Laconica, the Twitter clone software, is one step closer to the version 1.0(mytestbox.com)
mytestbox.com
Laconica, the Twitter clone software, is one step closer to the version 1.0
http://www.mytestbox.com/news/laconica-twitter-clone-open-source-microblogging-software-version-073/
5 comments
These guys are based at the same co-working station as us, Station-C in Montreal, and they seem to have an idea of what they are doing.
Following the linux model. They install micro-blogging on companies intranets and then do service for them. Not a bad idea, won't be the next google, but it is a niche market that seems ripe for the taking. A lot of companies want to use twitter like services, but are not comfortable going online.
Following the linux model. They install micro-blogging on companies intranets and then do service for them. Not a bad idea, won't be the next google, but it is a niche market that seems ripe for the taking. A lot of companies want to use twitter like services, but are not comfortable going online.
A good way to make money for those guys...intranet microblogging.
I guess this resembles the case of the social networks out there. There are some general leaders (Facebook, Myspace, Hi5) and some niche leaders (Linkedin and other dozen of niche social networks).
And a bit resembles also with the search engine situation: Google is the leader but that doesn't stop entrepreneurs to build niche search engines or even take on Google directly.
Twitter is the leader, no doubt. But a Twitter clone could have a specific niche (Yammer, for example, is much more oriented to enterprise "twittering").
Laconica just offers you, free, the mean to build such a niche service without being necessary to hire developers. Like there are lots of social networking software...or video sharing software (Youtube clones).
And a bit resembles also with the search engine situation: Google is the leader but that doesn't stop entrepreneurs to build niche search engines or even take on Google directly.
Twitter is the leader, no doubt. But a Twitter clone could have a specific niche (Yammer, for example, is much more oriented to enterprise "twittering").
Laconica just offers you, free, the mean to build such a niche service without being necessary to hire developers. Like there are lots of social networking software...or video sharing software (Youtube clones).
Interesting...I used a Youtube clone software to build a niche video sharing service. Of course, I never hope to reach Youtube mass...and I don't intent to.
Having it available as open source can prove a significant advantage - they might become the Wordpress of microblogging, so to speak.
As for Twitter capturing the microblogging market, with ~6 million users I doubt this is the case. Either what we've seen so far is the tip of the iceberg, or there is very little real demand for microblogging. Twitter seems to be very focused on a certain market and certain set of features, so there's definitely room for other players.
As for Twitter capturing the microblogging market, with ~6 million users I doubt this is the case. Either what we've seen so far is the tip of the iceberg, or there is very little real demand for microblogging. Twitter seems to be very focused on a certain market and certain set of features, so there's definitely room for other players.
I think the laconi.ca folks could gain a significant share of the market if they indeed would make it possible for their users to have the same username for all identi.ca installations in the world, just as it is possible for wordpress users to comment on every wordpress blog using the same wordpress identity.
A while back, I reasoned on Twitter vs identi.ca. -- Here's the bit on roaming micro-blogging services: http://is.gd/sJtL
A while back, I reasoned on Twitter vs identi.ca. -- Here's the bit on roaming micro-blogging services: http://is.gd/sJtL
I'm not a Twitter devotee personally but if they're right and Twitter keeps growing eventually competition is going to spring up. I mean, imagine a company having a monopoly on e-mail and having to build a system robust enough to handle every e-mail sent worldwide. It wouldn't be possible.
Given that it makes a certain amount of sense to start working on an open source protocol now so that it's mature when/if Twitter competition starts to spring up.
Given that it makes a certain amount of sense to start working on an open source protocol now so that it's mature when/if Twitter competition starts to spring up.
[deleted]
Twitter is a walled garden. Laconi.ca isn't, you can subscribe and respond to users on laconi.ca installations on other domains. It doesn't even have to be running the laconi.ca software, you can communicate with any domain which adheres to the OpenMicroBlogging protocol (there is atleast one other implementation out there).
enterprise microblogging?
Exactly...Yammer does that.
"Enterprise microblogging"?
And there is a company selling that?
And there are companies buying that?
I'm not sure if I want to laugh or cry right now.
And there is a company selling that?
And there are companies buying that?
I'm not sure if I want to laugh or cry right now.
It is known that companies are, usually, more resistant to the inovation.
I just remember the company I worked for some time ago: they switched from SQL Server 2000 to SQL Server 2005 last year :)...
I know a company which builds educational products...yet it doesn't support Firefox! Firefox which has 20% of the market!
Another company just upgraded their Internet Explorer browser...switching from IE6 to IE7...
So, give it some time...the enterprise will catch up eventually with Twitter like stuff. Too bad that, at that time, something new will be out there...and they have to play the cat and mouse again.
So, give it some time...the enterprise will catch up eventually with Twitter like stuff. Too bad that, at that time, something new will be out there...and they have to play the cat and mouse again.
Sorry, I think you completely misunderstood me.
I'm baffled that someone would even want to deploy a twitter-like app in a corporate environment. Twitter seems to be the most counter-productive form of communication imaginable, even when you get rid of the character limit.
I'm baffled that someone would even want to deploy a twitter-like app in a corporate environment. Twitter seems to be the most counter-productive form of communication imaginable, even when you get rid of the character limit.
Twitter is probably more valuable inside an enterprise than on the Internet. It's part of plenty of people's jobs to keep up with a constant stream of minor updates.
The 140 char limit, the inability to attach files, etc... seem very counter-productive with regards to intra-corporate communication. I'd never look toward Twitter for that role. IRC, campfire, Confluence, etc... sure, but never Twitter.
IRC, Campfire, and Confluence all require you to actively participate. (Thanks, I just remembered to hop on ours).
IM is always-on, and at my clients it seems to work. But broadcasting over IM doesn't work.
Email broadcasts piss off enterprise people (not least because psychotic IT managers crack down on email storage, which leads to a startup idea that could easily generate an 8-figure ROI for most large enterprises: kill those IT managers).
What does that leave you with?
I'm actually bullish on enterprise microblogging.
IM is always-on, and at my clients it seems to work. But broadcasting over IM doesn't work.
Email broadcasts piss off enterprise people (not least because psychotic IT managers crack down on email storage, which leads to a startup idea that could easily generate an 8-figure ROI for most large enterprises: kill those IT managers).
What does that leave you with?
I'm actually bullish on enterprise microblogging.
IM is always-on, and at my clients it seems to work. But broadcasting over IM doesn't work.
It's the broadcast bit about twitter that worries me. Broadcast equals noise. Communication noise is very harmful.
If you really value real-time updates about your peers then that should at least be limited to the stuff that can be relevant to you, e.g. to people that work on the same project as you.
For this purpose a simple chat-room seems more than adequate. And that is supported by pretty much every IM service in existence. Without character limits. With seamless unicast.
It's the broadcast bit about twitter that worries me. Broadcast equals noise. Communication noise is very harmful.
If you really value real-time updates about your peers then that should at least be limited to the stuff that can be relevant to you, e.g. to people that work on the same project as you.
For this purpose a simple chat-room seems more than adequate. And that is supported by pretty much every IM service in existence. Without character limits. With seamless unicast.
Broadcasts limited to the stuff relevant to you seems like the entire Twitter problem statement. I think you're getting hung up on how Internet Twitter is used. Enterprise IM isn't used for picking up teenaged girls on Yahoo, either.
Broadcasts limited to the stuff relevant to you seems like the entire Twitter problem statement.
Absolutely not. In twitter you follow people, which makes absolutely no sense in corporate context. Who am I supposed to follow, my project manager, all my co-workers? Am I supposed to change my followership for each project? What when I'm jumping between projects?
As I see it the only meaningful messaging context in the corporate world is per-project or per-team. And nothing easier than starting a chatroom, campfire or similar for that. Or why exactly should Bob the programmer care what Sarah from accounting is working on if she's not part of his project or team?
Absolutely not. In twitter you follow people, which makes absolutely no sense in corporate context. Who am I supposed to follow, my project manager, all my co-workers? Am I supposed to change my followership for each project? What when I'm jumping between projects?
As I see it the only meaningful messaging context in the corporate world is per-project or per-team. And nothing easier than starting a chatroom, campfire or similar for that. Or why exactly should Bob the programmer care what Sarah from accounting is working on if she's not part of his project or team?
>> "IRC, Campfire, and Confluence all require you to actively participate."
Please. Most of IRC is idlers. It's simple enough to setup an IRC client to be connected to channels that are useful to you.
Twitter is a single dimensional thing. You can only follow people and be followed. With chatrooms you can have several groups open at the same time. I'd say that makes it far more useful, especially in a corporate setting.
With Twitter you just don't have the granularity. You have to either say you're interested in Bob, or you're not interested in Bob. With IRC/chatrooms/etc, you say you're interested in Bob IF he's also talking about some project you've setup a channel for.
I'd say the only real reason for a corporation to use Twitter in their intranet is if they want to appear hip+cool and "get it".
Please. Most of IRC is idlers. It's simple enough to setup an IRC client to be connected to channels that are useful to you.
Twitter is a single dimensional thing. You can only follow people and be followed. With chatrooms you can have several groups open at the same time. I'd say that makes it far more useful, especially in a corporate setting.
With Twitter you just don't have the granularity. You have to either say you're interested in Bob, or you're not interested in Bob. With IRC/chatrooms/etc, you say you're interested in Bob IF he's also talking about some project you've setup a channel for.
I'd say the only real reason for a corporation to use Twitter in their intranet is if they want to appear hip+cool and "get it".
You're pretty biased here, axod.
It's simple for people who are used to "idling" on chat channels, periodically checking back to see whether anything interesting has happened. But not only is that an uncommon use case for most corporate computer users, it's annoying even for people who are used to it. To wit: much as I like Campfire, I have to be reminded or scheduled to get on it.
Most people don't spend their days lurking. Almost everyone on the Internet does spend their days available on IM.
You're not acknowledging the Twitter use case. Twitter isn't a chat system, even if people abuse it that way.
It's simple for people who are used to "idling" on chat channels, periodically checking back to see whether anything interesting has happened. But not only is that an uncommon use case for most corporate computer users, it's annoying even for people who are used to it. To wit: much as I like Campfire, I have to be reminded or scheduled to get on it.
Most people don't spend their days lurking. Almost everyone on the Internet does spend their days available on IM.
You're not acknowledging the Twitter use case. Twitter isn't a chat system, even if people abuse it that way.
My point is, that the Twitter use case is a subset of the chatroom use case.
It's simple enough to add bots to a channel to email/sms people of updates. Chatrooms just do everything twitter does, and a ton more.
It's simple enough to add bots to a channel to email/sms people of updates. Chatrooms just do everything twitter does, and a ton more.
What does that leave you with?
Skype. It's proprietary, but I don't know of a free alternative.
Zephyr.
Skype. It's proprietary, but I don't know of a free alternative.
Zephyr.
A big shot marketing guy at my day job (large company) started promoting Yammer as a "great way to share ideas and information".
But, no proprietary or internal only communications please, since its on offsite servers.
WTF?
But, no proprietary or internal only communications please, since its on offsite servers.
WTF?
One problem with twitter is you can't control the namespace.
Here is a podcast interview with the Laconica creator that cleared a lot of things up for me: http://www.twit.tv/floss37
Thanks for the link. The more details we get the better we understand...
"Laconica is built on PHP/MySQL open source software."
Given all the hullabaloo about twiter scaling, rewrites, etc, I thought it would be clear by now that a database driven website is not a good architecture for twitter-like messaging system.
Given all the hullabaloo about twiter scaling, rewrites, etc, I thought it would be clear by now that a database driven website is not a good architecture for twitter-like messaging system.
A single instance of Laconica probably won't support millions of users, but the whole point IMO is to federate smaller Laconica sites rather than building a huge centralized monopoly.
That's an idea, in fact. Aggregate all those small players into a big one...and other new small players can join to the federation...
Can you say XMMP...
Those who don't understand are doomed to re-invent. Poorly.
Those who don't understand are doomed to re-invent. Poorly.
Unfortunately, the XMPP feature that is what Laconica should have been based on was only relatively recently specified and implementations are still stabilizing, which is a necessary step before we have clients that support it.
I'm speaking specifically of "PubSub", where you can publish your updates and they get sent out only to subscribers.
Note that twitter does not otherwise match a conventional IM message, nor does it match a conventional conference room. It does precisely match the PubSub use case, and I still hope to see something based on that. Laconica isn't wrong to ignore it, per se, but they will end up having to do (or have already done) a lot of very, very redundant specification as a result of ignoring it. (I'd think they'd still have been better off taking an existing XMPP server, fixing the pubsub to do what they want, and building from there.)
I'm speaking specifically of "PubSub", where you can publish your updates and they get sent out only to subscribers.
Note that twitter does not otherwise match a conventional IM message, nor does it match a conventional conference room. It does precisely match the PubSub use case, and I still hope to see something based on that. Laconica isn't wrong to ignore it, per se, but they will end up having to do (or have already done) a lot of very, very redundant specification as a result of ignoring it. (I'd think they'd still have been better off taking an existing XMPP server, fixing the pubsub to do what they want, and building from there.)
I was thinking more of SMTP. Twitter and Facebook may be the Compuserve and Genie of Web 2.0.
You know, SMTP supports instant messages: SEND FROM: in place of MAIL FROM:. Apparently an analogous facility (I forget if it was actually connected to SMTP) was one of the major reasons for the uptake of Emacs on Multics.
Then what would be a good architecture for such a service?
Isn't Twitter's role to do with subsidising the cost of sending thousands of SMS messages? Rather than the actual software that sends them...
Yeah, I think Twitter is subsidizing the SMS (text messages) sent to the mobile phones...I read somewhere that they stopped to do this in China or another asian country because it was just too expensive...
This seem to be the most complex Twitter clone out there. I'm talking about an open source one...
What is the differentiator here?