Twitter takes the idea of "executive summary" and refines it to the most diminutive. Twitter's beauty comes from the speed of data transfer, as well as connecting trust agents to incentivize readership. Its downside: sacrificing depth for speed. With the mass of data blasting down the Twitter pipes, headlines replace depth. Finding the valuable, the needle within the haystack stares at us. Thus the value of our followees. The people we choose to follow capture our priorities, our interests and passions. Filtering the grand thoroughfare in this way greatly expands what trade pubs were attempting to do, in the magazine era's heyday. And the internet's grabs array of knowledge becomes more manageable. Or more so.
Perhaps I’m the only Macfan that’s not gaga over the iPad. It’s an interesting idea, but I’m just not sold on the concept. For what it offers, I think it would be valuable (to me) at a much lower price-point. Say, < $100. Then I could conceive. Heck, if it were $200 I would be sorely, SORELY tempted. But not $500. It doesn’t offer me much more than my iPhone. And I almost never use my Sony eReader (if the Mac version of the desktop software actually worked with it, then I might use it more). Anyway, if the iPad had handwriting recognition, or could do more with photo editing...I don’t know.
Comments