i have another feature request for T4: auto-insert clipboard contents when launching for the 1st time or toggling into view after being hidden.
I'm not sure that will really have much additional value. There's hotkey for Paste (CTRL + ALT + V), so if you're using the keyboard to control it, the extra step isn't much. I'd have to add in another menu item there, which I'm reluctant to do right now. Do you really think it would be that useful?
Ok, first off, my apologies if this is coming off very harsh.
This is less about insulting the quality of the program and more about in comparison to the expectations set forth by other clients prior to Triple T.
I've got thick skin.
I understand that the client is trying to go the opposite direction of more complicated clients but the problem is that the other clients weren't really complicated programs.
The problem I found was that they take up too much screen real estate and weren't "Always on top". I wanted something that I could tweet quickly and just leave there without any real effort.
Second, the infrastructure of the whole program go against the claim of simplicity.
I'm not sure what you mean here. .NET? Something else? It's meant to simply sit there unobtrusively and let you tweet quickly and easily. Not more. Not less. I don't know how it's not a simple infrastructure.
I personally hate the text size and icon size of the Adobe Air programs and the way they need to be configured out of a certain background but the advantage coming from those programs are that they often make the application cross-platform and that they are "discovery" clients which helps give a different feel to actually visiting Twitter.
I don't really know what you mean. I made the font slightly larger (although it is configurable) in order to give it visibility and readability on larger screen resolutions. It's 12pt Segoe UI.
I don't know if this falls under .Net hate and frankly I was never concerned much about that requirement to begin with but a simple program like this begs the question whether the .Net requirement is really necessary or even if it's detrimental to the image of simplicity this program claims to be.
After all, it's an extra step to a very under-powered client.
.NET 4.0 was unnecessary. I could have easily done it in .NET 2.0, but I wanted to just play around with .NET 4.0 and have a quick look at it. If I were to take the program very seriously, I would have done it in .NET 2.0, and that would be invisible to virtually everyone as .NET penetration there is extremely high.
Basically, it was me just killing 2 birds with 1 stone to save time.
It's also very easy nowadays to right click on Google Chrome and create an application shortcut to send you right into a Twitter page and sure you may lose the power of url shorteners but it's not like the program auto-converts the url for you and some of us don't use Bit.Ly when there are even shorter url shorteners out there.
Browsers are cumbersome and take up screen real estate. I wanted to avoid a browser at all costs as they are just slow. Using a mouse is also very slow, and using TAB to get into the right input field in a browser is extremely time consuming.
But it does convert URLs if you want it to. I thought it would be presumptuous to have it do it automatically. (CTRL + ALT + U)
At the end of the day though, the program fails because it doesn't simplify the process for Twitter users.
Twitter users especially the busy ones are primarily discussion seekers. They are not as much bothered by how to broadcast a tweet as much as they fear missing out on a participating in a popular discussion or finding an interesting link and commenting on it while it's hot.
This isn't to say they want an all-in-one complex as molasses product but it is like designing a program around the mindset of Facebook users but doing it for Twitter instead when most of the needs of those using Twitter are different.
I think you have different expectations than what the program sets out to do.
The program is not supposed to be for "Twitter users" at all. It's for "people that want to tweet", but couldn't be bothered to put in any effort.
It's a subtle difference, but an important one. Twitter users will tweet anyways. This isn't for them. This is for the guy that would like to tweet, but just can't be bothered to fart around with a browser and clicking and signing in and tabbing, and clicking in input fields and clicking a Submit button. This is for the guy that wants to type and tweet, and not anything more than that.
Again, I hope this isn't interpreted as an attack and I'm not saying no one will find this useful at all. I'm just mostly sharing this as a "quick review" and I have no personal agenda against a Twitter client but even more so, I'm actually very interested in another free competing Twitter client since I'm not totally satisfied by Seesmic/Tweetdeck/Twitwhirl or whatever new leader in Twitter clients I haven't heard of that mostly copies the feature of the previous programs.
That said, I don't think the program as is is a lost cause.
Not at all.
If I'm guessing right, I think that what you were sort of expecting would be best done as a browser plug-in.
I think there are many people out there who is precisely looking for a program like this only for Gmail. (Post notes - sent to GMAIL) and even though this isn't what Plurk users fully want, the lack of Twitter like ui for Plurk and Plurk clients may make a similar program for Plurk appealing.
Does Plurk have many users? This is the first I've heard of it.
As for Gmail, it would be drop dead simple to do, but I don't really see a point to it as it's using Gmail for what amounts to a highly-specialized, odd use for it. There are better ways to store notes.
Finally a seemingly shallow quirk but I think an equally important one: The name needs to be simpler. It's going to be very hard to search for that Twitter client at the tip of your tongue if you're thinking and getting Alice in Wonderland results from Google.
The name is meant to be long and humorous as a contrast to the shortness and ease of the program itself.
At the end of the day, it's a very small program, with a specialized purpose, and not a major product. I don't plan on putting any real marketing effort into it. It will never be massively popular, and will never make me rich or famous.
To frame the program in a different perspective, it solves a specific "pain-point". Take for example my DNN Keep Alive
program; it solves a very specific problem on a small scale.
In planning software, my approach is to find a pain-point, then solve it. Very little of what I actually write ever gets released (most of my pain-points are extremely esoteric and have no broad consumer/corporate appeal). The pain-point that T3 solves is specific, and obviously not for everyone. I decided to make it available as I figured that there would be enough people like me with that specific concern to make it worthwhile.
To be honest, I simply wouldn't tweet at all without it. Other clients were simply too large or complicated, and I refuse to use a browser for it. (I find browsers are rather clunky things -- they try to be everything to everyone and fall short quite often.)
Anyways, I hope that puts some perspective on what the program is supposed to do.