Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Snapchat Passes Twitter in Daily Usage

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 309 posts

Re: Snapchat Passes Twitter in Daily Usage

#171

Post by cloudjacker »

themagician wrote: post #161
cloudjacker wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah no, snapchat was never a timeline and thats what was good about it you want to be connected with someone because you are friends but don't like the random shit they post but don't want to unfriend them? thats a problem for a different social network but not snapchat

It is a timeline though. I open Snapchat and I see all the messages and stories, in order—sorted by time. It's not jumbled, there's no features. There's no "Featured" or "Top Stories" or "Retweets". It's just a timeline of content. From people I follow or people I know who have sent things to me. My Snapchat looks just like my Twitter did in 2008, except with a few more boobs.

ok

by definition of timeline correct, by UX of timeline no. it doesn't show you what it is without you explicitly diving into that story

Re: Snapchat Passes Twitter in Daily Usage

#172

Post by themagician »

cloudjacker wrote: post #171
themagician wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a timeline though. I open Snapchat and I see all the messages and stories, in order—sorted by time. It's not jumbled, there's no features. There's no "Featured" or "Top Stories" or "Retweets". It's just a timeline of content. From people I follow or people I know who have sent things to me. My Snapchat looks just like my Twitter did in 2008, except with a few more boobs.

ok by definition of timeline correct, by UX of timeline no. it doesn't show you what it is without you explicitly diving into that story

What are you talking about? I open Snapchat and it's literally two timelines, a private one and a public one. They are in order and timestamped. By definition and by UX. It is perhaps a quintessential example of a timeline of content.

Re: Snapchat Passes Twitter in Daily Usage

#173

Post by sasvari »

trevor-e wrote: post #169
justinpombrio wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you have more than a handful of friends that you're trying to keep in touch with, are you really going to ask every single one of them what they're up to each day? Good god why would I care? I imagine this difference in attitude accounts for some of the confusion over snapchat's purpose.

> Good god why would I care? If you're not interested in what your friends are up to, why are you friends with them in the first place? Maybe they're really just acquaintances? Like you said, maybe it's a difference in attitude. Still, I recommend you giving it a shot to get a better idea of what it is. I also thought it was dumb at first.

> > > When you have more than a handful of friends that you're trying to keep in touch with, are you really going to ask every single one of them what they're up to each day?

> > Good god why would I care?

> If you're not interested in what your friends are up to, why are you friends with them in the first place? Maybe they're really just acquaintances?

if I would care about what every single friend of mine is doing each day, it would be difficult to live a life for myself.

Re: Snapchat Passes Twitter in Daily Usage

#174

Post by mevile »

trts wrote: post #116
rhizome wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found Twitter has become my primary news source over the past couplefew years.

Right after Google shut down Reader for me. Twitter remains the best source of news + programming + local + academic content for me. Although on the whole I'm a little burned out on 'content' in general.

Have you tried inoreader? I use it pretty much just like I used Google Reader.

Re: Snapchat Passes Twitter in Daily Usage

#175

Post by cloudjacker »

themagician wrote: post #172
cloudjacker wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ok by definition of timeline correct, by UX of timeline no. it doesn't show you what it is without you explicitly diving into that story

What are you talking about? I open Snapchat and it's literally two timelines, a private one and a public one. They are in order and timestamped. By definition and by UX. It is perhaps a quintessential example of a timeline of content.

nah

when people think timeline they think the UX of Facebook, Twitter and tertiary networks that show you cards of data, everything about the post

they don't think some pedantic shit about it being "in order and timestamped so that fulfills all the criteria!"

Re: Snapchat Passes Twitter in Daily Usage

#176

Post by themagician »

themagician wrote: post #172
cloudjacker wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ok by definition of timeline correct, by UX of timeline no. it doesn't show you what it is without you explicitly diving into that story

What are you talking about? I open Snapchat and it's literally two timelines, a private one and a public one. They are in order and timestamped. By definition and by UX. It is perhaps a quintessential example of a timeline of content.

You are the one being pedantic in this case.

Sorry a list of content sorted by time is a timeline. I don't know what else you call that.

Re: Snapchat Passes Twitter in Daily Usage

#177

Post by greggman »

ChazDazzle wrote: post #55
stormbeta wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You can post pretty shamelessly the little things you're up to all day to your story, knowing it will be gone in 24 hours, keeping your feed really clean. This is the part I still don't get. Why would I want to constantly spam my friends with trivial photos of my daily life? Disappearing spam is still spam. I'm 28, nobody I know uses snapchat/instagram/whatever so I haven't actually used it. If it's something I actu…

Thirty something here. The stories aren't spam since they don't trigger notifications and you have to intentionally click on them to watch. When i'm not feeling social I ignore snapchat, when i am, i know i can check in and see what my friends are doing.

They are spam if I have to deal with them at all. Even skipping over things I'm not interested in is spam to me. It got so bad on FB I installed FB Purity. I have about 15 filters in there. Two to filter out one of my friend's posts who posts a pictures of every single meal every single day. I don't want to unfriend him nor unfollow him but his meal posts are spam to me.

How would this be any different in Snapchat? I'd still have all these meal spam pics to skip over.

Re: Snapchat Passes Twitter in Daily Usage

#178

Post by kobayashi »

themagician wrote: post #156
kobayashi wrote: post #150

Well, you're right that the ad problem drives people away, but you're wrong in saying that they deliver the same information in a functionally different but essentially similar method. I broadcast and ingest very different information on Snapchat than I ever did on facebook. The ephemeral nature of Snapchat, combined with the lack of public "likes" makes it a much more positive experience to post, and thus I in turn…

Because you got into Facebook so late. People who are 20 are doing on Snapchat today what I did on Facebook when I was 20: multicasting. I either want to send a message to everyone or to a group. Sometimes in a personal message. I see almost no real difference in content. Snapchat might be a little racier in personal messages, but that happened on FB and Twitter as well. The ephemeral nature was built into Facebook a…

Those are thought-provoking points. I'm trying to remember how I originally used facebook back in high school, and before the News Feed and Like eras we definitely used facebook much differently. Still, I think people use Snapchat to share more inconsequential parts of their lives than we ever did on facebook, but maybe that anecdotal experience isn't true, or maybe the difference is so minute that it doesn't even matter.

You've definitely changed my view of these social media platforms. I'm not sure that I absolutely agree with you, but I'm not sure where I disagree, either. Great points, all around.

Re: Snapchat Passes Twitter in Daily Usage

#179

Post by kobayashi »

ryanSrich wrote: post #115
kerbs wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are different kinds of confusing. Twitter is fundamentally confusing (for all the reasons mentioned - @'s, reply, RT, etc..) Snapshot's confusing part is only in the strange UI decisions of the app itself. Those I feel they could easily remedy.

This exactly. While I think Twitter could improve their UI by leaps and bounds, Snapchat's UI is just incomprehensible. However I'm a strong believer in it being 100% intentional at this point.

I don't find it to be incomprehensible. I think it makes sense once you get using it, but it's definitely a non-native feel on any OS. I, too, absolutely agree that it's intentional. Keeps the grandmas from using it and once people figure it out there's a great connection to the app - people have invested in it and felt the reward of understanding its intricacies.

Re: Snapchat Passes Twitter in Daily Usage

#180

Post by billhendricksjr »

the_watcher wrote: post #40
alttab wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh. Twitter is instantly public and indexed by google. Snapchat content goes away. They have very, very different goals. That said, it's easily agreeable that Snapchat the app is a flaming pile of brogramming.

> Twitter is instantly public and indexed by google. According to Chris Sacca on Bill Simmons podcast, when Twitter gave Google access to the firehouse, 60% of the links on Twitter had never been seen by Google's crawler.

I was curious about this as well. I believe Google started indexing tweets in 2014. Twitter gave Google a slice of the data well before then.

If this is correct, I'm curious if those unindexed URLs were Twitter.com URLs (tweets) or 3rd party URLs, meaning those pages were shared on Twitter before Google indexed them.

Edit: grammar

Post reply on HN