5 ms·

I am happy that we have Snapchat and iMessage as competitors to the Facebook Apps. I very much dislike their business practices of sucking up all the data they

I am happy that we have Snapchat and iMessage as competitors to the Facebook Apps. I very much dislike their business practices of sucking up all the data they can get their hands on e.g. during the acquisition of WhatsApp where they had to promise to European [1] regulators to not combine the user data with facebook‘s and then did it anyway. Also sad that they were so successful in copying Snapchat’s story feature - it made Snapchat so unique. Now nobody is using Snapchat for it anymore and everybody is on IG instead. All in all I know many people who really dislike FB and would leave it if they could, but the network effect keeps everybody locked in to WhatsApp at least in Europe/Germany. [1] https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/7/18215143/facebook-whatsapp-instagram-third-party-user-data-combined-banned-germany-fco-competition https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/7/18215143/facebook-whatsapp...

nexuist 7y ago
Snapchat is not any better. Given their financials I am sure they are selling my data to anyone who is willing to pay for it.
- cobookman 7y ago
  Source to back that up? From my understanding Snap's entire spiel is user privacy
  - jefftk 7y ago
    s/spiel/shtick/
  - moocowtruck 7y ago
    so when they do these sponsored filters, say the taco bell one? I wonder what metadata they send to taco bell saying hey look all these people used the your filter.. I mean I doubt it's just a number, taco bell would want some uniqueness? If would be nice if snapchat published the metadata fields so users can see what they expose by using sponsor filters n such? This is my basic understanding though I don't know that much abotu snapchat
  - pbhjpbhj 7y ago
    He's offering his opinion, how can there be any source? He basically said it's based only on financials. Perhaps better to say why you feel he should change his opinion, just need on Snap's spiel? Between the two I'm more inclined to believe "industry practice + financials" than "marketing spiel". Do you (or above else) have anything better to go on?
nolok 7y ago
> Also sad that they were so successful in copying Snapchat’s story feature - it made Snapchat so unique. Now nobody is using Snapchat for it anymore and everybody is on IG instead. I don't see what's sad about that, if the only thing that made SC unique is a feature that was so easily copied into EVERY FB app (messenger, instagram, even FB itself) then SC was anything but unique. Ultimately execution is what matters, and snapchat had a terrible app (at least on android) forever.
- meowface 7y ago
  The same feature is now also on YouTube, for some reason. I guess short video clips are just what the youth are into these days (Vine, TikTok, stories). I wonder if they're regretting not taking the 30 billion Google was offering. Ephemeral image/video/message sharing has become a pretty oversaturated market since their popularization of it, and there isn't really that much more innovation that can be done in that area, I think. And it doesn't seem like they're trying other kinds of things beyond ephemeral communication. They may be in a Foursquare-like situation, except Foursquare actually did manage to pivot from a gimmick to more of a sustainable business (as far as I can tell).
  - nolok 7y ago
    > I wonder if they're regretting not taking the 30 billion Google was offering. I know this was Google's "we need to turn into a social thing, G+ all the way" era and everything but good god, 30 billion, that figure was insane. Even if you go with "but major social app are worth a lot" just comparing it with how much was paid for whatsapp and instagram makes it even crazier.
    - meowface 7y ago
      I think the only thing even more insane than that is the creator of an app that lets you set a timeout when you send images and videos thinking $30 billion was a lowball insult and that they're clearly worth far more.
      - 7y ago
rubber_duck 7y ago
Also Telegram (unless I missed the type of apps you're comparing ? I really only use messaging aspect of all of these)
- nolok 7y ago
  I think he meant app that was a competitor on features but ALSO with a significant user base amongst the non-tech non-domain-specific population. I think Line, WeChat and a few others like that could qualify too, although they all seem very regional.
  - salsadip 7y ago
    Right. I just don’t really use telegram that’s why I didn’t mention it, although of course it is a good app! It is just doing exactly what WhatsApp is doing (feature wise) minus the big user base, which is it‘s downfall
    - madeofpalk 7y ago
      The thing about these sorts of apps is that if your network doesn't use it, then its _not_ good.
    - noragami 7y ago
      It's miles ahead of WhatsApp feature wise, except for properly implemented end-to-end encryption, of course. WhatsApp is a joke, I still don't understand why it became so popular.
      - donatzsky 7y ago
        WhatsApp became popular by being one of the first and by being available absolutely everywhere.
  - dgellow 7y ago
    Telegram reported 200 million active monthly users 1 year ago. It's not at the WhatsApp or Facebook messenger level, for sure, but that's clearly a significant user base. https://telegram.org/blog/200-million https://telegram.org/blog/200-million
0xfaded 7y ago
The reliance on facebook where I live now in Denmark is disgusting. I lived in SV for 4 years, and basically any information of importance reached me by word-of-mouth or mailing list. Craigslist is also used and awesome. Worst is that information meant for public dissemination, like training times or open event details, are now de facto private and require login. I've gone from logging in once every 3 months to once a week. AND messenger on mobile requires mbasic.facebook.com. /rant
- jefftk 7y ago
  Open event details should be public without logging in. I help run an event series that has our website link to FB for per-event details, and no account is needed.
- KozmoNau7 7y ago
  FB Messenger is the standard messaging service in Denmark, nothing else comes close. At least for everyone I know, it has completely replaced anything else they previously used, and ordinary text messages are seen as old-fashioned and obsolete. I've tried to get people to use Signal instead, but nobody cares enough to make the switch. "Everyone else is on Messenger, and I have an account already" is the most common reasoning.
  - intsunny 7y ago
    I think part of the problem here is that the UI/UX of Signal (and Telegram) are just not very good. Both are off-putting experiences and in turn do little to motivate people to switch to them.
    - dgellow 7y ago
      Seriously, Telegram UI/UX isn't good? That's the best user experience I know for a chat application and the main reason why I use it.
      - unimpressive 7y ago
gwm83 7y ago
I don't think I've ever used an app that was less intuitive and less user friendly than snap. That's probably why.
- mrweasel 7y ago
  The Snapchat UI is exceedingly weird. The navigation make no sense, and you can easily get lost in a feature you didn't know existed. Why don't they fix it?

nexuist 7y ago

Snapchat is not any better. Given their financials I am sure they are selling my data to anyone who is willing to pay for it.

cobookman 7y ago
Source to back that up? From my understanding Snap's entire spiel is user privacy
- jefftk 7y ago
  s/spiel/shtick/
- moocowtruck 7y ago
  so when they do these sponsored filters, say the taco bell one? I wonder what metadata they send to taco bell saying hey look all these people used the your filter.. I mean I doubt it's just a number, taco bell would want some uniqueness? If would be nice if snapchat published the metadata fields so users can see what they expose by using sponsor filters n such? This is my basic understanding though I don't know that much abotu snapchat
- pbhjpbhj 7y ago
  He's offering his opinion, how can there be any source? He basically said it's based only on financials. Perhaps better to say why you feel he should change his opinion, just need on Snap's spiel? Between the two I'm more inclined to believe "industry practice + financials" than "marketing spiel". Do you (or above else) have anything better to go on?

nolok 7y ago

> Also sad that they were so successful in copying Snapchat’s story feature - it made Snapchat so unique. Now nobody is using Snapchat for it anymore and everybody is on IG instead. I don't see what's sad about that, if the only thing that made SC unique is a feature that was so easily copied into EVERY FB app (messenger, instagram, even FB itself) then SC was anything but unique. Ultimately execution is what matters, and snapchat had a terrible app (at least on android) forever.

meowface 7y ago
The same feature is now also on YouTube, for some reason. I guess short video clips are just what the youth are into these days (Vine, TikTok, stories). I wonder if they're regretting not taking the 30 billion Google was offering. Ephemeral image/video/message sharing has become a pretty oversaturated market since their popularization of it, and there isn't really that much more innovation that can be done in that area, I think. And it doesn't seem like they're trying other kinds of things beyond ephemeral communication. They may be in a Foursquare-like situation, except Foursquare actually did manage to pivot from a gimmick to more of a sustainable business (as far as I can tell).
- nolok 7y ago
  > I wonder if they're regretting not taking the 30 billion Google was offering. I know this was Google's "we need to turn into a social thing, G+ all the way" era and everything but good god, 30 billion, that figure was insane. Even if you go with "but major social app are worth a lot" just comparing it with how much was paid for whatsapp and instagram makes it even crazier.
  - meowface 7y ago
    I think the only thing even more insane than that is the creator of an app that lets you set a timeout when you send images and videos thinking $30 billion was a lowball insult and that they're clearly worth far more.
    - 7y ago

rubber_duck 7y ago

Also Telegram (unless I missed the type of apps you're comparing ? I really only use messaging aspect of all of these)

nolok 7y ago
I think he meant app that was a competitor on features but ALSO with a significant user base amongst the non-tech non-domain-specific population. I think Line, WeChat and a few others like that could qualify too, although they all seem very regional.
- salsadip 7y ago
  Right. I just don’t really use telegram that’s why I didn’t mention it, although of course it is a good app! It is just doing exactly what WhatsApp is doing (feature wise) minus the big user base, which is it‘s downfall
  - madeofpalk 7y ago
    The thing about these sorts of apps is that if your network doesn't use it, then its _not_ good.
  - noragami 7y ago
    It's miles ahead of WhatsApp feature wise, except for properly implemented end-to-end encryption, of course. WhatsApp is a joke, I still don't understand why it became so popular.
    - donatzsky 7y ago
      WhatsApp became popular by being one of the first and by being available absolutely everywhere.
- dgellow 7y ago
  Telegram reported 200 million active monthly users 1 year ago. It's not at the WhatsApp or Facebook messenger level, for sure, but that's clearly a significant user base. https://telegram.org/blog/200-million https://telegram.org/blog/200-million

0xfaded 7y ago

The reliance on facebook where I live now in Denmark is disgusting. I lived in SV for 4 years, and basically any information of importance reached me by word-of-mouth or mailing list. Craigslist is also used and awesome. Worst is that information meant for public dissemination, like training times or open event details, are now de facto private and require login. I've gone from logging in once every 3 months to once a week. AND messenger on mobile requires mbasic.facebook.com. /rant

jefftk 7y ago
Open event details should be public without logging in. I help run an event series that has our website link to FB for per-event details, and no account is needed.
KozmoNau7 7y ago
FB Messenger is the standard messaging service in Denmark, nothing else comes close. At least for everyone I know, it has completely replaced anything else they previously used, and ordinary text messages are seen as old-fashioned and obsolete. I've tried to get people to use Signal instead, but nobody cares enough to make the switch. "Everyone else is on Messenger, and I have an account already" is the most common reasoning.
- intsunny 7y ago
  I think part of the problem here is that the UI/UX of Signal (and Telegram) are just not very good. Both are off-putting experiences and in turn do little to motivate people to switch to them.
  - dgellow 7y ago
    Seriously, Telegram UI/UX isn't good? That's the best user experience I know for a chat application and the main reason why I use it.
    - unimpressive 7y ago

gwm83 7y ago

I don't think I've ever used an app that was less intuitive and less user friendly than snap. That's probably why.

mrweasel 7y ago
The Snapchat UI is exceedingly weird. The navigation make no sense, and you can easily get lost in a feature you didn't know existed. Why don't they fix it?