Unitasker Wednesday: Puppy Tweets

All Unitasker Wednesday posts are jokes — we don’t want you to buy these items, we want you to laugh at their ridiculousness. Enjoy!

I don’t usually consider novelty items for unitasker selections. However, when novelties fail at being novel, I can’t pass up on such easy targets. This week, I present to you Puppy Tweets:

What is a Puppy Tweets? It’s a device your dog wears around its neck that transmits messages to your computer so your dog can tweet. Because, um, tweeting is something you really want your dog to do? From the product description on Amazon:

When your dog moves, barks, or naps the tag sends a Tweet via Twitter

According to a ridiculous number of bad reviews on Amazon, however, this isn’t actually what happens. Along with the devices (the dog tag and a USB antenna), you have to install a program on your computer to use Puppy Tweets. This program contains a preset list of messages that send from your computer every hour you have the program running. Your dog doesn’t have to wear the device (which is apparently quite large and uncomfortable for small dogs to wear), and you don’t have to use the USB antenna to detect movement, barking, or napping. Simply run the program, and receive bad jokes and puns from your dog via Twitter (not even transcriptions of your dog’s actual barks). You can even go into the program files and change the text of the tweets before they are sent, thus ruining the surprise of what your dog isn’t thinking!

In short, you could easily write up a bunch of pretend tweets from your dog in HootSuite and time them to send one an hour and have the exact same experience for free. I’m not really sure why you would want to receive fake tweets from your pet, though. That part continues to confuse me.

Thankfully, if such a not-so-novel product interests you, the Puppy Tweets in blue is only $1.10. If you want to part with more of your money, it’s $7.59 in pink.

25 Comments for “Unitasker Wednesday: Puppy Tweets”

  1. posted by DawnF on

    My goodness… what is the world coming to?

    I bet the dog does wish he could Tweet though ~ like “could you please play with me?” or “hello, my water bowl is empty again!”.

  2. posted by Jodi on

    O my gosh! Best unitasker post EVER EVER EVER!

  3. posted by Claire on

    Why? Just, WHY? What a ridiculous piece of junk. Why would anyone buy th….. But wait. Hold on…

    It’s been reduced from $29.99. That’s a saving of $28.89! That makes it a BARGAIN! *Rushes out to buy one.* *And to buy a dog to wear it.*

  4. posted by Northmoon on

    If they sold any of these it just goes to show that there’s a sucker for everything!

    LOL Claire, spend and save!!!

  5. posted by Pete on

    If you write up the tweets yourself you already know what your dog is going to say.

  6. posted by Flynnycat on

    Words fail me. I thought it was almost kind of neat until I got to the part where it’s all FAKE! If I could use a device to monitor what my dog actually does all day, that could be interesting (he’s a bit of a troublemaker and keeping tabs on him might not be a bad idea) but fake Tweets is just…well…stupid. I like how the price was reduced from $30 to a dollar and change…..shows what a great product this is….LOL

  7. posted by bookmum on

    Forget the Unitasker – one of the dumbest EVER – but I do like the idea of puppy tweets. (Work with me here, ok) Dog at home, missing their buddy. Child away at college, missing puppy time. Mom sets up account to randomly send child tweets from their puppy. Child giggles and feels a little less homesick.
    Now, how do I tweet the puppy? Hmm. Still working on that one.

  8. posted by DivaJean on

    Why would the pink model cost so much more? Is the Susan G Komen Foundation involved or something? Don’t get me started…..

  9. posted by leonie on

    hahahahahahahahaha…..your post is hilarious. Pink cost more. thanks for the laugh.

  10. posted by Heather on

    Everything for women cost more – haircuts, clothes, etc. So naturally, the pink one (for girl dogs tweeting!) would be more expensive.

  11. posted by packfan96 on

    My favorite line: “(not even transcriptions of your dog’s actual barks).”

  12. posted by sue on

    I’ll just open up a Facebook account for my dog, and let him “post”.

  13. posted by infmom on

    Ha. My cat long ago assigned me to do all his tweeting for him. He’s a cat.

  14. posted by Marie on

    Finally a unitasker I can ridicule without reservation! I’m enjoying the post and comments with great glee.

  15. posted by JustGail on

    I certainly don’t need this for my dog. I’m fairly certain her entire thought list is –
    1. feed me.
    2. this might be edible.
    3 ooooo, I don’t think I should have eaten that.
    4. YOW gotta pee!
    6. Let me IN!

  16. posted by Britty on

    So right, @JustGail!

    It makes me contemplate (not for the first time, mind you) just how much of this poor planet’s manufacturing capacity goes to making, well, dreck.

  17. posted by Rachel on

    @DivaJean, Leonie, and Heather,

    Thanks for noticing that pink or “everything for women costs more.” If I’m recalling correctly from my reading decades ago, it was Simonde de Beauvoir (who turned out to be morally…dubious) who had the astute observation that this world defines men as “normal” and women as “other.” Okay, that’s bad enough for human beings, but to extend this thinking to dogs?!

    Maybe, to be fair, the manufacturer just thinks it’s a kindness to the dogs’ human owners? But hey, why stop at dog tweet devices? just think of the marketing opportunities if we had pink versions of utility knives, flashlights, postage scales, housekeys, egg cartons, trash bags, and other previously ungendered essentials. Oh, wait, we already do. Think children’s toys. (LEGOS(R) blocks = latest example.) Think Komen Foundation.

    As DivaJean wrote “Don’t get me started…..”

  18. posted by Rachel on

    p.s. I’m blaming de Beauvoir for her lack of sympathy for a Jewish lover during WW II, not for extending the idea of “hormal” and “other” from humans to dogs.

    (p.p.s. The whole idea of women as “other” only works if men are the ones with the power to make the definitions.)

  19. posted by Lianne on

    Don’t get me started, either, on the things for women costing more (though, also don’t get me started on the idea that the pink one is for women). Jessica Valenti calls that “the vagina tax”. 😛

    Anywho, I think the basic premise behind this product is at least sound. After all, a dog in my city has a blog, and it’s won awards: http://www.sadieshihtzu.com/

  20. posted by ninakk on

    Would it mess up my cat if I made him wear it? I really need this thing, but don’t have a dog.

  21. posted by Gal @ Equally Happy on

    I was just thinking the same thing. My dog’s twitter feed would be:

    I’m hungry…
    Is this edible?
    I just ate poop!
    I’m hungry…
    I found food on the counter!

  22. posted by LivingOrderSA on

    What a great way to start off my morning – with a hearty laugh! This is hilarious!

  23. posted by Anita on

    This product is ridiculous, but the technology behind it is really cool. It reminds me of a project I saw on Kickstarter recently; someone was creating this kit with a variety of sensors (temperature, humidity, motion, sound etc) which you could hook up to a device that could then be programmed to send you a customized message in any medium you wanted (email, twitter, text etc). How you use this device is entirely up to you, which I thought was fantastic. Want to know when your laundry is done, when someone opens your front door, when your cat eats breakfast, when the temperature in your furnace room is higher than usual, or when your kids try to steal cookies? Now you can 🙂

  24. posted by Cheeni on

    Your unitasker posts are labelled as jokes, but you link helpfully to amazon with an associate link. That’s a bit like selling beer at an AA meeting you know.

    Not to disparage the good posts that you have, but this website could itself use some uncluttering – there are way too many useless posts that sell things, or motivate people to do the exact opposite of uncluttering.

  25. posted by Erin Doland on

    @Cheeni — Unclutterer isn’t against consumerism. In fact, we are quite fond of consumerism, as it keeps the economy alive. We believe our readers have the ability to reason and know what is best for their lives and make educated decisions based on their exact circumstances. We’re not ascetics. We live modern lives in a modern world with access to modern conveniences. We do not judge each other based on what we own. Rather, we believe that an uncluttered life is one where YOU choose to get rid of the things that are distracting YOU from achieving the life YOU desire. Since I don’t have the same values as someone else, how I can know what is right for that person? I can’t. That is why our Unitasker Wednesday features are jokes. We’re just poking fun of stuff (not people) and some of the stuff we even own. It’s okay to buy things, as long as you get rid of those things when they no longer meet your needs.

Comments are closed.