Facebook acquires Instagram • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook acquires Instagram

#81

Post by untog » Mon, Apr 09, 2012, 5:24 PM UTC

jc4p wrote: post #23

statictype wrote: post #16

How many photo-related startups has Facebook acquired now? And what do they gain from Instagram? A user base? Most of them are probably already on Facebook? Technology for handling photos? Doesn't Facebook already do this as well as anyone else? Design and UI talent for mobile apps? Don't they already have Mike Matas?

Most of Instagram's "technology for handing photos" uses S3, as described in previous Instagram tech blog posts. Instagram however has a massive big data structure which would lead to any big company getting high value out of them. Why use the tools they open sourced last week to improve your reliability if you can just acquire the entire team?

I'm pretty sure that Facebook has "handling a lot of photos" sorted:

http://gizmodo.com/5841667/facebook-photo-library-dwarfs-eve...

Re: Facebook acquires Instagram

#82

Post by brlewis » Mon, Apr 09, 2012, 5:24 PM UTC

j_baker wrote: post #28

I have to say: it's nice to see an acquisition where the product is valued enough to not be summarily taken out back and shot. I'm curious how it fits into Facebook's product strategy though. It doesn't seem to be their style to keep a brand around that doesn't help their main brand somehow.

FriendFeed wasn't taken out back and shot either -- it's still running, albeit with some broken features. It doesn't hurt Facebook to leave a service running.

With Instagram, I think it's a case of user acquisition trumping product strategy. If lots of people are joining Instagram, Facebook wants to own it regardless of how it fits with their main brand.

Re: Facebook acquires Instagram

#83

Post by amirhhz » Mon, Apr 09, 2012, 5:25 PM UTC

kylec wrote: post #18

Some of you might find this useful: https://instagram.com/accounts/remove/request/

When I read the headline I thought two things: a) Wow, the Instagram guys deserve it, congrats to them. b) I need to delete my account.

The second point is because I have been actively trying to avoid giving fb more data than absolutely necessary. No ill will towards Instagram.

Re: Facebook acquires Instagram

#84

Post by juliano_q » Mon, Apr 09, 2012, 5:25 PM UTC

After only one week using Instagram for Android it was already my favorite network. Congrats for the Instagram team, but I cant deny that I just lost much of my sympathy for the network, since I can´t stand the way that Facebook handles privacy anymore.

Re: Facebook acquires Instagram

#85

Post by theorique » Mon, Apr 09, 2012, 5:25 PM UTC

envex wrote: post #55

callmeed wrote: post #37

You know, I used to be pretty lax (careless, even) about geotagging all my Instagram photos. Now, should I continue to use Instagram at all, I'm definitely not going to share my location.

Just curious, but why the change of heart?

Facebook will add all the locations to their giant, evil database.

Re: Facebook acquires Instagram

#86

Post by homosaur » Mon, Apr 09, 2012, 5:26 PM UTC

inmygarage wrote: post #62

This is very reminiscent of Google/YouTube circa 2006. When Google bought YT it was a small team of people and a pretty nascent product that people really loved, and the usage numbers were out of control. They left the product mostly untouched and let it grow on its own. Though there was major criticism at the time, it is one of the best tech acquisitions of the past decade.

YouTube is a content paradise though. There's tons of value there and you can sell ads against it or even charge for premium services.

Where's the money in Instagram? The content is practically worthless and their only real value is in their userbase. Even though I use the Instagram client, most of the time I see photos, they come through Twitter. So that also reinforces for me that any value is in the users and not the actual content, which is mostly crap.

I'm more convinced that we're in a 2nd bubble now more than ever.

Re: Facebook acquires Instagram

#87

Post by donw » Mon, Apr 09, 2012, 5:27 PM UTC

flurie wrote: post #50

randomdata wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps they just see Instagram as a threat? If everyone is sharing their photos on Instagram, they are not doing so on Facebook.

I wonder what sort of people putting photos on Instagram weren't also sending them to Facebook. Wouldn't it likely be people who don't/won't use Facebook anyway?

Friction is my big guess; Instagram is effectively a drop-in replacement for your smartphone camera, with some extra features that are incredibly popular right now (e.g., the overused look-ma-its-the-70s effect).

Re: Facebook acquires Instagram

#88

Post by tzz » Mon, Apr 09, 2012, 5:27 PM UTC

One good thing about being bought by bigger player is that it creates a void for other smaller innovative startups. Instagram is easier to compete against now than when it was independent.

Re: Facebook acquires Instagram

#89

Post by zaidf » Mon, Apr 09, 2012, 5:27 PM UTC

statictype wrote: post #16

How many photo-related startups has Facebook acquired now? And what do they gain from Instagram? A user base? Most of them are probably already on Facebook? Technology for handling photos? Doesn't Facebook already do this as well as anyone else? Design and UI talent for mobile apps? Don't they already have Mike Matas?

A better question would be: what were the chances that Google could acquire instagram and use them to make a charge at facebook?

The question, of course, sounds a bit laughable. But the answer is a non-zero number big enough for facebook to pull the trigger and defend their territory(social networking & photos).

Re: Facebook acquires Instagram

#90

Post by georgespencer » Mon, Apr 09, 2012, 5:28 PM UTC

inmygarage wrote: post #62

This is very reminiscent of Google/YouTube circa 2006. When Google bought YT it was a small team of people and a pretty nascent product that people really loved, and the usage numbers were out of control. They left the product mostly untouched and let it grow on its own. Though there was major criticism at the time, it is one of the best tech acquisitions of the past decade.

> This is very reminiscent of Google/YouTube circa 2006.

In that it was a startup acquired by a big company? Yep.

> When Google bought YT it was a small team of people and a pretty nascent product that people really loved, and the usage numbers were out of control.

Like most startup acquisitions, the team size is relatively small and there is significant traction in the market with headroom to mature their footprint.

> They left the product mostly untouched and let it grow on its own. Though there was major criticism at the time, it is one of the best tech acquisitions of the past decade.

This is not going to be one of the best tech acquisitions of the next decade. YouTube helped to propel Google into content. It also helped to commoditise web video in a massive way: reminiscent of the way which Google commoditised search (YouTube is probably just short of being a byword for online video at this point).

Instagram is a photo service in a sea of other photo services. Photography has been around on the web in meaningful ways for a long time. Flickr lost out to Facebook in the community stakes, and Instagram is doing great in whatever-the-fuck market it's in (the share-to-my-twitter-followers market?), but this is not Google acquiring YouTube.

Bookmark this comment. See you in 2022.