The reason engineers don't like it is because it's lame. Engineers work very hard to create complicated things. Then some idiot gets rich off the idea of telling someone you just ate lunch. It's lame and hopefully dies soon. Boring.
Thanks for the comment. I thoroughly understand both the engineers and other reader’s point of view. Twitter is a very popular social networking tool and it is a good way to communicate. But engineers may already have an effective method in place to communicate, so why change? It is just like in the field of education at the college level where I work, there are many educators who teach a subject and use Twitter within the classroom. Some educators feel that it helps engage the student and help them better communicate with each other. Whereas there are other educators that teach a subject and they do not feel that Twitter is effective within their classroom because they already have many assessment teaching methods that are proven and help students achieve their Student Learning Outcomes of the subject. My point is that Twitter is a good and very popular tool, but it is not a tool that may be effective for all situations. I strongly agree that time is a major factor according to a few people that I have communicated with to one of the reasons that they don’t use Twitter. Finally, many companies may have policies against using social networking tools in the workplace too. All of these may be contributing factors to why engineers (and many others) do not use Twitter.
Some corporations use Yammer (Twitter within the enterprise) as an internal communication tool. With peer pressure to have relevant messages, it can be a great way to learn about what is happening in other parts of the business and to enable insights to be drawn from individuals outside a departmental silo. Checking the yams ("tweets") on a daily basis seems to work best; otherwise the continuous interruptions prevent the kind of deep focus on problem solving that characterizes successful productive professionals.
I for one find it hard to be constantly interrupted unless the matter is urgent and agree that to some degree reading random thoughts is a bit of a waste of time, unless one is so bored and non productive. In meditation we strive to let those thoughts we find going through our minds just go. Why have everyone else's thoughts go running in my mind unless they are very stimulating or engaging to what I am involved in ...at that moment.
Thanks for your comments. The idea for the article came out of a recent focus group I conducted with readers of EE Times. During the discussion, I was surprised by the strong negative reaction to Twitter. No other social media tool generated such a forceful response, and I wanted to explore what it was about Twitter that triggered this reaction.
I think the spontaneous rejection of the notion of Twitter by so many engineers means that this community may well be among the last to reasonably evaluate the tool's utility.
This is not to say that Twitter is or isn't useful; but it does mean that, with nothing more than a visceral reaction, some engineers are going to need some serious convincing to even give it a try.
Twitter does convey information, but with a relatively low SNR; it just takes a lot more processing power to extract the data, like spread spectrum. With so many information sources, why go to a medium that takes so much pre-selection or filtering to get useful data?
Perhaps the engineers who don't like Twitter have not been exposed to it's use as a business and marketing tool. It's a great way to get updates from companies that are of interest to you. The key is not to follow too many entities, to avoid information overload.
I dont agree with this article. Twitter is a great way to keep in touch, to keep you posted about new updates. I have many engineer friends who are die hard fans of Twitter and use the tool extensively.
As we unveil EE Times’ 2015 Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. Panelists Dan Armbrust (investment firm Silicon Catalyst), Andrew Kau (venture capital firm Walden International), and Stan Boland (successful serial entrepreneur, former CEO of Neul, Icera) join in the live debate.