Tweetbot 3(itunes.apple.com)
itunes.apple.com
Tweetbot 3
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/tweetbot-3-for-twitter-iphone/id722294701?mt=8&ign-mpt=uo%3D4
63 comments
I'm still not convinced about this visual style. It's incredibly hard to parse compared with their older one, and the linework icons are especially challenging. I'm forced to look at the icon and work out what it means rather than being able to intuit it at a glance.
Moreover this just looks exactly like all of it's peers; just another flat, generic app. The TapBot branding used to be incredibly strong, and it's just been stripped of everything that made it unique.
Moreover this just looks exactly like all of it's peers; just another flat, generic app. The TapBot branding used to be incredibly strong, and it's just been stripped of everything that made it unique.
I agree 100%. Designers are following Apples design blindly but I'm not sure Apple knows what they are doing when it comes to Flat design but they definitely know skeuomorphism. I've seen so many awesome Flat designs on dribbbble and behance that make a lot more sense.
I loved the last one. The huge thing that's missing for me on this one is the ability to make the text smaller. You get way fewer tweets on any screen. Probably going to downgrade
TB3 uses the system font size that you specify in Settings -> General -> Text Size.
I do agree that the default is too large, and furthermore that some (most?) apps would benefit from an independent text size setting.
[Shameless plug] My app MUDRammer: A Modern MUD Client[0] is very text-oriented and uses its own text size control to allow for font sizes from 8 to 24pt, far more than would be possible with the system control.
[0] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/mudrammer-a-modern-mud-clien...
I do agree that the default is too large, and furthermore that some (most?) apps would benefit from an independent text size setting.
[Shameless plug] My app MUDRammer: A Modern MUD Client[0] is very text-oriented and uses its own text size control to allow for font sizes from 8 to 24pt, far more than would be possible with the system control.
[0] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/mudrammer-a-modern-mud-clien...
But why did I have to read HN to find this out? It destroyed the good vibe, as did the disappearance of the simple method to change lists.
Text sixe is controlled on the system level and you can adjust it in the settings: General / Font Size
What if I only want a smaller text in Tweetbot and not all over iOS?
You're out of luck.
I'm not. According to a FAQ published today, Tapbots is working on a solution … :)
But I really don’t want to have the same font size as the rest of the OS.
We hear you and are working on something, stay tuned.
http://tapbots.com/blog/news/tweetbot-3-questions-and-answer...
But I really don’t want to have the same font size as the rest of the OS.
We hear you and are working on something, stay tuned.
http://tapbots.com/blog/news/tweetbot-3-questions-and-answer...
This is butt ugly.
The one and only reason why I bought previous Tweetbot version was that it looked gorgeous and had an insane visual polish. This however... is just... argh... I'm just speechless.
The one and only reason why I bought previous Tweetbot version was that it looked gorgeous and had an insane visual polish. This however... is just... argh... I'm just speechless.
No comment about the new version, but my view of the old version was that it was the most heavy-handed overly-styled app that I use. Sure, that was the Tapbots aesthetic, but I used Tweetbot for the interaction design, in spite of the visual style.
It at least gave their app a special visual style. Now it's just "Tweet" without the "bot".
Felt the same. Couldn't use it with all the different textures, gradients, borders...
Thank you flat design proponents. You've succeeded in killing creativity and differentiation.
As a flat design proponent (I suppose[1]), there's no reason all apps without textures need to look the same (see [1]).
[1] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/svpply/id516820047?mt=8
See also: Layervault, Artsy, Letterpress.
[1] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/svpply/id516820047?mt=8
See also: Layervault, Artsy, Letterpress.
Are you basing that on the screenshots? It's a pretty impressively dynamic interface. My first impression is that they did some awesome stuff with UIKitDynamics, and none of it seems egregious.
Yep. I won't install it because I think it's kind of a dick move to use one of their key slots. But they used to have a pretty unique aesthetic that was distinguishable at first glance. Now the first glance is all bland.
I agree, there is a trend in iOS 7 for visual "blandness". I'm not upset about it, but I do see it happening.
It's not a dick move to pay them their asking price, and use a token.
It's not a dick move to pay them their asking price, and use a token.
It feels slow with all the shaking etc. And easy list access is gone, you have to use the menu to access lists …
It's not the 'flat design' that is killing creativity and differentiation.
It's the fact that so many of the apps-going-flat-ios7 are deciding to go with the color palette of white background + bright blue text/icons — it's surprising as the iOS 7 HIG does not require that color scheme.
There is great opportunity to take this aesthetic in a different direction and it's surprising to see this not go there. This is the same look as Mail + Safari.
It's the fact that so many of the apps-going-flat-ios7 are deciding to go with the color palette of white background + bright blue text/icons — it's surprising as the iOS 7 HIG does not require that color scheme.
There is great opportunity to take this aesthetic in a different direction and it's surprising to see this not go there. This is the same look as Mail + Safari.
I am really pissed off when the app producers release major versions of their apps as a new app in the store so you have to purchase again. Same thing happened with Reeder app (which is a prominent RSS reader) or Shares app.
I already pay you $5-$10-$15 whatever to trust that this will be a lifetime purchase. Why would app developers do it? Why does Apple allow this? If I develop an app and publish 10 versions (all has new features every time) as a new app in the store, is it legitimate at all?
Anyway I purchased this one as well but it is not about $2.99, it is about the brand and I started to hate Tapbots. When Twitter releases a better client, I will throw the app I paid for away just because I don't Tapbots apps anymore.
I already pay you $5-$10-$15 whatever to trust that this will be a lifetime purchase. Why would app developers do it? Why does Apple allow this? If I develop an app and publish 10 versions (all has new features every time) as a new app in the store, is it legitimate at all?
Anyway I purchased this one as well but it is not about $2.99, it is about the brand and I started to hate Tapbots. When Twitter releases a better client, I will throw the app I paid for away just because I don't Tapbots apps anymore.
What makes you think $15 entitles you to a lifetime purchase let alone $2.99? What else in your life do you get to keep forever for that amount?
A pair of levi jeans: ~$50 of ~3 years; an iPhone ~$500 for ~3 years; a beer ~$5 for ~30 mins.
I bought a coffee in Starbucks yesterday. How dare they charge me for another today!
Most apps are priced at even less than a coffee. The profit on most apps is less than that on one tomato.
Yet, you feel entitled?
A pair of levi jeans: ~$50 of ~3 years; an iPhone ~$500 for ~3 years; a beer ~$5 for ~30 mins.
I bought a coffee in Starbucks yesterday. How dare they charge me for another today!
Most apps are priced at even less than a coffee. The profit on most apps is less than that on one tomato.
Yet, you feel entitled?
That's not the same thing. Why are you comparing consumables with software? I don't care how much Tweetbot costs, if it does the job, I can pay $30, but I when I buy it, I must know the release policy of the publisher.
Is it going to be Microsoft Office where I have to pay for upgrades? Or is it going to be like Instapaper, a lifetime purchase? This is the point I tried to make.
Is it going to be Microsoft Office where I have to pay for upgrades? Or is it going to be like Instapaper, a lifetime purchase? This is the point I tried to make.
They are all like Microsoft Office where you have to pay for upgrades: one way or another you will, eventually, have to pay for an upgrade. Software is expensive to develop and eventually a constantly expanding market won't be enough to sustain development costs. Eventually everyone who wants one will have a copy of Instapaper and then something will need to change to pay for its development.
You paid for the software that now resides on your phone. Have they deleted it from your phone and you have to buy the new version?
If a developer redesigns and rewrites an application why are they not entitled to make their users pay for it again? You could just keep using the old version.
I think it's absurd that people complain about iOS apps being "yet another $5" given the amount of time it takes to make a beautiful application.
Given that iOS developers have no ability to offer upgrade discounts, I fully support them charging full price for new versions. They deserve it, especially given the hundreds of dollars people pay for new versions of Office, Creative Suite, etc each year.
I think it's absurd that people complain about iOS apps being "yet another $5" given the amount of time it takes to make a beautiful application.
Given that iOS developers have no ability to offer upgrade discounts, I fully support them charging full price for new versions. They deserve it, especially given the hundreds of dollars people pay for new versions of Office, Creative Suite, etc each year.
It's sad that the app store's lack of support for paid upgrades has created this totally unrealistic expectation that a $5 purchase entitles you to a lifetime of upgrades. Do you really think that is sustainable? You still have the original version you purchased, it's not like the developers have taken something away from you!
My beefs:
1. Slow animations on image dismissal.
2. Lack of triple-tap to [reply|retweet|favorite|translate|view in favstar].
3. Hides a tweet's timestamp if you favorite it.
4. Makes noise when I tweet, even though I have sounds set to "Notifications Only".
#1 is subjective, I suppose (and in keeping with iOS 7's slow animations). 2-4 are, in my opinion, significant UI/UX regressions.
1. Slow animations on image dismissal.
2. Lack of triple-tap to [reply|retweet|favorite|translate|view in favstar].
3. Hides a tweet's timestamp if you favorite it.
4. Makes noise when I tweet, even though I have sounds set to "Notifications Only".
#1 is subjective, I suppose (and in keeping with iOS 7's slow animations). 2-4 are, in my opinion, significant UI/UX regressions.
Off topic, but I have to say I loathe links that take me out of the browser and into the App Store directly.
you can fix that by editing a config file. Here's how in Chrome http://www.maclife.com/article/howtos/how_reset_google_chrom...
Looks like you can no longer triple-tap to reply, or tap-and-hold the back button to go all the way back to your timeline. These were very handy gestures and I don't see why they'd remove them.
You don't need tap-hold to go back now that the tab bar is always present at the button. Just hit the tab and it goes back to the timeline.
This feels like anti-consumer pricing to me. Obviously, the prices are all low, so I welcome the "first world problems" accusations, but they already charged separately for the iPad and iPhone versions for seemingly no reason, and it just doesn't feel good being required to pay again for what appears to be nothing more than an iOS 7 redesign (granted, a good-looking one) that the vast majority of apps will offer as a normal free update.
I remember balking at apps that had separate iPhone and iPad versions... and then I tried to make a universal app. There is a LOT of work involved.
I was a bit bummed it was a paid upgrade, but I think we have to blame Twitter for that. Only acquiring new users is no longer a viable business model, twitter clients need to find ways to get money from their existing users in order to continue development.
Anyway, $3 for something I KNOW will be good (having used Tweetbot 1&2 extensively) is a no-brainer.
I was a bit bummed it was a paid upgrade, but I think we have to blame Twitter for that. Only acquiring new users is no longer a viable business model, twitter clients need to find ways to get money from their existing users in order to continue development.
Anyway, $3 for something I KNOW will be good (having used Tweetbot 1&2 extensively) is a no-brainer.
$3 is hardly anti-consumer. It's literally me having a 1.5 hour nap in my apartment, or part of a cup of coffee. They're also in the position of having a very restricted number of API keys they can use, which is why I imagine this is being released and branded as a separate version.
It's not about the dollar amount, which I tried to emphasize. It's about not giving updates for free, which for non-game apps is overwhelming the norm. As for the API key limit, I don't see why that makes a difference for this, unless Twitter has some specific rule that they allow new API keys if you release a new major version or something like that.
But wouldn't older customers who just updated keep the same token, so it would only use new ones as new users bought the app? Losing tokens shouldn't have been a huge problem if this was the case.
That said, I still support them charging for the update.
That said, I still support them charging for the update.
It's a whole different app and the old one remains on the store. It's for all the world a different product, which would have its own new key.
Lol.
Also, that's just the "upgrade" pricing, expect it to bump to $4.99 shortly.
Also, that's just the "upgrade" pricing, expect it to bump to $4.99 shortly.
I like that they're charging again for it, but only because I prefer TweetBot 2 and want to continue using it. If they released TB 3 as an upgrade to 2 it would be very difficult not to upgrade.
It's an app that's there if you want it; if you don't, there's an app that's already great.
I'm staying on the old app for now and don't expect them to brick the old one.
I'm staying on the old app for now and don't expect them to brick the old one.
I think I enjoy the sound design as much as the visual design of TweetBot 2.
Has this been changed/improved/degraded in the new version? Anyone?
Has this been changed/improved/degraded in the new version? Anyone?
[deleted]
Awesome update. For reasons that escape me now, I switched from Tweetbot to Twitterrific when iOS 7 came out. But Tweetbot is clearly a superior client in a bunch of ways. Most notably: streaming api support, and notifications. It's nice to be able to switch back to Tweetbot without leaving my flat blurry world.
My only complaint is the same one I had with Tweetbot 1 and 2: that stupid icon.
My only complaint is the same one I had with Tweetbot 1 and 2: that stupid icon.
Are you saying Twitterrific doesn't have notifications? They've had notifications for a while now. At least 6 months, I believe. Check your settings.
Hah! You're absolutely right, somehow I had notifications switched off. Had I know that an hour ago... I probably still would have gone back to Tweetbot. I like the way it works better. But that definitely makes the comparison between the two apps closer.
Shame to see the old design go, even though it had to. Tweetbot is one of the most well-designed iOS apps ever made, in my opinion.
...why isn't it just using my iPhone logins for Twitter? It's telling me I have to log in separately. FFS.
PG: can you make HN show the subdomain for apple.com links (or just for itunes.apple.com )?
Font size is now based on the system-wide settings in Settings > General > Text Size. I was worried for a moment when I couldn't find the setting in the app itself since the text was nearly 50% larger the previous version.
Right now I'm sticking with Twitterrific. I played around with TB3 but the lack of a dark theme is a dealbreaker for me, among other things. Especially when Twitterrific looks really nice, and Tweetbot looks really bland.
I really love Twitterrific's notifications, too. The icons make them much easier to recognize, which in turn makes acting on the right notifications (specifically mentions / replies) easier.
Exactly. It used to be that Twitteriffic was the underdog but I think it's superior now. Too bad twitter views 3rd party clients negatively, hopefully they don't all get shut down in the future.
Definitely miss the old aesthetic but it does clash with iOS7 a lot. The photo tossing animation is superb. I wish other apps let you do the same instead of forcing one directional tossing.
It's really beautiful. Did Twitter ever offer to buy TweetBot? Still pretty upset tweetdeck was killed.
Different. Will take some time to get used. Othwise very nice update.
I think that it looks great. Much better than the last version.
Talk about image compression in those screenshots...
That being said, I'm rapidly tiring of Paul's attitude toward his customers. It's like he takes everything negative said personally.
His Twitter bio says "Please don't contact me for tech support, I won't answer."
He often tweets things that annoy him about his customers like "But but but why do I have to pay again."
Paul, if you're reading this, I love your work but your public attitude is so often negative that it makes me not want to continue to support you.