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

Facebook Home over a week later: only 500K installs with a two-star user rating

venturebeat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 87 posts

Re: Facebook Home over a week later: only 500K installs with a two-star user rating

#31

Post by Taylorious »

Karunamon wrote: post #22
criley wrote: post #4

I tried it out but I found it too suffocating -- Facebook, like Google, wants their "feed" to be your main IV-line of info-tainment but in practice the vapid updates of friends mixed in with poorly constructed advertisements isn't very engaging. If someone makes Facebook Home for aggregated RSS feeds, than they've invented mobile crack and I will never be able to put it down. So maybe don't do that. Also, Chat Heads…

vapid updates of friends Don't friend people on Facebook who post garbage. Any social service (Facebook, Twitter, etc) is only as good as the effort you put into curating the experience. Oh, and if you feel you must friend someone, you can just hide everything they post from your news feed.

Family.

Re: Facebook Home over a week later: only 500K installs with a two-star user rating

#32

Post by [deleted] »

rmrfrmrf wrote: post #23
Karunamon wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

vapid updates of friends Don't friend people on Facebook who post garbage. Any social service (Facebook, Twitter, etc) is only as good as the effort you put into curating the experience. Oh, and if you feel you must friend someone, you can just hide everything they post from your news feed.

Stop blaming the users for a bad product, especially when your suggestion goes against the core purpose of the product in question.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook Home over a week later: only 500K installs with a two-star user rating

#34

Post by Karunamon »

spinchange wrote: post #28
Karunamon wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

vapid updates of friends Don't friend people on Facebook who post garbage. Any social service (Facebook, Twitter, etc) is only as good as the effort you put into curating the experience. Oh, and if you feel you must friend someone, you can just hide everything they post from your news feed.

Has it occurred to you that there might be a use-case mismatch between treating a social network as a source of always-on, in-your-face infotainment and a communications vehicle with imperfect yet valued human beings you know and care about? Or do you expect everyone you know to be excellent, always-interesting, content curators?

I expect users of a social network service to understand the most basic details of how such a service works. Slamming the service because you don't like the postings of people you chose to subscribe to is just a little bit ridiculous.

It would be like subscribing to political blogs on $rssApp and then leaving bad ratings for the app because your news stream is filled with political news.

Facebook's tools have been pretty good so far from blocking spam from friends. Games (the main offenders) can be outright hidden or blocked, noisy or shitposting friends can be turned down to manageable levels (updates -> only important) or hidden outright.

Really the best thing they could add for flexibility is a keyword filter...

So i'll say it again. You, the user, is ultimately responsible for what comes up in your stream.

Re: Facebook Home over a week later: only 500K installs with a two-star user rating

#35

Post by untog »

The title feels clickbait-y. It should be pretty obvious why there were only 500K downloads- it's only available on around three devices. I'm interested to at least take a look at it, but I can't.

As for the reviews, many of them are of the "I hate Facebook" variety, but others seem to state (correctly) that it need some work. Given Facebook have committed to monthly releases, I don't think this is the end of Facebook Home.

Re: Facebook Home over a week later: only 500K installs with a two-star user rating

#36

Post by rmrfrmrf »

volaski wrote: post #30
rmrfrmrf wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop blaming the users for a bad product, especially when your suggestion goes against the core purpose of the product in question.

Oh yeah and there's email, phone, and all kinds of other communication platforms. They are all bad products because there's so much spam, right?

"e-mail" and "phone" are not products. That's like calling Facebook "internet".

Re: Facebook Home over a week later: only 500K installs with a two-star user rating

#37

Post by incision »

smackfu wrote: post #12

"mostly thanks to more than 5,800 one-star reviews." AKA, protest ratings. "This sucks in principle and I will never use it since Facebook is stupid."

Yep.

At least you're required to install (Sort of, just hit install. Even if you cancel immediately, the option to review remains available) an app before being able to post a review on Play, it's surely a small deterrent, but the effect would surely be worse without it.

I've been hoping Amazon would start culling non-verified purchases for a while now as they're quite established and the site has become the default soapbox for consumer outrage.

Re: Facebook Home over a week later: only 500K installs with a two-star user rating

#39

Post by freshfunk »

criley wrote: post #4

I tried it out but I found it too suffocating -- Facebook, like Google, wants their "feed" to be your main IV-line of info-tainment but in practice the vapid updates of friends mixed in with poorly constructed advertisements isn't very engaging. If someone makes Facebook Home for aggregated RSS feeds, than they've invented mobile crack and I will never be able to put it down. So maybe don't do that. Also, Chat Heads…

There are no ads currently in Home. Are you sure you really paid attention?

Re: Facebook Home over a week later: only 500K installs with a two-star user rating

#40

Post by ivix »

Karunamon wrote: post #34
spinchange wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has it occurred to you that there might be a use-case mismatch between treating a social network as a source of always-on, in-your-face infotainment and a communications vehicle with imperfect yet valued human beings you know and care about? Or do you expect everyone you know to be excellent, always-interesting, content curators?

I expect users of a social network service to understand the most basic details of how such a service works. Slamming the service because you don't like the postings of people you chose to subscribe to is just a little bit ridiculous. It would be like subscribing to political blogs on $rssApp and then leaving bad ratings for the app because your news stream is filled with political news. Facebook's tools have been pr…

I think you've got confused between a rating and an in depth product review.

If I have the "wrong friends" for a product to be useful to me, then I would probably not rate it highly.

Post reply on HN