They "recommend" people don't build businesses like TweetDeck, because they believe there isn't enough room. However, it seems to me that TweetDeck has done pretty well for itself.
It seems stronger than merely a "recommendation" to me. They flatly state that new apps may not replicate the mainstream Twitter experience. Existing developers are allowed to continue to "serve their customers" - but I think developing new product lines as TweetDeck is doing, is going to run afoul of the new API terms of service.
Unless they have a side agreement, I expect some sort of battle to arise from this.
We've been working on something like this but better for a while: http://meeep.com A totally customizable Twitter web client (e.g., you can upload your own userscripts, HTML templates, etc.).
Completely quixotic. Twitter wants to own the client experience and as owner of the platform, they have the power to do so.
Twitter's now-infamous developer group post also listed a number of areas Twitter doesn't want to own. Reading between the lines, they're giving client companies the opportunity to transition to another line of business. If the client companies don't take the hint, Twitter's going to eventually play hardball.
Why doesn't Twitter buy TweetDeck? TweetDeck appears to be a better user experience than anything that Twitter have come up with themselves so far. If Twitter does want to own the client experience on their platform then what better way of doing so?
Apparently they haven't, one of the panelist (from Tweetdeck) at Geeknrolla said he couldn't talk about any takeover speculation, which implies that it might not have gone through.
This is based on the core of the Google Chrome app. Does this mean it is expected to replace the Chrome app? And does it have any new features? I've been missing the ability to filter certain apps from the Chrome app yet still find it the best Twitter desktop app.
