51–60 of 72 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just loaded Instagram and it did this. It’s probably not something you see because you open the app multiple times a day. You definitely run into it when you only open the app a few times a week.
This article is about the instagram.com website, not the mobile app. Are you talking about the website or the mobile app?
Great for the web team if they are doing a better job than the mobile team I guess.
> we immediately present users with a cached copy of their previous feed and stories tray, and then replace it with fresh data once it’s available I vehemently HATE this pattern. I'm on a slow connection, and I open the app. Yay, I see some (cached) content. I start reading. After a random amount of time EVERYTHING CHANGES, and I can't get back to it. It's gone, for all intents and purposes, forever. I'd love to have…
> in part 2 we talked about improving performance by pushing data directly to the client rather than waiting for the client to request the data I firmly believe this should never, ever be done. This is the very reason I swapped to linux from windows xp many years ago: there was no way to tell the computer not to do anything unless I ask for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just tried. Why can't I upload shit from the website? I tried changing my user agent and clicking the new upload button that appeared and it didn't work (possibly because it was a video?) What's the point of making a website if it's crippled compared to the mobile app?
Instagram web never allowed uploads.
I wonder if they're ever going to bring the web version anywhere close to feature parity with the apps, or update the UWP app that's been abandoned for years.
I wonder if they're ever going to bring the web version anywhere close to feature parity with the apps, or update the UWP app that's been abandoned for years.
You're probably talking about the desktop web version I assume. If you check out the mobile web version its actually pretty close features wise, theres direct messaging, stories, creation with webgl filters,etc. The desktop version of these is admittedly lagging behind though - but I'm optimistic that desktop will get some more love in future :)
Does anybody from instagram actually use instagram.com? Because the comments side panel on pictures is probably the buggiest implementation of _anything_ i've ever seen.
Can't reveal the exact numbers, but yeah - a lot of people use IG on web :) Mobile web was always the big focus for us though - most people assume its just a desktop only web version, but actually the mobile web version is much more fully featured than the desktop version.
> we immediately present users with a cached copy of their previous feed and stories tray, and then replace it with fresh data once it’s available I vehemently HATE this pattern. I'm on a slow connection, and I open the app. Yay, I see some (cached) content. I start reading. After a random amount of time EVERYTHING CHANGES, and I can't get back to it. It's gone, for all intents and purposes, forever. I'd love to have…
I don't use instagram, but I use FB mobile and this same behavior exists on there, and I echo this sentiment. I have 1000+ connections on FB, built out over the past 15 years (I started using FB in college when it was a college network); which is to say, I'd never be able to fully read everything every one of my connections have posted because there are too many. Sometimes I see an interesting post as I'm scrolling,…
I only have like 150 friends on FB and it's already hard to find something.
> in part 2 we talked about improving performance by pushing data directly to the client rather than waiting for the client to request the data I firmly believe this should never, ever be done. This is the very reason I swapped to linux from windows xp many years ago: there was no way to tell the computer not to do anything unless I ask for it.