

Would You Pay $199 for a Mobile Twitter Device With “Lifetime” Service? - kloncks
http://mashable.com/2009/10/28/twitterpeek/

======
JCThoughtscream
The answer to "would you pay?" for any dedicated, single-purpose consumer
electronic:

NO.

If it only does one thing, it's effectively an expensive paperweight - except
that I'm sure I'm not the only one that uses my cell phone as a paperweight as
well as a phone, so it's even worse than a paperweight! The apps market is
huge for a reason - let's listen to that lesson.

~~~
Zev
_The answer to "would you pay?" for any dedicated, single-purpose consumer
electronic:_

Yes. If the device did enough for me. I have a Kindle, which can only read
documents. I still have and use an old iPod that can only play music (no games
or fart apps?! That thing must be _useless_ ). I have a television which can
only output video (what do you mean, it can't _record_ what its displaying?!),
etc.

All these devices - that can ultimately only do one thing - serve me just
fine. That isn't to say that every single-purpose device will have a
widespread market; the ebook reader market is very much a niche - and so is
this market, Twitter anywhere without a cell phone contract.

And there's nothing wrong with serving a niche.

------
DanielStraight
For all the people out there with Twitter but no cell phone... all 3 of them.

