OK, I'm just old and don't understand the draw of walled-garden social media, but why do people need different walled gardens for (micro)blogs, pictures, and video?
Or, why doesn't Meta make the Facebook platform better at doing the things that Instagram and now Threads do, instead of creating separate platforms for each? If the goal is to get people to sign up and connect with each other, doesn't network theory tell us that one platform with 100% of the users is more valuable than two networks each with 75% of the users and a 50% overlap?
As a user, if you know a bunch of people on one platform, why not just post your text thoughts, pictures, and videos, all to the same place?
OK, maybe your goal is to get as many total people following you as possible, and there are some people on platform A who aren't on platform B, and vice-versa, so you're on both. But why post half your stuff to A and half to B, rather than posting everything to both?
I’m like you, and we are wrong because what matters is the default experience.
Not the three clicks in experience, or the I changed a bunch of settings experience. Each platforms identity, the people it draws, the social norms, it’s purpose; is derived from its default experience.
Each identity creates a brand, and the brand is the meme communicated between people. What’s hip and in is a function of brand awareness.
> why do people need different walled gardens for (micro)blogs, pictures, and video
10 years ago, Facebook was where young people would post PG-rated pics (family members in the network). IG would be where they'd post themselves acting stupid. 20 years ago, they'd have used Facebook for this, because it was restricted to university students, no real risk of leakage to the outside world.
I’d say originally Instagram was a mobile camera app when fzz as rebook had a horrendous mobile experience.
“It just worked” and it was stripped down and simple. Take a photo, post it.
Now Instagram is feature bloated, so it’s time to launch a primitive stripped down platform again to see what direction this one grows in, instead of trying to redesign the old one. It’s a soft reboot.
Isn't that what groups are for? Facebook has groups, right?
You and your mates create a private group for pics of each other acting stupid, and that's where you post them. How is the leakage risk different from using a different walled garden?
Or, why doesn't Meta make the Facebook platform better at doing the things that Instagram and now Threads do, instead of creating separate platforms for each? If the goal is to get people to sign up and connect with each other, doesn't network theory tell us that one platform with 100% of the users is more valuable than two networks each with 75% of the users and a 50% overlap?
As a user, if you know a bunch of people on one platform, why not just post your text thoughts, pictures, and videos, all to the same place?
OK, maybe your goal is to get as many total people following you as possible, and there are some people on platform A who aren't on platform B, and vice-versa, so you're on both. But why post half your stuff to A and half to B, rather than posting everything to both?