases storage costs for Twitter.

And suddenly you lose a unique network, and instead you have a Facebook also-ran.

So now – I don’t think we should lose the 140 character limit just yet.

I’ve long been following Dave Winer, and I’ve been paying particular attention to some of his current projects concerning Twitter, microblogging and OPML files and more.

More on that later, as it appears the wireless internet connection on my train to work is completely broken, but I had to mentioned the list of who read ReadWriteWeb also follow on Twitter after @cslyons pointed out I was on it!

Luckily it can’t go to my head as I’m pretty far down the list with 7 followers compared to someone like @timoreilly’s 124 followers or Scobleizer’s, but the gap isn’t as big as I would have imagined, so maybe ReadWriteWeb readers have better taste than Twitter users in general.

Following my previous post on the implications for Twitter of the first large scale phishing attack, I’ve seen a few interesting responses:

First up, @benbarden responded to my concerns over short urls by suggesting that people could host their own, e.g. 140char.com/link1 etc.

A pretty cool idea, and one that Ben is apparently running on a site already (I might have to beg him for a guide!). The only flaw is that a lot of people run hosted blogs, and will therefore still be at the mercy of shortening services. But for those of us paying hosting costs it’s worth considering.

Then the always friendly @mingyeow from MrTweet asked my opinions on a blog post ‘Addressing Privacy Concerns‘. Suffice to say it’s a very eloquent explanation of how and why the developers of one application are aiming to keep your accounts safe:

One of the points raised is that MrTweet will support OAuth as soon as it becomes available, although it won’t answer every security question, because, as they quite rightly say, securityand convenience are always a trade-off.

There’s some really interesting debate around the use of OAuth from both Jesse Stay on LouisGray.com, and Dave Winer.

Before you get back to work on Monday (or for some reading before you get down to working), there have been a few interesting and thought-provoking posts I’ve spotted:

Robert Scoble posted 10 reasons why Twitter direct messages suck, which I expected to disagree with, but he made a lot of sense in explaining why the amount of messages he receives means that he realistically has to ignore them – he can’t autorespond, file, filter, or mass delete, so it becomes unworkable.

Stowe Boyd then takes it and runs further, to outline how the problem could result in an opportunity to earn some revenue for Twitter, around improving the integration and functionality of direct messaging for those willing to pay $5 a month.

My thought is that it’s a very small group who need these features as an absolute necessity, but a larger number might be persuaded they need them. It’s certainly something I could see Twitter exploring, and I suspect that by offering it as a Freemium service, they could avoid some of the ’sell-out’ accusations that display advertising will generate.

I’m not sure it’s enough to please the VCs and justify the valuation of Twitter – but I’m increasingly convinced that there isn’t a sole revenue stream that provides a complete solution – and it could be a mixture which becomes the answer.

The other thought piece I thought was worth repeating was Dave Winer on The Space Between Twitter and FriendFeed. Is there room for something that exists with a more graphic and visual system than Twitter, but without some of the complexity of Friendfeed which can put users off?

Obviously this wasn’t Pownce. But could it be a direction for Plurk, which already has a far more visual interface? Or one of the services I have to admit to overlooking a little in the influx of clones, copies and variations, such as Rejaw? And would it be enough to achieve the most important and challenging part of taking on Twitter – getting critical mass? Friendfeed is different enough to fulfill a slightly different function and have an identity away from microblogging, but would something in the Friendfeed/Twitter chasm be cursed by being too much of one or the other?