Comments on: Why Pinterest Could Point To the End Of Twitter (Opinion)

By: Nikki

Nikki — Thu, 24 May 2012 03:14:45 +0000

I don’t think this will replace twitter…or any other site for that matter. I use pinterest and twitter both, while I do agree that pinterest is a slightly better way to share photos, videos, & etc. That is not the basis of twitter. Twitter was able to connect people like no other social networking site has before. Pinterest cannot replace this.

By: Thick asian girls

Thick asian girls — Wed, 16 May 2012 10:14:05 +0000

I believe this is one of the so much significant information for me. And i am glad studying your article. But should observation on few common things, The website taste is great, the articles is in reality nice : D. Good process, cheers

By: Pinstamatic

Pinstamatic — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:16:08 +0000

Hey Jen

Take a look at Pinstamatic (http://pinstamatic.com) that allows you to post any website, as well as stickies, dates, locations etc.

All the best
Neil

By: Ken

Ken — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 17:49:56 +0000

The fact that Pinterest required me (after getting an invite) to supply either a Facebook or Twitter login makes it absolutely a non-starter. Right there I discount the possibility of ever signing up for it, because they’re trying to datamine me upfront, before I even start using the site. It isn’t to help find your friends, it’s for the single and sole purpose of being evil.

By: Jen

Jen — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 20:31:39 +0000

It makes even less sense with your “clarification”. I can post a link to ANY website on Twitter, with commentary. Pinterest is limited to page with photos (and going a layer further… photos that Pinterest is “allowed” to post).

I know both casual and “hardcore” users of the web – all of whom observe that there are big differences between the sites and their use cases. Pinterest isn’t a Twitter clone and it doesn’t attempt to replicate much of that functionality. It doesn’t seem to even be a goal of the company to replace Twitter.

By: Christian Cawley

Christian Cawley — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 20:26:27 +0000

You’re probably looking at it in the wrong way then – my argument is that Pinterest is far more user friendly than Twitter, and can appeal to “standard” users rather than early adopters.

Hardcore users of the web and technology tend to ignore that fact that the rest of the world look at things in a different way. Twitter is great, don’t get me wrong – I use it extensively across several accounts and websites – but in its current form it isn’t going to survive long term when one (perhaps two) of its primary uses has been so easily revised by Pinterest.

By: John

John — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:35:50 +0000

You make an interesting point, Christian. I see Pinterest an even more simplified version of Twitter, because you cannot post a status message, but you can share a bunch of useful stuff with like-minded individuals.

And you’re right about Google +; only SEO fanatics use it. I raise my glass to Pinterest and with it good-luck! Regards, John

By: Jen

Jen — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:34:28 +0000

Your thesis doesn’t make sense to me. You call out Pinterest as a successor to Twitter, classifying both as a “link sharing” network. While Pinterest most definitely falls into that category I think link sharing is only a small part of what Twitter is used for. Furthermore just in that use case there are many situations where link sharing on Twitter makes more sense that Pinterest (i.e. time sensitive announcements).

*Full disclosure: I am active user on both Twitter and Pinterest. I like them equally, but for very different purposes.

By: suzalele

suzalele — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:46:18 +0000

Am I missing something? I subscribed to pinterest ages ago, but never use it. I don’t care what my friends are looking at. Who has the time to check out what they like? I only check facebook once a week too. I am not antisocial; just marching to my own beat..

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 21:28:37 +0000

Pinterest will only take off properly when you can pin any webpage. Atm it is not allowing me to pin at least a third of the sites I like. Plus, you can’t embed boards on your blog.

So my evaluation of it is as follows: its a good site with plenty of potential, but in its current format its very much a beta with a long way to go before it can even try to challenge Twitter.

By: John Stewart

John Stewart — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 19:10:02 +0000

Interesting but I happen to see a lot of benefits from Google+. Thanks for an article that has us thinking

By: iPinterest

iPinterest — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 17:02:43 +0000

have you received an invite yet? If not let me know.

http://www.iPinterest.com

By: iPinterest

iPinterest — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 17:01:43 +0000

I can remember several years ago when Digg exploded. I was one of the early users and at one time even ranked in the top 25 most followed users. Then things changed and people got to scamming it, for a lack of better way of putting it. They did any and every thing to get they submissions ranked on the top pages. Due to this, it wasn’t long before interest in it started to decline. I’m anxious to hear if you see this happening to Pinterest?

You can follow my Pinterest blog at iPintest.com

By: Christian Cawley

Christian Cawley — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 13:09:30 +0000

But that’s the point, isn’t it? Google+ was/is marketed as an alternative to FB when it is nothing of the sort. Your mum, sister, brother, barkeep and local doctor don’t use Google+, people who have no interest in SEO (99% of the population) don’t use it… it’s little more than extra indexing for Google to use, yet another one of their own services to choke up the SERP.

Family, friends and groups are what the web is about, not businesses.

By: Chase Mann

Chase Mann — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 13:03:58 +0000

You had me up until you derided Google+ … you need to learn more about it and actually use it and see the SEO benefits for businesses.

You can leave twitter and facebook to family, friends and groups … but use Google+ as your best alternative Magazine+Newspaper+Yellowpages hybrid.