{{ searchResult.published_at | date:'d MMMM yyyy' }}

Loading ...
Loading ...

Enter a search term such as “mobile analytics” or browse our content using the filters above.

No_results

That’s not only a poor Scrabble score but we also couldn’t find any results matching “”.
Check your spelling or try broadening your search.

Logo_distressed

Sorry about this, there is a problem with our search at the moment.
Please try again later.

Twitter's ascent as a social media powerhouse continues unabated.

The next step in its rise: monetization. Twitter has to make money at some point, it has critical mass, there's no shortage of monetization concepts floating around and Twitter management has all but admitted that 2009 is the Year of Revenue.

Yesterday, Twitter users were reminded that the fail whale is still lurking. It gobbled on user avatars, tweets and DMs and finally submerged the service for 45 minutes.

I've personally noticed on and off Twitter slowness lately and it's got me thinking: if Twitter can't slay the fail whale, will it ever be able to catch a massive haul of revenue?

To be fair to Twitter, a lot of progress has been made in reducing fail whale sightings. At one point, it looked like the fail whale was going to be a permanent fixture in the Twitterverse. But as Twitter looks to monetize, potentially meaning it's taking money from users and/or advertisers, one has to ask if the fail whale is acceptable at all.

When you run a free service, users are often quite forgiving. That doesn't mean they can't leave it in droves but there's less room for complaint, especially when you're as loved as Twitter.

Case in point: TechCrunch's Jason Kincaid said that Twitter's 45 minutes of downtime was "Not too shabby". I've personally cancelled hosting accounts and filed SLA claims for less downtime.

Which is the point. The minute you start charging somebody any amount, no matter how small, performance and reliability become huge issues because customers believe that performance and reliability are two of the things they're paying for. The more you charge, the greater the expectation. That will be true for Twitter, even if we all are willing to give it an extra benefit of the doubt.

Imagine: if you were paying Twitter for premium value-added features, would you tolerate lost avatars, tweets and DMs? If you were a large advertiser on Twitter, would you be pleased to learn that your ads were not displayed as frequently as expected because the service was often slow or inaccessible? Of course not.

As Twitter enters a commercial phase, it needs to keep this in mind. Putting the fail whale on the endangered species list is not a technical priority; it is a commercial priority.

Photo credit: playerx via Flickr.

Patricio Robles

Published 7 April, 2009 by Patricio Robles

Patricio Robles is a tech reporter at Econsultancy. Follow him on Twitter.

2403 more posts from this author

Comments (1)

Avatar-blank-50x50

Robin Parker

I'd have to say Twitter is one of the flakiest web apps I've ever used, in terms of its uptime. Maybe if they were actually making money, they could put more resources into sorting it out, but that could become a Catch 22 situation for them...

over 7 years ago

Comment
No-profile-pic
Save or Cancel
Daily_pulse_signup_wide

Enjoying this article?

Get more just like this, delivered to your inbox.

Keep up to date with the latest analysis, inspiration and learning from the Econsultancy blog with our free Daily Pulse newsletter. Each weekday, you ll receive a hand-picked digest of the latest and greatest articles, as well as snippets of new market data, best practice guides and trends research.