I’m one of those folks who cares about twitter’s business model. I care simply because I take the service seriously. So seriously, in fact, that I wrote an entire defense—an entirely tedious defense—of taking twitter seriously.
So, yes, here are a couple screenshots:
PS. If you take twitter seriously, you’ve got to check out tunkrank, explained here.
If Digg distributed its comment threads to the blog posts themselves, that would be awesome. But if Digg also distributed the ability to do the digging to the posts themselves, that would be killer.
Digg is awesome. Disqus and other commenting services are awesome. Digg and Disqus would be awesome as one.
Those two feature sets are a match made in blogging heaven.
Want to race to see who makes this happen first, me or you?
“…demonstrate how a market is or will be growing in alignment with your business. timing is everything.”
And so I say this: The concept of “following” made popular by twitter and friendfeed is an increasingly natural concept for users. Friendfeed has pushed the boundaries with its “hide” feature, allowing users to personalize the flow of information from their friends.
It’s time to expand beyond the notion of following friends and merge it with subscribing to feeds in general. The market for web apps where we “follow” and control the stream of information that’s most interesting to us is growing. It’s time to get ahead of the curve and get serious about following the news, personalized.
See here, slightly annotated with a humor joke:
Note the difference between features and benefits—and think about them. For example, a house that gives shelter and lasts a long time is made with certain materials and to a certain design; those are its features. Its benefits include pride of ownership, financial security (ha!), providing for the family, and inclusion in a neighborhood. You build features into your product or service so that you can sell the benefits.
Benefits are hard to write about concretely, almost to the point where thinking about their value becomes merely speculative. What’s pride of ownership really worth? What would people really pay for the marginal units of neighborhood inclusion that a house can impart over an apartment? Close to bullshit.
Only comparisons to similar cases really count. The comparisons can be direct, or they can be indirect and more creative. To the extent that they’re creative, however, they’re presumably less reliable, all else equal.
If your comparison is spot-on, but really creative, what makes it compelling to others, I suspect, says more about who’s listening than its internal logic.
So keep looking for listeners. Hard to know when to stop.