Comments on: Who Will Dominate the Internet?

By: Zavrion

Zavrion — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 07:59:57 +0000

I think there is a lot of painful irony most of you readers wouldn’t understand in this post. Bloggers and business people alike are pushing for Twitter because of its quality referral traffic. Which really acts more like an ad network than it does social media traffic. Lets be serious, Twitter should be charging for that traffic. If they did I’m sure you and everyone else would be up in arms over it.

In the most literal sense Internet marketing is traffic shaping. Something that Comcast whatever guy I’m sure knows nothing about.

Twitter is a forced meme propped up by business interests. CNN’s use of it is as gimmicky as their hologram on election night 2008. I wouldn’t be surprised if Twitter ended up like Yahoo! in ten years.

By: BurnedFrozen

BurnedFrozen — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 00:50:20 +0000

Google is known by almost everyone who uses the internet. I highly doubt Twitter will be able to dominate Google because there are still many people who do not use twitter, but have Google as their homepage. I’m not saying it couldn’t happen, but Google has been around for years which makes them a highly reputable website which has made Google what it is today. Twitter may be a popular website, but will probably be nothing more of a modern day Myspace to update friends and family to what someone is doing at a moment in time. Many people like to be discreet about their life which is the major reason I do not see Twitter ever being more than a website for people who like to boast about themselves and being attention seekers.

By: Tristan or eTristan

Tristan or eTristan — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 07:20:47 +0000

Well because google is such a big company and it owns YouTube. Plus, not as many people I know, anyway, have Twitter. Everyone I know has Facebook.

Thats just my opinion. Dont get me wrong, twitter rocks and is a great news source. Thats how i knew MJ died.

-Tristan aka eTristan on the chat

By: btcomp

btcomp — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:52:03 +0000

I think Twitter is important, but I think Facebook is becoming exponentially more so than Twitter. What does that say of Twitter? Could it be gobbled by Facebook? Maybe!

Twitter is complex in its simplicity. But Facebook is simple in its complexity. It works. It connects to Twitter, LinkedIn and its growing.

By: Brent

Brent — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:33:26 +0000

The internet has its ups and its down.

and I am 13 years old

By: Dennis

Dennis — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 20:00:45 +0000

Twitter can’t even address their own infrastructure problems (hello scalability), so how can they possibly usurp Google in even the next 5 years?

Twitter might be a pioneer in a very exciting new arena, but they are too narrowly focused. Google fosters innovation and actively develops in many areas/markets, not just search. They give away lots of technology. Twitter? They can’t even roll out significant new features in a several quarters time. They still are far too startuppy to try to take on Internet capstones like Google.

By: BigMovingStock

BigMovingStock — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:31:46 +0000

Google is powered by algorithms – Twitter is powered by human beings – this is what makes twitter so cool. In a sense – Twitter is creating real time indexing of what is happening on the internet – it is very powerful.

By: Breetai

Breetai — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 14:47:13 +0000

As far as Apps and Communitiies go Twitter is neat and they can tout a large following… sort of. But there are a few things wrong with saying twitter can replace Google as ‘Dominant.” #1 Twitter still hasn’t figured out how to make money yet. You can’t dominate anything if you have no business model and Google is greatest success story of monetizing the internet. That by itself is game breaking.

The other problem is that twitter’s large number of clients include a crapload of spammers.

By: ljmorsillo

ljmorsillo — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:02:02 +0000

I must take exception to one line in this post:
>>Twitter is one of the fastest and most accurate news sources out there

Fast, yess. Accurate? I’d really need to be convinced of that – the more traditional medai has (had?) the resources to be much more accurate,

I think that fast and accurate are oppositional ideas. The very speed which can somethimes be so beneficial leaves no time for any critical thought, no analysis. It’s helpful to get news which will explore more than a single train of thought regarding an event. On top of that, a tweet is a single person’s point of view – without the valuable feedback from editors, fact-checkers, etc – thus prone to a higher rate of error.

By: Barry Finlay

Barry Finlay — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:04:55 +0000

thats very interesting but i would have to disagree. Twitter is great…and massive but Google have a lot of fingers in a lot of pies. One day there will be a new king ot queen I agree but I don’t thing it will be twitter. I think that when Google Wave reaches the masses it will have a direct effect on Twitter. I think googles reign have at lease 1 more decade before something else takes its place.