4 ms·
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
by 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 agoSnapchat 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 agoCouldn't you make this argument for literally any product at any period of time?
- alttab 10y agoI mean I get it. I really do. And you're right, especially about attention (advertising). But the goals are different. And twitter is failing.