I am so not "getting" this Instagram thing / do you guys want to look at each others pictures?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (451 of them)

i actually pay real money to flickr yearly. does anyone do that with instagram?

TracerHandVEVO (Tracer Hand), Monday, 9 April 2012 23:27 (2 years ago) Permalink

instagram wins because their entire product has one use, and they're just starting to flip into a second by letting third-party apps send pictures to their cloud. Pretty much one of the best cases of doing one thing really well.

mh, Monday, 9 April 2012 23:28 (2 years ago) Permalink

the pictures I take with it always look shitty so I don't use it

diamanda ram dass (Edward III), Monday, 9 April 2012 23:51 (2 years ago) Permalink

nah instagram had no revenue at all
xp

iatee, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 00:10 (2 years ago) Permalink

"We don’t plan on doing many more of these, if any at all." - zuck

does not sound like a guy who is super thrilled bout his billion dollar baby

iatee, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 00:12 (2 years ago) Permalink

He's taken it as far as it could possibly go based on its original functionality. Now the only thing left to do is progressively convert it into a multi-billion dollar, nearly useless, privacy-destroying piece of shit. So, where's the fun in that?

Mr. Peabody (Aimless), Tuesday, 10 April 2012 00:22 (2 years ago) Permalink

"We don’t plan on doing many more of these, if any at all." - zuck

Even Google - by whom almost every single startup dreams of getting bought up - haven't acquired that many companies (100 or so iirc). This is Facebook's equivalent of the YouTube acquisition - but YouTube already was one of the biggest websites on earth and Instagram is a currently popular phone app. Obviously I'm lol old and can't understand this new world of upside-down commerce.

You always tell me: "Perhacs Perhacs Perhacs" (seandalai), Tuesday, 10 April 2012 00:51 (2 years ago) Permalink

youtube for $1.65b vs. instagram for $1b

iatee, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 00:54 (2 years ago) Permalink

okay I just dl'd this stupid app, it is a lot more like an entire social network than i thought

iatee, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 01:02 (2 years ago) Permalink

being a preteen today seems really bleak

iatee, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 01:02 (2 years ago) Permalink

nothing a lil adderall wont fix

lag∞n, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 01:11 (2 years ago) Permalink

http://gigaom.com/2012/04/09/here-is-why-did-facebook-bought-instagram/

Facebook was scared shitless and knew that for first time in its life it arguably had a competitor that could not only eat its lunch, but also destroy its future prospects. Why? Because Facebook is essentially about photos, and Instagram had found and attacked Facebook’s achilles heel — mobile photo sharing.

Johnny Fever, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 01:38 (2 years ago) Permalink

Basically, instagram has its mobile platform down pat and fb, even though its usable on mobile devices, is not MADE FOR mobile devices. Zuck just bought the infrastructure to remedy that.

Johnny Fever, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 01:40 (2 years ago) Permalink

I doubt that the infrastructure the 12 people at instagram built is better than whatever mobile shit fb is working on

iatee, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 01:42 (2 years ago) Permalink

hahaha

markers, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 01:43 (2 years ago) Permalink

does that mean I can share something on fb from my phone? cuz that would be worth $1b

diamanda ram dass (Edward III), Tuesday, 10 April 2012 01:43 (2 years ago) Permalink

achilles heel for lunch, zuck

buzza, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 01:46 (2 years ago) Permalink

'does that mean I can share something on fb from my phone? cuz that would be worth $1b'

you can do that already

'I doubt that the infrastructure the 12 people at instagram built is better than whatever mobile shit fb is working on'

the infrastructure probably not; the app, yes. instagram is one of the best UX experiences I've ever seen for a mobile app. incredibly easy to use.

still, yeah, no revenue and no apparent plan for revenue. I don't blame them for selling. fb bought it because it could afford to and was scared that instagram getting 500 mil in funding last week meant that it was on the verge of doing something bigger that was going to be a threat. in this sense, this makes fb start to look like a monopoly, or microsoft or some shit.

akm, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 06:46 (2 years ago) Permalink

big props to instagram for negotiating their way into 1 BILL-ION DOLLARS

swaghand (dayo), Tuesday, 10 April 2012 11:37 (2 years ago) Permalink

'does that mean I can share something on fb from my phone? cuz that would be worth $1b'

you can do that already

how?! I've used the fb mobile app on a couple diff phones and there's never a share button next to links and posts, just like and comment

this info is worth at least $500m to me

diamanda ram dass (Edward III), Tuesday, 10 April 2012 13:18 (2 years ago) Permalink

I doubt that the infrastructure the 12 people at instagram built is better than whatever mobile shit fb is working on

― iatee, Monday, April 9, 2012 9:42 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

nah theres a good chance it is, just by virtue of the fact that facebook has been in existence as a website for nearly a decade now and has only lately been trying to build a mobile platform on top of that (and doing a bad job), whereas instagram is built *for* mobile. building platforms that work seamlessly with all the same features between desktop and mobile is pretty hard, and probably even harder on a site like facebook where you have both a large company and a massive user base. twitter is the only company i can think of that actually pulls it off.

max, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 13:45 (2 years ago) Permalink

idk I figured they prob have people working on something from scratch

iatee, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 13:54 (2 years ago) Permalink

I don't know anything about coding but when fb was created in 2004 or w/e, not sure the zuck anticipated it growing to include half the western world, from what I've heard fb has had problems scaling up their database infrastructure et cetera, hard to do when the world counts on you to be have an uptime of 100%, you can't just take it down for a week to transfer everything into the sleek new scaleable database your $500000/yr programmer bro just designed

swaghand (dayo), Tuesday, 10 April 2012 13:57 (2 years ago) Permalink

yeah but you can't just say 'okay let's dl all of fb onto this awesome instagram platform' either

like, mobile is pretty clearly the future of the $100 billion company, surely there was something in the works

iatee, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:00 (2 years ago) Permalink

not sure the zuck anticipated it growing to include half the western world

yeah...he anticipated it growing to include the entire western world

iatee, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:01 (2 years ago) Permalink

I think facebook has some good devops people and software engineers, but I'm not sure if they've got everything pointed in the right direction! I know that several years ago their general direction was to work on creating a backend that would optimize the hell out of their existing codebase and give them the ability to continue working in the same languages while letting the site perform. Whether they've retooled, I have no idea.

Instagram is all amazon/s3/cloud-deployed, right? I think you gain a lot from starting from that approach in that if you do it right you are concentrating on scaling and the ability to dynamically add resources from the start.

mh, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:05 (2 years ago) Permalink

yeah but they could start from that approach w/o dropping a billion dollars

iatee, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:06 (2 years ago) Permalink

There's no way facebook or anyone else would have to actually take down a system to transfer to a new one, though. Might be some hiccups across regions and some weirdness with notifications, but I doubt we'd tell the difference since that happens anyway.

mh, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:07 (2 years ago) Permalink

I think for them to do it they would have had to create a separate facebook iphone photo app, then people would get confused

swaghand (dayo), Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:07 (2 years ago) Permalink

if you're talking about infrastructure (databases for account authentication, user profiles, image storage) then that is the same for mobile or web.

client/app/mobile web interface is entirely separate from that.

akm, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:08 (2 years ago) Permalink

xp No, certainly, buying Instagram is more about buying the user base and the whole package. A team of good engineers could create their own Instagram, but no one is going to jump over to a duplicate product.

dayo, facebook has their own Messages app, though! I see no real issue with multiple facebook apps.

mh, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:08 (2 years ago) Permalink

akm otm, although I think that facebook's website doesn't actually call their APIs, public or external, and that's one of their big issues.

mh, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:09 (2 years ago) Permalink

or *internal* I mean. I think they really do have sloppy direct-at-data store calls.

mh, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:09 (2 years ago) Permalink

edward III, do you use fb mobile through the app or via their web interface on the phone?

akm, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:09 (2 years ago) Permalink

'facebook's website doesn't actually call their APIs'

their apis are awful actually. have you tried to use them? their documentation is a fucking nightmare, they depricate things all the time and don't really tell you; they introduced and then killed this fbml thing in like 2 years. now the only fb apps I ever had to use and/or build don't work. I hate dealing with it.

akm, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:11 (2 years ago) Permalink

mh otm

max, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:11 (2 years ago) Permalink

'certainly, buying Instagram is more about buying the user base and the whole package.'

right. but its an exorbiant buy.

I work(ed) for KodakGallery until last week. We have a pretty cool event photo sharing app; plus a website and a whole product line. But we're tied to eastman kodak which means we're going down the toilet and up for sale. First bid? Shutterfly, who have worse products and a worse experience overall; but Shutterfuly ONLY wants to buy the membership base to cut down on their competitors and will kill the rest of the company. If they win the auction, they'll have gotten millions of users for 23 million. Bargain price. But compare that to this buy. 1 billion for a membership base? Really? FB is saying they will let instagram run as is and not interfere with it or force anything on the members; maybe because they would face a big backlash on it; but that is a LOT of money to buy something that you aren't going to 'do anything' to.

akm, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:15 (2 years ago) Permalink

Yeah, I have no idea what the real goal is, and maybe there isn't a solid one. Zuckerberg seems kind of cool on the whole deal in media quotes, right? I kind of wonder if this was a consensus board pick or if there's something going on the business side of things.

Either that or they're real dicks and don't trust what their internal mobile app programmers say -- which may be the case, since at least one guy left because he was kind of bored -- and they're going to have some Instagram guys guide their mobile team.

mh, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:23 (2 years ago) Permalink

Remember, you can have the best people working for you, but anyone you hire to give you direction will always be better. Or so management always seems to think.

mh, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:24 (2 years ago) Permalink

well its a membership base and also a play to stop instagram from overtaking facebook

max, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:26 (2 years ago) Permalink

that to me seems to explain 90% of it

iatee, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:27 (2 years ago) Permalink

yeah. i mean i should be clear that $1 billion is ridiculous no matter which way you slice it unless instagram is just like an office filled with $2 billion and the 11 employees are all security guards or something

max, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:28 (2 years ago) Permalink

idk, that might be the lowest amount of money that facebook considers pulling out their pocketbook for

mh, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:29 (2 years ago) Permalink

that's a good point, maybe zuckerberg just forgot all digits smaller than a billion

iatee, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 14:29 (2 years ago) Permalink

biking in to work today i really wished i had gotten a job in palo alto instead of going to grad school

Lamp, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 15:04 (2 years ago) Permalink

in other words i am so not 'getting' this instagram thing

Lamp, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 15:06 (2 years ago) Permalink

it's ok, I witnessed my high school friend who founded p1nterest getting grief from his family for not being a doctor a few months ago

mh, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 15:13 (2 years ago) Permalink

lol @ "fbml". worst company

am0n, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 15:13 (2 years ago) Permalink

fbml wasn't a horrible idea but kind of betrays the fact they're still in a php or even coldfusion mentality

like seriously, guys, they created a php compiler and optimizer and shit, I think they're mentally ill

mh, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 15:14 (2 years ago) Permalink

oh, sorry, it's a converter that changes php to c++ and it's called "hiphop"

shoot me

mh, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 15:16 (2 years ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.