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

Facebook threatens to delete synced photos if users don't download new photo app

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 71 posts

Re: Facebook threatens to delete synced photos if users don't download new photo app

#31

Post by reitanqild »

soylentcola wrote: post #24
shopkins wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder how long that will last until people start moving away from the platform. I think we'll need a solid alternative first. What would people want in the "next Facebook" anyway? Easy contact with every old classmate, friend, and family member? A place for their photos? An easy way to invite anyone to an event? I would wait for that day, but personally my use of FB has majorly changed over the past 10 years on…

The problem isn't that we're missing a "next Facebook". There have been several from both large companies and smaller startups that offer a better Facebook than Facebook in terms of UI, features, etc. The features are the easy part. The thing that prevents adoption of the next Facebook is that everyone is already on Facebook. Unlike email, you can't switch your provider or roll your own and still communicate with eve…

And a lot if techies are actively recommending the most useless alternative (twitter: everyone shouting to everyone, only very basic features etc) while actively hating the only network that had a chance, google+.

And the reason for the hate: mostly it seems because google in their infinite I-dont-know-what decided to 1. push the hated (but understandable for technicians even at my level) common identity solution under the same name as the new social network 2. destroy reader at the same time and for apparently no good reason.

(Oh, and for those who missed it they since came back with support for using pseudonyms.)

Edit: I hope for something better, for google to create something that connects to g+ and can be self hosted, I hope for them to hold out a hand and make Facebook look bad, I hope for somethong like matrix or hubzilla or something to become common. Oh, and I already use sandstorm.io

Re: Facebook threatens to delete synced photos if users don't download new photo app

#32

Post by mixedCase »

lewiscollard wrote: post #9
swiley wrote: post #5

Go ahead! I don't keep anything on Facebook that I don't have locally.

That's nice. What about the millions of non-techies who are about to have their stuff deleted because Facebook decided, on a whim, to railroad them into the Moments app? Everyone on HN knows not to trust Facebook with anything of of value, but as technical people our collective response to a corporation deleting the stuff of people who don't should not be "I'm okay, I have backups".

>What about the millions of non-techies who are about to have their stuff deleted because Facebook decided, on a whim, to railroad them into the Moments app?

They'll have a great opportunity to learn via experience what we've known for years. This is the only way they learn.

Re: Facebook threatens to delete synced photos if users don't download new photo app

#33

Post by newscracker »

reitanqild wrote: post #31
soylentcola wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't that we're missing a "next Facebook". There have been several from both large companies and smaller startups that offer a better Facebook than Facebook in terms of UI, features, etc. The features are the easy part. The thing that prevents adoption of the next Facebook is that everyone is already on Facebook. Unlike email, you can't switch your provider or roll your own and still communicate with eve…

And a lot if techies are actively recommending the most useless alternative (twitter: everyone shouting to everyone, only very basic features etc) while actively hating the only network that had a chance, google+. And the reason for the hate: mostly it seems because google in their infinite I-dont-know-what decided to 1. push the hated (but understandable for technicians even at my level) common identity solution und…

[Sliding off topic - going deeper into the Google experience] Google+, and Google services in general, have become unintuitive and almost hostile to users in the past few years.

I find it difficult to even navigate around in Google+ to get certain things done. Google Docs and stuff - same story - there's not even a sign in button that's visible when one visits the homepage(which I usually go to by typing docs.google.com). You look at some pretty pictures and blurb and then click on something and then get a new tab to open and then you may login.

The days of the Google founders counting the "weight of the homepage" (in number of words for google.com), page load speed and simplicity are long gone from other apps.

I like the Google+ posts layout and font sizes better than Facebook. IMO, Facebook looks like a decade old web application built for IE 6. But getting things done and moving around is a huge pain in Google+. The same is much easier to do in Facebook (this could also partially be because I've used Facebook for longer).

If someone in the Google+ team reads this, I'd love to rant and provide examples if you're willing to consider changes.

Re: Facebook threatens to delete synced photos if users don't download new photo app

#35

Post by tobtoh »

jbkrule wrote: post #27
tobtoh wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you can't provide me with all of the features of messenger in the browser then that's fine. And I'd also prefer if they don't try and hijack other features. I had installed Messenger, but had notifications turned off because I don't care to be interrupted every time someone sends me a new message when I'm not actively participating in the chat. Today, someone tried to call me (as in voice call), via the Messenge…

Uh, what did you expect? If you turn off notifications to an application of course you won't be notified, regardless of what communication tactics are used in the app. That seems to be your fault for assuming otherwise. Unless there was specifically a button in the app for turning off notifications only for texts.

I expected Messenger would just handle chat messages (ie a direct replacement for my web-based FB chat). That it also would re-route voice calls was not expected, but I don't blame it for that.

I do blame it that it doesn't give me the option to disable that functionality. I do not want phone calls to be routed via Messenger ever - yet you have no ability to separate that functionality.

Re: Facebook threatens to delete synced photos if users don't download new photo app

#36

Post by iainmerrick »

reitanqild wrote: post #31
soylentcola wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't that we're missing a "next Facebook". There have been several from both large companies and smaller startups that offer a better Facebook than Facebook in terms of UI, features, etc. The features are the easy part. The thing that prevents adoption of the next Facebook is that everyone is already on Facebook. Unlike email, you can't switch your provider or roll your own and still communicate with eve…

And a lot if techies are actively recommending the most useless alternative (twitter: everyone shouting to everyone, only very basic features etc) while actively hating the only network that had a chance, google+. And the reason for the hate: mostly it seems because google in their infinite I-dont-know-what decided to 1. push the hated (but understandable for technicians even at my level) common identity solution und…

I agree with most of that, but why are you keen on G+? It was never open and never amenable to self-hosting or anything like that. It was just a Facebook clone (arguably a little bit different now).

Going further back a year or two, I think Google Wave was going to allow self-hosting. But of course that sank with barely a trace.

Re: Facebook threatens to delete synced photos if users don't download new photo app

#37

Post by prutschman »

tobtoh wrote: post #35
jbkrule wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, what did you expect? If you turn off notifications to an application of course you won't be notified, regardless of what communication tactics are used in the app. That seems to be your fault for assuming otherwise. Unless there was specifically a button in the app for turning off notifications only for texts.

I expected Messenger would just handle chat messages (ie a direct replacement for my web-based FB chat). That it also would re-route voice calls was not expected, but I don't blame it for that. I do blame it that it doesn't give me the option to disable that functionality. I do not want phone calls to be routed via Messenger ever - yet you have no ability to separate that functionality.

What will happen if that same person tries calling you through Messenger now that you've removed the program?

Re: Facebook threatens to delete synced photos if users don't download new photo app

#38

Post by quarterto »

tobtoh wrote: post #35
jbkrule wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, what did you expect? If you turn off notifications to an application of course you won't be notified, regardless of what communication tactics are used in the app. That seems to be your fault for assuming otherwise. Unless there was specifically a button in the app for turning off notifications only for texts.

I expected Messenger would just handle chat messages (ie a direct replacement for my web-based FB chat). That it also would re-route voice calls was not expected, but I don't blame it for that. I do blame it that it doesn't give me the option to disable that functionality. I do not want phone calls to be routed via Messenger ever - yet you have no ability to separate that functionality.

Your friend chose to contact you via Facebook Messenger, for whatever reason. It didn't "reroute" anything. Phone calls are phone calls. If they'd actually rung you instead of using Facebook Messenger, your phone would still have rung.
Post reply on HN