6 ms·

I had this realization a while ago, Snapchat is basically what Twitter tried to achieve, a realtime pulse on everything happening anywhere, democratic and spont

I had this realization a while ago, Snapchat is basically what Twitter tried to achieve, a realtime pulse on everything happening anywhere, democratic and spontaneous because of information constraints. The difference being that Twitter is plagued with bad actors (you can be mean when you're just typing), whereas Snapchat is much more engaging, friendly, and to put it in a term that everyone understands: fun! The sad thing is I think Twitter engineering is much more talented than Snapchat... cough

alttab 10y ago
Uh. Twitter is instantly public and indexed by google. Snapchat content goes away. They have very, very different goals. That said, it's easily agreeable that Snapchat the app is a flaming pile of brogramming.
- nathancahill 10y ago
  I upvoted your comment before I read the last line. What does brogramming have to do with this?
  - untog 10y ago
    Maybe that the app is garbage. I agree that it's garbage yet also somehow delight in the fact that it proves app purists (use Apple UI guidelines, slickness is paramount to user experience) utterly wrong about the criteria for a successful app.
    - toomuchtodo 10y ago
      No one cares how well the Skinner box is written, just as long as the right levers can be pulled and buttons pressed.
      - dasil003 10y ago
        I agree with your cynicism. I have no problem with snapchat per se, one of the most brilliant things about it is that it recreates the ephemerality the world has always known, which for some reason the internet pioneers got in their brain needed to be replaced by archivalism that defined the first 30 years of the public internet. It's actually quite brilliant to bring this sort of casual conversation to a social network, and it's obvious why it resonates with teenagers as it reflects the social nature that teenagers' lives have always had. My problem is just with the addictive nature of apps in general. Facebook is probably a worse violator than Snapchat, but in the end all popular apps by definition sort of have to do this. Call me a hypocrite since I've been obsessed with computers and tech my whole life, but something about this makes me so sad. I hope we can live in a future where we are not all glued to our phones all the time.
        toomuchtodo 10y ago
        > My problem is just with the addictive nature of apps in general. Facebook is probably a worse violator than Snapchat, but in the end all popular apps by definition sort of have to do this. Call me a hypocrite since I've been obsessed with computers and tech my whole life, but something about this makes me so sad. I hope we can live in a future where we are not all glued to our phones all the time. Agree! Your hope is my hope, but I'm losing faith fast.
- kajecounterhack 10y ago
  Do you have some source you can link regarding snapchat the app? I don't know much about it (I could never figure out the interface)
- altonzheng 10y ago
  Personally, I think in the long run, when you think of it, they are really similar. I get that they are physically entirely different products, but I feel like they are both competing for the same limited resource: attention. I'm speaking solely from what I value personally, but to me, I lump Twitter and Snapchat in the same category that can be described as: what I do when I'm bored and want to see what's happening around me. When the problem statement is that, Snapchat just blows Twitter out of the water in terms of entertainment. When I watch the Warriors play off on Snapchat, I get to see the entire game filmed through crowdsourcing - it's like I'm there. I'd argue Twitter is trying to capture that same feeling of being there. Also, I haven't included Facebook in this since they are beyond that, they are basically a utility at this point. I thought Snapchat was dumb at first, trust me. However, it's increasingly proving itself to be a very, very important medium of video distribution. Of course, there will always be a market for more curated content, but for real time, spontaneous content, Snapchat beats Twitter for me anyday.
  - alaskamiller 10y ago
    Snapchat is your generation's MTV. It'll be okay. Then one day you'll get old and see the kids do something else. Rinse repeat.
    - altonzheng 10y ago
      Couldn't you make this argument for literally any product at any period of time?
  - alttab 10y ago
    I mean I get it. I really do. And you're right, especially about attention (advertising). But the goals are different. And twitter is failing.
- whateveracct 10y ago
  The snapchat app is fun, easy to use for the most part, full of good features, and aesthetically pleasing. What's your deal with it?
  - jedberg 10y ago
    Maybe it's because I'm in my 30s but I find the UI completely undiscoverable. I know how to use it now, but it took me a while to figure out, probably because I didn't have a friend group to show me how, as opposed to the teenagers I've seen use it, who have friends show them new features.
    - morgante 10y ago
      I'm 23 and I can't for the life of me figure out how to use Snapchat or why people use it.
  - alttab 10y ago
    Battery usage, lag, crashes, app and OS freezes, general performance. It won't be a utility until my $600 phone can withstand casual usage. I'm hip to the jive at 29 and can learn the interfaces quickly. The brogrammer doesn't pay attention to the details hence the indictment.
- the_watcher 10y ago
  > Twitter is instantly public and indexed by google. According to Chris Sacca on Bill Simmons podcast, when Twitter gave Google access to the firehouse, 60% of the links on Twitter had never been seen by Google's crawler.
  - billhendricksjr 10y ago
    I was curious about this as well. I believe Google started indexing tweets in 2014. Twitter gave Google a slice of the data well before then. If this is correct, I'm curious if those unindexed URLs were Twitter.com URLs (tweets) or 3rd party URLs, meaning those pages were shared on Twitter before Google indexed them. Edit: grammar
    - the_watcher 10y ago
      I figured a huge driver of this were pic.twitter links, since there would be no way for Google's crawler to see all of those URLs without access to the firehose.

alttab 10y ago

Uh. Twitter is instantly public and indexed by google. Snapchat content goes away. They have very, very different goals. That said, it's easily agreeable that Snapchat the app is a flaming pile of brogramming.

nathancahill 10y ago
I upvoted your comment before I read the last line. What does brogramming have to do with this?
- untog 10y ago
  Maybe that the app is garbage. I agree that it's garbage yet also somehow delight in the fact that it proves app purists (use Apple UI guidelines, slickness is paramount to user experience) utterly wrong about the criteria for a successful app.
  - toomuchtodo 10y ago
    No one cares how well the Skinner box is written, just as long as the right levers can be pulled and buttons pressed.
    - dasil003 10y ago
      I agree with your cynicism. I have no problem with snapchat per se, one of the most brilliant things about it is that it recreates the ephemerality the world has always known, which for some reason the internet pioneers got in their brain needed to be replaced by archivalism that defined the first 30 years of the public internet. It's actually quite brilliant to bring this sort of casual conversation to a social network, and it's obvious why it resonates with teenagers as it reflects the social nature that teenagers' lives have always had. My problem is just with the addictive nature of apps in general. Facebook is probably a worse violator than Snapchat, but in the end all popular apps by definition sort of have to do this. Call me a hypocrite since I've been obsessed with computers and tech my whole life, but something about this makes me so sad. I hope we can live in a future where we are not all glued to our phones all the time.
      - toomuchtodo 10y ago
        > My problem is just with the addictive nature of apps in general. Facebook is probably a worse violator than Snapchat, but in the end all popular apps by definition sort of have to do this. Call me a hypocrite since I've been obsessed with computers and tech my whole life, but something about this makes me so sad. I hope we can live in a future where we are not all glued to our phones all the time. Agree! Your hope is my hope, but I'm losing faith fast.
kajecounterhack 10y ago
Do you have some source you can link regarding snapchat the app? I don't know much about it (I could never figure out the interface)
altonzheng 10y ago
Personally, I think in the long run, when you think of it, they are really similar. I get that they are physically entirely different products, but I feel like they are both competing for the same limited resource: attention. I'm speaking solely from what I value personally, but to me, I lump Twitter and Snapchat in the same category that can be described as: what I do when I'm bored and want to see what's happening around me. When the problem statement is that, Snapchat just blows Twitter out of the water in terms of entertainment. When I watch the Warriors play off on Snapchat, I get to see the entire game filmed through crowdsourcing - it's like I'm there. I'd argue Twitter is trying to capture that same feeling of being there. Also, I haven't included Facebook in this since they are beyond that, they are basically a utility at this point. I thought Snapchat was dumb at first, trust me. However, it's increasingly proving itself to be a very, very important medium of video distribution. Of course, there will always be a market for more curated content, but for real time, spontaneous content, Snapchat beats Twitter for me anyday.
- alaskamiller 10y ago
  Snapchat is your generation's MTV. It'll be okay. Then one day you'll get old and see the kids do something else. Rinse repeat.
  - altonzheng 10y ago
    Couldn't you make this argument for literally any product at any period of time?
- alttab 10y ago
  I mean I get it. I really do. And you're right, especially about attention (advertising). But the goals are different. And twitter is failing.
whateveracct 10y ago
The snapchat app is fun, easy to use for the most part, full of good features, and aesthetically pleasing. What's your deal with it?
- jedberg 10y ago
  Maybe it's because I'm in my 30s but I find the UI completely undiscoverable. I know how to use it now, but it took me a while to figure out, probably because I didn't have a friend group to show me how, as opposed to the teenagers I've seen use it, who have friends show them new features.
  - morgante 10y ago
    I'm 23 and I can't for the life of me figure out how to use Snapchat or why people use it.
- alttab 10y ago
  Battery usage, lag, crashes, app and OS freezes, general performance. It won't be a utility until my $600 phone can withstand casual usage. I'm hip to the jive at 29 and can learn the interfaces quickly. The brogrammer doesn't pay attention to the details hence the indictment.
the_watcher 10y ago
> Twitter is instantly public and indexed by google. According to Chris Sacca on Bill Simmons podcast, when Twitter gave Google access to the firehouse, 60% of the links on Twitter had never been seen by Google's crawler.
- billhendricksjr 10y ago
  I was curious about this as well. I believe Google started indexing tweets in 2014. Twitter gave Google a slice of the data well before then. If this is correct, I'm curious if those unindexed URLs were Twitter.com URLs (tweets) or 3rd party URLs, meaning those pages were shared on Twitter before Google indexed them. Edit: grammar
  - the_watcher 10y ago
    I figured a huge driver of this were pic.twitter links, since there would be no way for Google's crawler to see all of those URLs without access to the firehose.