On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 1:08 PM, James Holderness <[email protected]> wrote:
> Julien Genestoux wrote: > > As I said on the Twitter Dev Group. I think you miss the fact that it's a > > "standard" and "inter-operable". It's very counterproductive to have 36 > > different APIs for 36 different services. The web is what it is because > > people have agreed to build websites with the same standards, which makes > it > > easy to consume : HTTP, RSS/Atom, email... > > My understanding of the Twitter streaming API is that it's a client- > server protocol that can be used from desktop applications. PuSH is > only a server-to-server protocol so it doesn't really serve the same > purpose. > That's a fair point. However, I'm not sure of _any_ desktop app that uses the streaming API yet, hwoever, I know many web app who have been forced to use it :( > > Even if you think that PuSH is somehow more of a "standard" (which I > think is debatable), it just doesn't fit their requirements (IMO). >
