<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Twitter rant – How Twitter could be faster and avoid the Fail Whale</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.the-linkedin-speaker.com/blog/2009/05/14/twitter-rant-how-twitter-could-be-faster-and-avoid-the-fail-whale/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.the-linkedin-speaker.com/blog/2009/05/14/twitter-rant-how-twitter-could-be-faster-and-avoid-the-fail-whale/</link>
	<description>Undiscovered tips by "The LinkedIn Speaker" (I do NOT work for LinkedIn)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 03:50:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick OMalley</title>
		<link>http://www.the-linkedin-speaker.com/blog/2009/05/14/twitter-rant-how-twitter-could-be-faster-and-avoid-the-fail-whale/comment-page-1/#comment-933</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick OMalley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2010 17:48:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-linkedin-speaker.com/blog/?p=139#comment-933</guid>
		<description>Chris,

I disagree.

Twitter&#039;s main selling point isn&#039;t that it updates my page whether I&#039;m looking or not.  If I&#039;m not looking, and they update my page, they are just wasting computer power.  If they have too much computer power, and never run out, that isn&#039;t a problem, but if they are unreliable during the day, they should fix it.

I agree that &quot;A connection from a browser every 20 seconds is not particularly costly&quot;.  However, the SEARCH that they have to do IS costly, and that&#039;s what is causing the fail whale.

Also, &quot;throwing more hardware at it&quot; costs money and takes time.  My solution is quicker, and costs almost nothing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris,</p>
<p>I disagree.</p>
<p>Twitter&#8217;s main selling point isn&#8217;t that it updates my page whether I&#8217;m looking or not.  If I&#8217;m not looking, and they update my page, they are just wasting computer power.  If they have too much computer power, and never run out, that isn&#8217;t a problem, but if they are unreliable during the day, they should fix it.</p>
<p>I agree that &#8220;A connection from a browser every 20 seconds is not particularly costly&#8221;.  However, the SEARCH that they have to do IS costly, and that&#8217;s what is causing the fail whale.</p>
<p>Also, &#8220;throwing more hardware at it&#8221; costs money and takes time.  My solution is quicker, and costs almost nothing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://www.the-linkedin-speaker.com/blog/2009/05/14/twitter-rant-how-twitter-could-be-faster-and-avoid-the-fail-whale/comment-page-1/#comment-932</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2010 17:02:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-linkedin-speaker.com/blog/?p=139#comment-932</guid>
		<description>Your advice to Twitter is that they give up their main selling point (the dynamism of the service) in order to alleviate a few outages? That&#039;s not the best advice I&#039;ve ever heard.

And besides, things have moved on in web service technology in the past decade. A connection from a browser every 20 seconds is not particularly costly. Certainly it&#039;s something Twitter copes with most of the time. And it&#039;s a scalable problem anyway - it can be solved by throwing more hardware at it. That&#039;s a much better solution for Twitter than having people use their service less.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your advice to Twitter is that they give up their main selling point (the dynamism of the service) in order to alleviate a few outages? That&#8217;s not the best advice I&#8217;ve ever heard.</p>
<p>And besides, things have moved on in web service technology in the past decade. A connection from a browser every 20 seconds is not particularly costly. Certainly it&#8217;s something Twitter copes with most of the time. And it&#8217;s a scalable problem anyway &#8211; it can be solved by throwing more hardware at it. That&#8217;s a much better solution for Twitter than having people use their service less.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.the-linkedin-speaker.com/blog/2009/05/14/twitter-rant-how-twitter-could-be-faster-and-avoid-the-fail-whale/comment-page-1/#comment-912</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Aug 2010 17:12:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-linkedin-speaker.com/blog/?p=139#comment-912</guid>
		<description>Well said Patrick, well said indeed.

I don&#039;t know though, I still think the Fail Whale is kind of &quot;cute&quot;.....in an annoying and exasperating kind of way.  Sort of like when you&#039;re watching a movie on TV and it goes into a commercial.  You start mumbling something about &quot;stupid commercials, why do they have to put commercials in movies...&quot;, and then you notice puppies running all over the screen and you go, &quot;awwwwwwww&quot;.  Before you snap to your senses and go back to the &quot;stupid commercials&quot; rant.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well said Patrick, well said indeed.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know though, I still think the Fail Whale is kind of &#8220;cute&#8221;&#8230;..in an annoying and exasperating kind of way.  Sort of like when you&#8217;re watching a movie on TV and it goes into a commercial.  You start mumbling something about &#8220;stupid commercials, why do they have to put commercials in movies&#8230;&#8221;, and then you notice puppies running all over the screen and you go, &#8220;awwwwwwww&#8221;.  Before you snap to your senses and go back to the &#8220;stupid commercials&#8221; rant.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

