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

I think the main way to make inroads on facebook is via the young (probably college age and younger) who will want something where NOT everyone is on it. Was it not initially the air of exclusivity that helped to launch facebook as a brand? Of course now it's morphed into something totally different, and it is institutionalized, in fact it's almost become a kind of utility -- a combination universal phone book, universal yearbook, universal greeting card conduit, e-mail system, chat system, photo album, etc. You don't do it because it's cool anymore, you do it because it's useful. But some college kid will come up with something that's appealing to young people and revolting or bewildering or just unavailable to older people and that will gradually eat into fb, eventually. It probably won't be just an edgier fb, it will be something paradigmatically different.

well myspace actually had younger users, fb had elitism

they pretty much opened up the site college by college going by the us news rankings

if i go on facebook and send one important message and click through a gallery of 100 photos because i am bored i do not think that means i am getting 100x as much use out of photos

― thomp, Tuesday, April 10, 2012 11:37 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

well, YOU arent, but facebook is

this is already happening, thus purchasing instagram, theyd buy twitter in a second if they could too xp hurting

lol google+

I use facebook so I know it's not cool

if i go on facebook and send one important message and click through a gallery of 100 photos because i am bored i do not think that means i am getting 100x as much use out of photos

― thomp, Tuesday, April 10, 2012 11:37 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

well, YOU arent, but facebook is

― max, Tuesday, 10 April 2012 15:43 (17 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

ads refresh three times when i write that message and not at all when i click through the photos iirc

k so theyre getting 30x as much use out of photos

ime 'important messages' are increasingly taking the form of fb photos, i.e. sonograms

i have plenty of feelings about this phenomenon (not good) but that's neither here nor there

nah, they're getting 30^0.3x as much use - xp

pwned by math

thomp your individual experience on fb is probably not something you should consider representative of a half billion people

i don't know, possibly it's because fb came in when i was an undergrad, and since then i have spend three years dicking around then gone back to school (sigh) -- it seems like everyone i have known in my 20s has been more contactable via facebook than via any other internet medium, and uses that for making most of the arrangements about their social lives. probably these people would stop if facebook suddenly turned into timbernersleebook overnight but i still don't think it is true that graphical dingdongs are a large part of the appeal

ha, xpost

well myspace actually had younger users, fb had elitism

― iatee, Tuesday, April 10, 2012 11:42 AM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

myspace was also very susceptible to spam and general ugliness. myspace pages became kind of miserable. and they got bought by a company that proabably had the least idea of anyone what to do with it.

yeah IME people actually do use facebook for a lot of important shit. For example, it's become the central repository of photographs of my baby for three generations of family spread across the globe.

also (mainly bcz i don't have any friends) my 'individual facebook experience' is more like:

- open facebook
- click on qrank
- refresh until qrank actually works
- play qrank
- close facebook
- hate myself

srsly my Israeli grandfather-in-law gets on fb and posts shit like "thek you for sending the puctures to us"

- open facebook
- is anyone else in my life actually doing something more interesting than me
- comment on that thing
- post a picture of my cat

I don't understand what FB has gotten wrong with pictures and mobile picture uploads? It's easy to upload from my phone when I want to, and I'm constantly seeing other peoples' pictures (until I unsubscribe from Photos of Y)

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

― akm, Tuesday, April 10, 2012 10:09 AM (1 hour ago)

thru the app... I know you can go into desktop mode on the browser vers to share but it's such a basic function idk why the app can't do it (attn hackers, prolly an attack surface)

yeah I don't know how it is from other phones but on an iPhone it's very easy to take a photo and send it straight to facebook as it is if you have the app.

The thing is, every camera app on iOS that lets you post images to facebook does it better than facebook itself.

the Facebook app is truly terrible for posting photos

like, it is not at all difficult, and compared to a few years ago, it's like... damn! I can put pictures on facebook

then you use instagram or camera+ or something and it's like two button pushes and one of them was the actual click to take the picture

don't basically all android phones have 'share to facebook' as an option whenever you take a photo via the onboard camera app? it had never occurred to me to try and put photos on facebook via the facebook app

having looked it is remarkably difficult to do that

oh I actually assumed the "share to facebook" option on the iphone was a result of installing the app. Maybe it's just the iphone.

i'm actually just like my older relatives in that i didn't really start using facebook until my wife and all our other friends/relatives started using that as the primary place to share pictures of our/their kids. like if anyone sends me messages on FB i'm like "here's my e-mail address, let's talk there" but i'll actually go on FB to see the pictures everyone put up of the easter egg hunt we had the other day. so i totally get the whole photocentric facebook experience thing.

oh I actually assumed the "share to facebook" option on the iphone was a result of installing the app. Maybe it's just the iphone.

― i don't believe in zimmerman (Hurting 2), Tuesday, April 10, 2012 12:02 PM (22 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this option does not exist on the native camera app, u can tweet tho

mainly what i have learnt from this is that america has a thing called a 'macaroni grill'

It's the destination of choice for out-of-towners to go for a "fancy" meal. It eclipsed Olive Garden in this aspect a few years ago.

every time i hear about one of these things i go 'that is ridiculous' and then i go to the website and look at every item on the menu and go, okay, i'd eat that

apparently they will deep fry little balls of mac and cheese and serve them to you with a truffle dip

yeah, that part is probably pretty ok

some foreigners should come over and make one of those fish out of water docs abt all the amazing casual dining chains America has to offer

We really do have the fat+sugar balance to a point where you're like "man this food is made of total bullshit but I feel like I should finish this oversized platter"

is there any way i can volunteer to take this particular carbohydrate bullet

god, they have a whole selection of random things they've fried and put on a plate with a dip and it's called 'italian tapas'

I assume the lack of Share to FB in the iPhone camera is Apple's fault.

Seems like a standalone FB camera app would have cost less than a billi.

It absolutely would, just like Dailymotion could've been had for less than Youtube. EXCEPT, people actually use Youtube.

I don't see those as equivalent. People don't use DailyMotion to put stuff on Youtube. YouTube is a content hub, Instagram isn't.

Instagram IS a content hub, though.

one thing I kind of wonder as an aside is why Vimeo, which is so much nicer than Youtube, wound up not really taking off, or at least I think it didn't

vimeo is high class youtube

I like that Vimeo markets itself more to filmmakers and proper productions whereas Youtube has always been the place people upload phonecam footage. The world is big enough for both to exist imo.

idk but youtube seems to have integrated 'social' much better w/ video responses and vlogs and stuff

vimeo is where you go to show off that cute little short you made w/ an illegal copy of final cut pro you copped from your film school grad roommates

yeah maybe vimeo's model is to stay higher quality and more specialized and limited.

youtube was the first video site whos player worked good, end of story

^^