Thursday
13Aug2009

An Apple Inc a day...

Well, I just re-read Jason Calacanis's article on his opinions on the state of Apple Inc. today.  It's a lot to digest.  But let me summarize.

Jason finds fault with Apple and calls them to the carpet because of their closed system, anti-trust practices, and large sums of money they seem to be making at the expense of the user.  His 5 points that lead him to reject Apple directly taken from his article are:

  1. Destroying MP3 player innovation through anti-competitive practices
  2. Monopolistic policies in telecommunications
  3. Draconian App Store policies that are frankly, insulting
  4. Being a horrible hypocrite by banning other browsers on the iPhone
  5. Blocking the Google Voice Application on the iPhone

Phew!  Where to start?

Jason Calacanis is a brilliant writer and journalist, an excellent evaluator of technology, and CEO of his own company, so I know he's got the experience of seeing business from the other side of the table.

But I have to disagree with some of his points.

He spends the first part of his article explaining how much money he's spent over the years on Apple technology, confessing he believes it to be a bit much.

Jason glosses over the fact there's a more precious commodity than money - and that is time. 

Maybe I'm just getting older, and slower, but I don't have the time I used to have.  Managing a company with my brother, helping to assist my recently widowed mother, being both a father and husband, has shown me that how I spend my time is much more precious than how I spend my money.

On top of which, I'm moving much more slowly than I'd like to admit.  My memory's getting shakier, nothing's a hop away any more, but more of a hobble.  Who knows, maybe all that hair I've been losing over the years contained my energy.  But it's waning.

I've used windows since around 1992.  I've been 3.1'd, 3.2'd, 95'd, 98'd, XP'd, Vista'd, and now 7'd.

I've used Linux as my main desktop for around 4 years now. I've been gnome'd, kde'd, xfce'd.  I've been centos 4'd and 5'd, knoppix'd, foresight'd, ubuntu'd, kubuntu'd, and opensuse'd.

But recently I mac'd myself.  Here's why.

While I've loved using computers all these years, I'm still amazed at the time I wasted.

I learned from windows that I can't be productive if I don't regularly defragment my hard drive, scan for viruses and remove them, patch software regularly, pay for secure software, be wary of attachments in email, and don't ever use Internet Explorer.  Unless of course, I have to go to a web site that requires it.

I learned from Linux that although a powerful system for running my servers, it pales in comparison as a rich user experience in its desktop form.  I was so politically there too.  Open source software, that I was free to edit and change at will?  Oh such power!  Oh such control over my hardware!  And for free as well!

But I went from maintaining windows to fighting hardware and software compatibility issues.  (Has Adobe yet released a working Flash player that runs in 64bit Linux?) Could hardly maintain a wireless internet connection while patching a system.  Every new patch and release seemed to break my connection to the internet.  So instead of me struggling to maintain a system and keep it running, I went to just trying to get a user experience that consistently worked.  (In defense, I still use Linux as my main desktop OS at work.  When of course I'm not using my windows only accounting software.)

Two things happened over the years that made me go Mac...

1) Apple released OSX (the 10th version of their Operating System)

2) Apple began using Intel cpus.   

Whoa!  With the advent of the OSX built upon the power of BSD, on an Intel chip, meant I could literally run windows, Linux, and OSX on the same system.  Now I'm interested.

So with coaxing from a good friend ( and my happy wife ), we bought our first mac together.  A relatively inexpensive mini-mac.  And I was blown away!  I'm still amazed at the experience of using a mac, a few years later.

I mean - here's the parallel.  If you feel like using a computer is a chore, here's a good analogy.

Using windows?  You're definitely going to hell at some point.

Using linux? You're going to hell - and faster because linux makes the river Styx flow faster.

Using a mac?  Well, you might be going to hell, but you're actually looking at it as a nice scenic tour.

The point is, I still have to maintain a mac just like I have to maintain other OSs, but for some reason, there's some corny notion going on at Apple Inc, that the user experience is important. And I'm loving it. 

Forty-eight hours after installing the new computer, I accidentally deleted something I needed.

Now I've done incremental backups for years, but have you used Apple's Time Machine?  Not only is it pretty and intuitive, but it damn well works too.

Fancy that?

Jason forgets in his argument for point number one (Apple is destroying MP3 player innovation), that there are other MP3 players on the market, and there are many other ways to buy music than through iTunes. 

But if you want to buy music through Apple, and you own an iPod or iPhone, then I guess yes, you're going to have to use iTunes.  But of course, you're free to spend your money elsewhere, which I guess is where Jason's headed.  Those actions speak loud to any company.  If flocks of users flee to some other company's product, then they'll probably change their ways.  But if people are continually happy from the experience, good luck.

Jason asks "What would your reaction be if Microsoft made the Zune the only MP3 player compatible with windows?"

I'd like to see them try, actually.

The windows OS is in the poor state that it's in because of it being so widely used, and whoring itself to the world, it has to try to remain compatible with everything that's out there.

Apple doesn't attempt to make their systems open to every program that exists.  Maybe that's why there's fewer vulnerabilities, and fewer choices.  But I'd take a small loss in freedom (And I do mean SMALL), if I get the user experience I want from a product.  So far, Apple hasn't let me down.

And if they do, I'll jump ship to the next greatest product.  But right now, they get my money.

For point number two, I have to confess, I haven't had any problems with AT&T as my provider for my iPhone.  Would I like to see tethering?  Sure.  But it's not my driving feature.  The iPhone has replaced six different devices, some of which I've never owned but was thinking about purchasing.  It's now my GPS, phone, portable music player, newspaper and book library, camera, and computer.

But while my experience has been positive, I also believe that choice keeps the prices low and capitalism working well.  So I agree with Jason on this point.  Open it up to other carriers, and consumers win.

For point number three, there is no counter-argument.  Apple has everything to gain by doing away with its policies of reviewing every app before it's released, which I'm sure is a costly measure.  And the fact that I may want to run a program that works fine on the iPhone, but for some reason they block it, that is Draconian and I agree.  If my desktop mac was similarly blocked from installing applications, I'd go running instantly back to linux. (I'd slowly hobble back to windows if I had to.)

Point number 4 is just an extension to number 3. Apple does not permit any other web browsers on its iPhone.  You're stuck with Safari.  I agree with Jason - no counter-argument warranted.

Point number 5 I have mixed feelings about.  Apple blocked the Google Voice app, and are now being investigated for it.

It's because of this action that so much dialogue is occurring.  It seems as you get closer to the top of the hill, and become king, you also become everyone's target.  And Apple has a problem.

It's too bad because Google and Apple seems like a good merge.  Google needs a hardware company; Apple needs to be more open with its services.

And Google just might win this fight.  They are re-inventing their application as a web application.  And Apple will surely have the proverbial "egg on its face", if they choose to block this functionality.  But that's good for consumers.  Competition keeps everyone happy - well everyone except the king.

So in essence, I agree with some of the arguments that Jason Calacanis raises, but I'm not willing to jump the Apple ship yet.  I've already embraced open source - and that has its share of problems.  I've already embraced windows, but I don't want to spend my time maintaining a tool, I want to simply use it.

So Jason - if you're really getting serious about leaving apple products, are you willing to sell them at a discount?

Oh yeah - and the answers to your questions:

1) Do you think Apple would be more, or less, successful if they adopted a more open strategy?

If Apple was able to maintain the seamless experience I expect every time I use an Apple product, where the product becomes an extension of my own creativity and intelligence, then yes I support the move.  But if they lose that - then Apple becomes like any other technological brand and they lose - simply because they don't stick out anymore.

2) Do you think Apple should face serious antitrust action?

No.  And nor did I think Microsoft should.  Government should stay out of business endeavors.  People will be able to better control companies with their dollars, if not their individual voices.

3) Do you think Apple's dexterity and competence forgive their bad behavior?

They're products forgive them.  Make me a terrible product, you'll lose my money then.  So far they haven't.

 

 

Sunday
19Jul2009

Alternate Reality Gaming defined?

Congratulations to all the attendees of the 2009 argfestocon in Portland Oregon.  After much debating and sharing, the writers, web designers, artists, academics, film producers, directors, puppet-masters, and players have created a 26 bullet point list that clearly defines the ARG genre as a whole.

Beginning Monday, July 20th, 2009, all ARG designers must adhere to the aforementioned bullet-point list before "going live" with their work.  All present ARGs are excluded from the bulleted list adherence requirement, except unless "beginning a new chapter".  In such case, the new work will be required to comply. 

An elected board of seven "moderators" will be silently monitoring all ARG work over their two-year term, after which seven new members will be elected - (See Section 32 - Sub-part A - Paragraphs 3-5).

Any ARG creator, or ARG player for that matter, found to be not in compliance with aforementioned bulleted list, will be immediately detained and interrogated by no less than five violent mimes, subjected to heavy fines, and ex-communicated from the community.

You have been warned.

Resistance is....

well, you know the rest.

Silly isn't it?

Many of us come from different backgrounds and expertise; we did indeed have much debate at the conference.

There were writers and academic researchers who see plot and character as top priority, strongly pushing the need for traditional story elements in new media.  Film producers and directors who emphasized players being an "audience", seeing players' roles as more limited in order to preserve the original creators' intent. Conversely other film directors and producers who see audiences the exact opposite.  There were vocal ARG players who emphasized the need for puzzles; that the personal fulfillment gained from solving a puzzle creates the ultimate experience.  ARG designers who spoke of unshackling our minds from traditional story-telling and emphasized the transient experience of live events and physical exploration.

So did we come to any agreement as to what an ARG should be?

Well, yes and no.

The common thread from the panel discussions throughout the day seemed to reflect one basic theme. The different topics and panelists that were presented all seemed to emphasize, at one time or another,  one ARG attribute more than anything else.

An ARG is about the Experience

Regardless of how the ARG unfolds, an ARG is about the experience.  Because ARGs ultimately imitate life, this results unfortunately in a lack of preservation or persistance.  For instance, one can re-read a book, or watch a favorite film ad-nauseum.  But how does one re-create the joy of initially solving a puzzle, or capture the magic of a "live event"?  It's because the ARG experience is so fleeting that makes the fun so rewarding and fulfilling - and so precious.

So whether the ARG is traditional story-telling, or a physical exploration of a city, or a series of puzzle-quests that unlock future chapters of an ongoing film, the emphasis in on the PLAYER'S EXPERIENCE. That, more than anything else, seems to be the common driving force behind ARGs that were discussed on Saturday.

One panelist brought up Scott McCloud's Understanding Comics, referring to Scott's emphasis that the story between the frames of a comic book or strip takes place in the reader's mind - and that's what we're after in creating ARGs. 

Yes, it could be said that all art and media is about the experience.  A film must be viewed; a book must be read, etc.

But that's not the point.

We're not arguing that an ARG is an experience, what we seem to be saying to one another at the conference is the player's experience is TOP PRIORITY.

This examination of the player's experience was reflected in each and every panel discussion.  There were those that cared deeply for the experience of the players, and there were those who detached themselves from the priority of the players' experience.  And those that did detach, faced scrutiny of fellow panelists and the audience. 

It's the shared connection, the collaborative effort, not just among players working together but of the coveted unofficial agreement between the puppet-masters and players, that separates the ARG from other media.

A book is written, than read later.  A film is shot, edited, than viewed later.

Probably the art-form related most closely t o ARGs are stageplays. Because while the play is written earlier, it's shared and experienced through real-time  - and like a puppetmaster may redirect mid-game how the story or experience unfolds, so too can stage actors react to a live audience, and redirect the experience (albeit - somewhat limited).

And it's because an ARG is told in real-time, the shared connection between the players and those that work behind the curtain becomes a stronger bond than in any other media.  And because that bond is based on so many unknowns - the only way to forge that bond, is to base it on trust.

Let me repeat that.

An ARG, more than any other art form - is based on trust.

Think of the underlying trust you have when you attend a play, or view a film.  You can look at the running-time beforehand (ah yes - I can put aside 2 hours of my life to watch this).  You can read reviews (Wow - Roger Ebert gives this a thumbs up).  You can hear about the experience from friends and co-workers before deciding to actually read that book, or see that film.  After all - it can't be that bad - they're still alive!  They survived!

But because ARGs are so transient, because the experience can't easily be preserved, we as players have absolutely no basis in deciding whether or not to go down the next rabbit-hole. 

Should I trust these puppet-masters?  Should I invest my time in this?

Throughout yesterday's conference, old and new issues of trust surfaced.  Topics such as: what to do on forums that are "outside the game", how often does a puppetmaster directly get involved in the unfolding of the experience, where lies the "safe word" for players. How to appeal to different players' levels of comfort.

And while some issues are still being debated, at least we came together to discuss those issues.  Trust, and the violation of that trust became the underlying theme of yesterday,  from the first panel in the morning to the keynote speech from Jordan Weisman.

Waita minute!

Does that mean we finally have a definition for an ARG?

An ARG is a shared transient experience, unfolding in real-time.

Wait that's not an ARG.  That's life.  ARGh!

How about this?

An ARG is an ARTIFICIAL shared transient experience, unfolding in real-time.

Because an ARG is about blurring the lines between what is real and what isn't, to clearly define what an ARG is and what it isn't, is not only impossible, but by nature rejects its own definition.

Maybe we should forget trying to define our genre that we work and play in.  Let the history book writers many years from now struggle with that issue.

Instead let's discuss more, create more, trust more, and experience more.

And if you send me a 26-bullet point list on what I'm supposed to adhere to, I'll send a mime after you.

Saturday
11Jul2009

Living in an Alternative Reality for Fun and/or Profit

In 1865, Lewis Carroll introduced the world to Alice and the wonderful anthropomorphic creatures of Wonderland. Alice fell down the rabbit-hole and entered a strange magical world.

Little did we know that the rabbit-hole goes both ways.

What if characters from your favorite books, films, and legends entered your world? I know quite a few women who'd love to meet Edward Cullen (from Twilight). Personally, I'd love to work with Indiana Jones on an archaeological dig.

In recent years, a new medium for telling stories is emerging. And you're one of the characters.

Maybe you're familiar with the concept of ARGs (Alternative Reality Gaming) from the 1997 film The Game. Michael Douglas portrays a wealthy and prickish businessman, whose brother (played by Sean Penn) introduces him to the adventure of a lifetime. (If you haven't seen the movie, I highly recommend it) See movie trailer here.

But the film while very enjoyable, separates itself from this emerging genre by actually admitting that the protagonist is playing a game. The mantra "TINAG" or "This is Not a Game" echoes the sentiment of the works coming out of this medium. The idea behind the term can be easily understood by thinking if you were watching a movie, would you want the story to stop abruptly, and the actors portraying the characters start talking about themselves?

Once the story is set in motion, it should never stop until the telling is finished.

The same goes for playing these - "non-games".  You become a part of an emerging story filled with actors, and other people like yourself who are "playing."  The result is an elaborate collaborative real-time story. 

Now the title of this post is fun AND PROFIT.  Where does the profit come in?

Over the last few years, massive collaborative efforts have gone into creating some of the most immersive and rewarding stories ever produced, in order to market a product.  Because big corporations with big bank accounts have been behind some of these ARGs, the stories have been able to utilize world-wide treasure hunts, professional actors and directors, web site designers, and of course, talented writers and artists.

An example of one these projects was "The Lost Ring", funded by McDonald's.

I won't even attempt to summarize the awesome expanse of this project, but imagine strangers from all over the world coming together in order to save the earth.  This is the experience that Dr. Jane McGonigal's Lost Ring provided to players.  The prize?  To go to Beijing to see the 2008 Olympics.  Dr. McGonigal, has a PhD in performance studies from UC Berkeley, and has taken the genre to new heights.  While the games that she produces often involve puzzles found and solved through the web, more often than not she unleashes people from the shackles of their computers, and gets them to socialize and get out and get physical.  Her latest projects and research can be found at her web site avantgame.com

And her summary of the Lost Ring project can be found at, (where else?) The Lost Ring web site.

42 Entertainment, founded by Jordan Weisman, has produced other expansive and immersive games in order to market products.  Some of their projects include the ARG "I love Bees" in order to promote Microsoft's game Halo 2, the ARG "Are you serious?" to promote the film "The Dark Knight", and "Year Zero" to promote Trent Reznor (NIN)'s album "Year Zero."

42 Entertainment was also responsible for marketing Microsoft's Vista OS release, with the ARG "Vanishing Point".  Just imagine you were vacationing in Las Vegas, and happened to be standing near the fountains outside the Bellagio, and saw this:

Well to be truthful, people were "told" when and where to be to witness this.  But this initial video introduced players from around the globe to compete for the "ultimate vista", which turned out to be a ride into outer space.  The following is taken from 42 Entertainment's web site:

The Vanishing Point was the first global puzzle game of its
kind ever created, coordinating spectacular live events
around the world with challenging online puzzles. Over a
million people were drawn to the website, and nearly
100,000 people registered and actively played.

Though these large campaigns have produced some incredible works, big money need not be involved in creating an ARG.  Remember the title of the post says FUN as well.  And there is an ever-growing fanbase for ARGs.  From this fanbase people have been collaborating on "grassroots" ARGs, just for the sake of telling a story, or to raise awareness about social and economic issues.

By playing a game, people become more immersed in the world created for the story.  Watching a film, reading a book, or even viewing live theater  can't offer the same immersion a real-time game can produce.  Because of this phenomenon, people walk away from these games changed people. 

I've been experiencing ARGs for about two years now.  And am curently taking a step behind the curtain.  I will be assisting in the writing of an ARG in order to promote an internet show, though Non-Disclosure Agrements preclude me from relaying any detail.

Not yet anyway.

If you're curious about the genre as a whole, I recommend the site argn.com.

If you're interested in the latest ARGs that can be experienced, sign up for a free account at the forums section of unfiction.com, and check out the News and Rumours forum.  There you will find the current and new ARGs that are looking for participants.

I also recommend Dave Szulborski's book This is Not a Game. Dave discusses the philosophy behind ARGs, introduces the reader to past ARGs and explains their impact, and offers advice to those wanting to play or create ARGs.

In a few days, I'll be leaving the suburbs of Chicago for Portland, Oregon to attend this year's ARGfest, to meet and have fun with other ARG players and designers.  My goal is find some more projects to work on and people to assist, so I can learn the fundamentals in making ARG projects work well.

And then one day, hopefully, you'll be participating in one of my own creations.

I highly recommend you try participating in one of these ARGs soon, just so you can experience a medium that's soon to be the entertainment medium of the future.

Let's see how deep the rabbit-hole goes...

 

 

Sunday
28Jun2009

Twitter 101

At the end of my last post, I said that I'd further define some terms when using twitter.  Maybe you've signed up and can't understand what people are typing.  Let's start with a few definitions.

 

  • Tweet - A post using twitter.  This is a message that you post to every one.  Here's an example:
  • Re-Tweet - When you see someone repost a tweet from someone else, you might see the letters 'RT'. That's the customary method to posting content of someone else's and giving them due credit.  You only have 140 characters to use.  So "RT" followed by their name is a way to pass along information to people who are following you, but may or may not be following the user whose post you're re-tweeting.  There have been a few people on twitter who have "re-tweeted" some of my words.  Like this:
  • @ - Whenever you see an @ symbol, what follows is the username of the person being referred to.   For example, I've been following the unfortunate students in Iran who have been using twitter to get information out of the country.  I've been worried because one of them hasn't posted in four days.  I asked if anyone has heard anything - like this:
  • # - If you look at my example tweet above, you'll notice the #iranelection part.  This is a way of filtering content on twitter.  Now anyone who searches twitter, or uses other web sites like twitterfall.com to follow certain subjects, will see my above tweet.  They may not be following me directly, but they'll see my post and maybe tweet more information, so they will also use #iranelection in their post.  This way people who may be discussing a particular subject can follow along.
  • Mentions - Mentions are a cool way to speak with people who aren't necessarily following you.  If you find a celebrity to follow, how can you send them a direct message, if they arent following you?  Use the @ symbol as in @FriarTech, in your tweet.  Then if they check their "Mentions" by searching for @FriarTech ( or their username ) they'll see your message.  It's basicallly like the # symbol defined above, but instead of filtering by subject, you're filtering by user.

Well I hope the above tips help you better understand how to use twitter.  It's just another way in which the internet is bringing people together in ways we've never been able to communicate before.

So until my next post - go ahead and start "tweeting".  And don't forget to have fun!

Tuesday
23Jun2009

Why I Use Twitter

Over the last few months, I've been approached by friends and co-workers, asking me why they should use twitter. They had heard about it through the media, since celebrities like Ashton Kutcher, Demi Moore, and Oprah Winfrey had made headlines that they in fact use twitter. Italian paparazzi had boycotted covering any news concerning cyclist Lance Armstrong as he preferred using twitter to speak to his fans than talking with reporters.

 

“But why do I need to use twitter?” I'd hear.

 

Now, I've said this before and this definitely is worth repeating. I can't tell anyone why they NEED to do anything.

 

Back when I first went to work for my father after graduating college, he asked me “Why do I need to use a computer?” My reply was simple. “No one needs to use a computer, but they can be extremely handy.”

 

So I'm not going to tell you that you should run (virtually of course) right now and create a twitter account and start “tweeting”(when you post a message using twitter, it's called a “tweet”).

 

What I can tell you is why I use it, what I get out of it, and what I see in terms of its potential.

 

TWITTER IS A DOOR, NOT A PLACE

 

First, I'd like to make a distinction about twitter from most other web sites. I say most because I view Facebook, Digg, and other social media web sites not as destinations (though they are considered “sites”), but as doorways.

 

For instance, I'll visit web sites of stores I frequent looking for specials, products, or bargains. I'll visit news sites to catch up on what's happening in the world. I'll visit my bank's web site to make a transaction or just reconcile my accounts.

 

These are examples of visiting destinations.

 

But twitter.com is different. I don't view visiting twitter as visiting a “site” or “destination”. When I login to my account at twitter, I'm opening a doorway of communication with anyone and everyone.

 

It's a tool, device, or medium through which I access people. Much like a telephone, twitter enables me to communicate with others. A doorway is a noun; a thing. But I don't consider a doorway an object to own or have, but only something to use to go somewhere else. So in that sense, twitter isn't a web site, but a portal.

 

NO GRIEF IN BRIEF

 

Most everyone is familiar with the concept of email and instant messaging. The idea behind email is that you 1) obtain the email address of someone you already know, 2) type a message of any length, and 3) send it off and think hopefully, the person on the other end will eventually read it.

 

So email is only as good as knowing the destination or person you're emailing, before you actually send it.

 

Have you ever had an a business colleague send a lengthy email, filled with questions throughout, then ended it with “hope to get your response sometime today”?

 

Such a burden! Suddenly, the convenience of instant communication becomes the stress of being always on immediate demand. This trend toward immediacy over the last few decades is well documented and reflected upon in James Gleick's book Faster: the acceleration of just about everything.

 

If you can rip yourself away from your daily email agenda, I highly recommend taking the time to read it.

 

Twitter is different. Not only do you not have to post anything (although I recommend you contribute to the community and do post), but you only have 140 letters and spaces (characters for those who are familiar with computer terms) in which to do so.

 

I bet I know what you're thinking.

 

“140 letters? What could I possibly say in 140 letters other than – 'I'm making a sandwich' or 'just got out of work' or 'wow you really cant taste it after the first 6 beers'”

 

Well let's reflect on that a bit.

 

As far as I can remember, quality was never based on quantity. In fact, some may argue they are inversely proportional to each other (though I don't even see a correlation between the two). And it seems when comforting a loved one or dear friend, sometimes an old cliché might prove to be more effective than a dissertation on being happy. Even Eric Idle's song “Always look on the bright side of life” takes a few minutes.

 

And how about these gems:

 

No great man ever complains of want of opportunities.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson

 

Hate the sin, love the sinner.” - Mahatma Gandhi

 

If a man hasn't discovered something that he will die for, he isn't fit to live.” - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

 

Ill deeds are doubled with an evil word.” - William Shakespeare

 

Apparently, wise words of advice can arrive in small packages.

 

So there's a lot you want to say to the world? But you can't just ramble on. You only have 140 characters. That gives you pause; makes you think. And thinking before writing is probably a good approach. By having a small window through which to communicate, the words can be more thoughtful, and the volume of them can be exponential.

 

Not to say that twitter is only filled with wisdom.

 

There's spam tweets, and marketing tweets, and senseless tweets, and redundant tweets. Apparently having a chance to say something to the rest of the world, doesn't inspire everyone to the same degree.

And that's not to say that tweets can't be casual. It's your soapbox – and much like life, it's up to you to decide how you spend it.

 

EVERYONE IS EQUAL

Some of the most celebrated twitters, or tweeters, are celebrities who speak about their daily lives extremely casually. And while this may seem a waste of time to others, to me it enables to see celebrities I admire as human. These aren't objects of my adoration or affection. They're real genuine people.

 

This gives celebrities to communicate with their fans on a more personal, casual level than was ever possible before.

 

Facebook calls its users friends. More often than not, if you want to communicate with someone on facebook, you have to be their “friend.” If you are a celebrity on facebook, you no doubt have a “fan” page.

 

On twitter, everyone is considered of equal rank. You “follow” others. People who read your posts are “followers”.

 

Just think – you can have your own flock of “followers”. Where's that soapbox again...?

 

I believe that's probably the coolest feature of twitter. The very concept that we all follow each other in turn, gives each of us a unique piece in the entire whole of a species. Well, at least the part of our species that uses twitter...

 

Knowing that people are “following” us, serves as both an ego-boost, and a pledge to be responsible. “Hey, if I'm going to follow you, I'm holding you up to having something interesting to say. If not, I'll stop following you. Or worse, I'll block you.”

 

And it also is humbling to know that we're all the same, but also different.

 

I mean, just because you're unique, doesn't mean you're special, right?

 

CONCLUSION

 

So those are some of the reasons I use twitter.

 

In my next post, I'll explain the terminology of this three-year-old technology, how to decipher odd looking tweets, and feature some of the people I follow, and why.

 

I'll never tell you that you need to use twitter.

 

But it can be extremely handy.

 

Oh yeah, and fun too!