"Take Instagram, which from the start had to balance engineering and design constraints. In its infancy, the company was too computationally expensive to allow

"Take Instagram, which from the start had to balance engineering and design constraints. In its infancy, the company was too computationally expensive to allow for both landscape and portrait mode; instead of limiting the interface to one or the other, Instagram’s designers decided to make every photo a square." Source on that? What was computationally too expensive? Casual Googling indicates that the intention behind square was an aesthetic one - setting the pictures apart, and tapping into the vintage instant camera vibe. E.g.: "First, it’s worth reflecting on why Instagram photos were square in the first place. Instagram CEO Kevin Systrom has said Instagram wanted to be different, to find a way to do photos in a way that stood out. And the square format looks good; it’s consistent and visually appealing" https://unionmetrics.com/blog/2015/08/instagram-update-square-good-moving-beyond-square-great/ https://unionmetrics.com/blog/2015/08/instagram-update-squar... In fact, Wired's own article from a few years back talks about design decisions behind the square, and makes no mention of any thing being "computationally expensive": "There are logistical reasons for shoehorning photos into the shape: Squares look great in a grid and feed format. They provide a consistent visual experience for both photos and the little interface details like username, likes and comments. It relieves us of having to make yet another decision on yet another app, and that lightening of the cognitive load is not insignificant." https://www.wired.com/2015/08/instagram-says-goodbye-square-photos/ https://www.wired.com/2015/08/instagram-says-goodbye-square-...