
Get your own #dickbar - davewiner
http://encodedrecords.com/dickbar/
======
kcl
In 2010 I wanted an iPhone Twitter client with a nice UI and no ads, so I paid
$2.99 for Tweetie 2. This was after I bought Tweetie 1 for $2.99. Tweetie 2
wasn't a free upgrade.

In 2011, after acquiring Tweetie 2 and making it free, Twitter adds paid
advertisements and wrecks the UI.

~~~
raganwald
I would email Dick and ask for a special ad-free version that goes out to all
paid Tweetie customers.

~~~
PanMan
Unfortunately, that isn't possible in the AppStore, afaik. You can sell to
everyone, or give away for free, but not to a limited group (beyond the 100
promo codes thing.)

~~~
michaelfairley
The app is free for everyone, but previous Tweetie owners could have their ads
disabled.

~~~
pmjordan
The Tweetie app "upgraded" to Twitter for iPhone; they're treated as the same
app by the App Store. I don't think it's possible to tell apart upgraders from
new users. (I paid for Tweetie)

~~~
apgwoz
I'm sure they have a list of email addresses that have paid for Tweetie (or
the ability to acquire it). Given this, it seems possible that they could do
something to disable it in the app.

~~~
jerome_bent
No, they don't. Apple keeps all that information from developers. (By the way,
that's the same information publishers are clamoring for).

~~~
apgwoz
I didn't realize Apple kept that from you, but OK. Alternative. Twitter
clients normally send their user-agent as part of an API request. Twitter
probably still has that data, and could check to see who sent a Tweet from
Tweetie between a given period of time. Is there the possibility of false
positives? Certainly, but it's better than nothing.

~~~
pmjordan
_but it's better than nothing_

Is it? I'd be afraid of a backlash caused by some minority of users who had
e.g. bought tweetie but never actually tweeted using it (just for reading
tweets or whatever), had changed twitter accounts since, etc., plus the people
claiming to be part of this group in an attempt to get something for free or
whatever.

Realistically, they're probably going to have to do something about this much-
hated "feature" for _everyone_ anyway.

~~~
apgwoz
> Realistically, they're probably going to have to do something about this
> much-hated "feature" for everyone anyway.

The question is though, is it a feature for some? If so, how many? Twitter's
audience is huge. A couple thousand vocal users _might_ be on the minority
side.

Twitter is big enough now that it's not going to be able to do anything right
in the eyes of everyone. But, they have a ton of data about usage patterns,
and other data _we_ don't. I'm willing to bet that the decision to include
such a "feature" was backed up by real data.

I'm sure they'll release an update to give you the ability to turn off the
"feature" of course, and this whole discussion will be pointless.

------
webwright
Startups make mistakes... I'm pretty surprised that Twitter is responding with
"It's a feature, not a bug. This is something you WANT-- trust us!"

<http://twitter.com/#!/dickc/status/43500398450982912>
<http://twitter.com/#!/dickc/status/44302983839756288>

Bummer.

~~~
kyleslattery
Sounds like they'll be either changing or removing it:
<http://twitter.com/twittermobile/status/43730986864885760>

~~~
devtesla
Guess: they will make it hide-able but on by default. It'll stop the
complaining while still giving advertisers more hits than they might have
before the dickbar. Win win

------
raganwald
What is a dickbar?

<http://dickbar.org>

~~~
rhizome
that expander thing is weird.

------
siglesias
Twitter's new business model may well be subscriptions to turn off #dickbar.

~~~
cletus
It seems that no one is interested in the model where subscribers pay for no
ads. Look at Hulu. You can buy Hulu Plus and... still get ads. If Hulu Plus
was ad free I would sign up immediately.

So why is that? There are several potential reasons:

1\. Those providing such services like advertising or, rather, they like the
relationships they have with advertisers. Consider [1] (second time quoted
this today!):

> Since the carriers had all the power, getting any distribution (which
> usually meant getting on the handset “deck”) meant doing a business
> development deal with the carriers. Business development in this case meant
> finding the right people at those companies, sending them iPods, taking them
> to baseball games, and basically figuring out ways to convince them to work
> with you instead of the 5,000 other people sending them iPods and baseball
> tickets. The basis of competition was salesmanship and capital, not
> innovation or quality.

Companies, and particularly sales guys, like having something to sell (being
ad inventory). They like the perks this gets them (and the commissions of
course).

2\. Subscribers aren't willing to pay what the advertising brings in. I'm
curious about this but haven't seen any numbers. Take an episode of The Big
Bang Theory. How much does each episode cost to produce? How much does each ad
bring in? How much does the national network earn in affiliate fees? How much
of the advertising revenue is product placement? If you had these numbers, you
could calculate what each viewer is worth. I suspect it's a lot less than what
such companies charge on iTunes and elsewhere;

3\. A correlation between the people willing to pay for no ads and being the
target of those ads, which means if you're willing to pay for no ads, you need
to pay higher than what ad revenue / viewers might otherwise suggest; and

4\. Lack of metrics in broadcast and print media. Sales guys are known to
exaggerate (and basically just make up) conversion numbers on ad campaigns.
The reality I'm sure is a lot less but there's no real way to tell. With
online advertising, you can tell, which possibly explains it's lower
cost/value compared to traditional advertising;

5\. Related to (4), people pay for broadcast and print advertising what they
do, largely because that's what it's always cost; and

6\. Limited inventory drives up the cost. Inventory is not a problem online.

As for Twitter, I suspect they haven't done anything interesting with
advertising (and monetization) because that's a hard problem to solve. I mean,
people need to see ads for them to be ads right? At that point, how exactly
are you going to advertise to people who mostly use an API, other than through
their Twitter stream?

[1]: [http://cdixon.org/2010/06/06/steve-jobs-single-handedly-
rest...](http://cdixon.org/2010/06/06/steve-jobs-single-handedly-restructured-
the-mobile-industry/)

~~~
Deadsunrise
Spotify . You have a free plan with ads, one without ads, and the premium plan
with mobile access and offline play.

<http://www.spotify.com/uk/get-spotify/overview/>

------
xpaulbettsx
If the Dickbar annoys you as much as it annoys me and your phone is
jailbroken, install the Twizzler package to remove it. Makes the new Twitter
actually a quite nice upgrade.

------
moblivu
Am I the only who's not getting the purpose of this "Dickbar" ?

------
kristofferR
The dickbar can be removed from iPhone Twitter with the jailbreak application
Twizzler: [http://www.tipb.com/2011/03/03/twizzler-removes-trending-
bar...](http://www.tipb.com/2011/03/03/twizzler-removes-trending-bar-
twitter-33-jailbreak/)

------
pclark
it's as if the founding product driving force at Twitter have left.

~~~
gsmaverick
Most of them are gone.

------
X-Istence
I would like to point out that there is an app called Twizzler, or more
"patch" on Cydia that takes care of the problem:

[http://isource.com/2011/03/05/twizzler-the-jailbreak-
answer-...](http://isource.com/2011/03/05/twizzler-the-jailbreak-answer-to-
your-twitter-quickbar-blues/)

Courtesy of @chpwn.

------
jagtesh
More free publicity for Twitter, great.

------
SandB0x
This is the height of inanity.

------
siculars
Mark Beeson (@m242), you, Sir, are #winning.

