[hartard]

Back when I used AOL/AIM in high school there was an explosive adoption of "always on" internet services such as DSL and cable. During this time, it became fashionable for teens to express their current emotions/actions/likes as their "Away Messages" on AIM, which was something new compared with the limitations their previous dial-up connections. I'd go as far to say these messages were the precursor to services like LiveJournal.

Since college, with the mass adoption of social networks, I would guess that 95% of all my friends no longer use independent chat services, like AIM.

I see twitter as the next iteration of "Away Messages" - or, what they now call status updates.

Personally, I dislike Twitter for my personal use. I think it is a fascinating way for brands to sell products to unsuspecting consumers, but there is no value as a standalone "Away Message" platform... that would be the job of something like Facebook status updates, since all of my friends are already connected on there.

As for how it grew? It both filled the need for people to continually express themselves and that other really important thing... celebrity endorsements.

[cloudkj]

+1. That's exactly how I view Twitter - as a modern version of "away messages." I remember looking forward to the always-on Internet connection in college dorms as a way to set long-lasting away messages so friends can see what I'm doing or some witty remark I thought of.

[01101010]

"Personally, I dislike Twitter for my personal use. I think it is a fascinating way for brands to sell products to unsuspecting consumers, but there is no value as a standalone "Away Message" platform... that would be the job of something like Facebook status updates, since all of my friends are already connected on there."

Twitter seems better for personal use. Advertising/commercial use is everywhere, and it's nice to have a tool that's relatively uncluttered where I'm not being "targeted".

There are several advantages of twitter being "a standalone 'away message' platform" over Facebook:

•It's simpler (both in its look and its goal). I don't have to worry about applications, games, polls, or whatever else people do on Facebook that isn't communicating a single, focused idea, link, or observation. To me all that stuff isn't added value, it's just more baggage.

•Following can be one-sided, whereas friending is an agreement and is based on a real-life identity. I don't need to have a pre-existing connection to follow or be followed on twitter. Because Facebook is based on who you actually are, it doesn't have a "shit my dad says" or a "yelling bird" or whatever else that's silly and entertaining unless you have that one hilarious friend.