<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>The Inquisitr - Latest Comments in What&amp;#8217;s Twitter&amp;#8217;s Real Motive for the API Cuts?</title><link>http://inquisitr.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://inquisitr.disqus.com/what8217s_twitter8217s_real_motive_for_the_api_cuts/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:47:58 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: What&amp;#8217;s Twitter&amp;#8217;s Real Motive for the API Cuts?</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/16075/whats-twitters-real-motive-for-the-api-cuts/#comment-5477885</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Those people would probably be the same ones who kick the proverbial ass out of it.&lt;br&gt;I don't think they would ever charge for the basic twitter service, but it all depends on how 'premium' is defined (or what services would fall into that category).&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Chris Wright</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 16:47:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What&amp;#8217;s Twitter&amp;#8217;s Real Motive for the API Cuts?</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/16075/whats-twitters-real-motive-for-the-api-cuts/#comment-5475812</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Absolutely. I simply don't get the business model relying on free services. After all nothing is really free and more so in today's market conditions.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">angsuman</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 15:23:46 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What&amp;#8217;s Twitter&amp;#8217;s Real Motive for the API Cuts?</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/16075/whats-twitters-real-motive-for-the-api-cuts/#comment-5467840</link><description>&lt;p&gt;i think a lot of people wouldn't pay for twitter, no matter what the cost/features are.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">centernetworks</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 13:37:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What&amp;#8217;s Twitter&amp;#8217;s Real Motive for the API Cuts?</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/16075/whats-twitters-real-motive-for-the-api-cuts/#comment-5459953</link><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;lt;sorry double="" post=""&amp;gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">MK</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 07:08:49 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What&amp;#8217;s Twitter&amp;#8217;s Real Motive for the API Cuts?</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/16075/whats-twitters-real-motive-for-the-api-cuts/#comment-5459932</link><description>&lt;p&gt;If Twitter starts charging for API throughput, especially if it decides on a corporate paying model for large services, will that then mean those services will also field pay-to-use models (and hasten to do so?)  ?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">MK</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 07:05:31 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What&amp;#8217;s Twitter&amp;#8217;s Real Motive for the API Cuts?</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/16075/whats-twitters-real-motive-for-the-api-cuts/#comment-5459359</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Why would you multiply the number of requests per hour with the number of friends like you did in your example? 20 requests is still 20 requests with a single batch of responses back, no matter how many individual people responded during that time. Not everyone is going to update every time either.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;You can't use desktop clients as an example and then in your next sentence say it doesn't apply to them.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Joost Schuur</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 05:26:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What&amp;#8217;s Twitter&amp;#8217;s Real Motive for the API Cuts?</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/16075/whats-twitters-real-motive-for-the-api-cuts/#comment-5458301</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Consider this though Dunc:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Other startups have built on Twitter and are building business models around Twitter's resources. Perhaps they want Qwitter and TweetScan and all these other tools to pay for the interface or requests above 20,000. It would make sense. Commercially I think it's a good place to start monetisation. Why should twitter bear the burden for all these other tools that basically build on Twitter's success?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the angle, I never would have thought it.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jonathan Nguyen</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 03:00:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What&amp;#8217;s Twitter&amp;#8217;s Real Motive for the API Cuts?</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/16075/whats-twitters-real-motive-for-the-api-cuts/#comment-5457601</link><description>&lt;p&gt;interesting angle Duncan ... I think a lot of ppl would indeed pay a monthly/annual fee for premium Twitter services, especially with so many using it more or less as a marketing/branding tool.  Limiting what the free apps can do would be a logical move to get to a place where they can charge people.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Adam Ostrow</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 01:47:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What&amp;#8217;s Twitter&amp;#8217;s Real Motive for the API Cuts?</title><link>http://www.inquisitr.com/16075/whats-twitters-real-motive-for-the-api-cuts/#comment-5456765</link><description>&lt;p&gt;So, does this mean that TweetDeck may not be a viable tool anymore? If so, then I'm very angry.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">mathewballard</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 00:42:14 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>