Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 9th Jul 2012 23:15 UTC
Internet & Networking "Twitter set off alarm bells across the web in recent weeks when it ended its partnership with LinkedIn and reiterated its warning that it would be cracking down on the terms of its API. The company didn't offer any explanation for why it removed tweets from LinkedIn, but speaking with sources familiar with the company's plans, The Verge has learned that major changes are coming in the next few months which will move Twitter from an open platform popular among independent developers towards a walled garden more akin to Facebook." If I can't use Boid, I'm not sure I would still use Twitter.
Thread beginning with comment 526226
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Business as usual
by dylansmrjones on Tue 10th Jul 2012 16:10 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Business as usual"
dylansmrjones
Member since:
2005-10-02

Irrelevant. The price of the media is irrelevant to the price of the software itself.

You just won't admit to yourself, you defined 'beginning' incorrectly.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Business as usual
by zima on Tue 10th Jul 2012 16:49 in reply to "RE[5]: Business as usual"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Type-in software in magazines was often (perhaps even typically) a work of somebody in the stuff; or commissioned by the magazine to some ~outsider. Either way, more than just its dissemination paid from the price of the media.

Reply Parent Score: 3

zima Member since:
2005-07-06



Edited 2012-07-11 23:44 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Business as usual
by moondevil on Tue 10th Jul 2012 19:54 in reply to "RE[5]: Business as usual"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Irrelevant. The price of the media is irrelevant to the price of the software itself.


No when you are a 8 year old kid that is supposed to buy such magazines with his own money.

For sure those magazines did not felt like free to me.

You just won't admit to yourself, you defined 'beginning' incorrectly.


I was quite precise by stating the year.

Reply Parent Score: 2