5 ms·

Threads is a mobile-only app, like Instagram. You can't actually use Threads on a desktop browser, so that's probably why this is shared as a Twitter post. Even

by Asooka 3y ago

Threads is a mobile-only app, like Instagram. You can't actually use Threads on a desktop browser, so that's probably why this is shared as a Twitter post. Even if it were a Threads post, it would not be submittable to HN.

lloeki 3y ago
It also launched "in more than 100 countries" but none of the the E.U. ones. So until it either solves its privacy issues of becomes part of the fediverse, audience is crippled.
eatonphil 3y ago
Not exactly true. They have a read-only browser view. In fact a Thread thread has already been on the front of HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36609632 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36609632
- superq 3y ago
  > Not exactly true. Still, mostly true.. read-only is just dumb. Nice to be back in 2008, when mobile-first turned into mobile-only. The entire point of this thread was that this is a Python/Django web app, but it's not actually a web app at all, so what's the point of pointing out any of this?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- HarHarVeryFunny 3y ago
  I see these https://www.threads.net/t/xxx https://www.threads.net/t/xxx links to specific threads, but is there any top level page where you can search for stuff or browse ? https://www.threads.net https://www.threads.net just has a QR code (to install the app presumably).
  - eatonphil 3y ago
    You can get to users profiles too and view their posts: https://www.threads.net/@zuck https://www.threads.net/@zuck. But there's no broader browser yet it seems.
sanderjd 3y ago
Right. But this demonstrates why that's dumb. People can't even share press about their app without using a different product. Edit: Someone kindly pointed out that you can see the content in the browser without an account from following a direct link. (You just can't have the app installed or it will open that and drop you on the login page.) This makes me a lot happier with the product!
SECProto 3y ago
> Threads is a mobile-only app, like Instagram Instagram can be used in a desktop browser just fine.
- hotpotamus 3y ago
  Let's imagine that I don't have an Instagram account because I don't. (I never really understood it because it just felt like a slightly differently flavored Facebook and I already had a Facebook account.) Up until this weekend, I could simply view a Twitter post regardless of whether I had an account. And while I've never been much of a Twitter user, I did find that useful as a lot of local news and weather type stuff would get posted and I could easily view them. Is there any analogy to that with Threads?
  - Grazester 3y ago
    You can view single IG posts without an account.
  - uxp100 3y ago
    You could view a tweet if linked to it, but it would limit your ability to view a feed or navigate elsewhere. Which is similar to instagram, but insta is more aggressive with stopping you, whereas twitter gave a slightly larger grace period. Twitter removed that behavior under Elon, then developed something even more restrictive. Great. Neither are good, and unfortunate that tumblr has recently ish copied this (for default css at least). Real shithead behavior. Unfortunately, Facebook looks the best out of all of them. If a restaurant posts their specials on Facebook, I can see them. Basically not true for other social sites.
snarkyturtle 3y ago
Chill it's been in development for like 6 months and they wanted it to scale to 10M users. I'm sure a web interface is on the roadmap.
- superq 3y ago
  Six months and it still doesn't have a basic and open web interface. Not impressive. Many apps, including HN, operate for years with only a web interface.
tredre3 3y ago
Instagram launched in 2010 (but really gained traction only in 2011). It has been available via the web since 2012 but it took until 2015 for the web version to reach feature parity with the app version (namely posting and discovery). Based on that, I think it's safe to assume that a full featured web version of Threads should be up within a year. Threads already has some web presence (you can view threads and profiles).

by Asooka 3y ago

lloeki 3y ago

It also launched "in more than 100 countries" but none of the the E.U. ones. So until it either solves its privacy issues of becomes part of the fediverse, audience is crippled.

eatonphil 3y ago

Not exactly true. They have a read-only browser view. In fact a Thread thread has already been on the front of HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36609632 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36609632

superq 3y ago
> Not exactly true. Still, mostly true.. read-only is just dumb. Nice to be back in 2008, when mobile-first turned into mobile-only. The entire point of this thread was that this is a Python/Django web app, but it's not actually a web app at all, so what's the point of pointing out any of this?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
HarHarVeryFunny 3y ago
I see these https://www.threads.net/t/xxx https://www.threads.net/t/xxx links to specific threads, but is there any top level page where you can search for stuff or browse ? https://www.threads.net https://www.threads.net just has a QR code (to install the app presumably).
- eatonphil 3y ago
  You can get to users profiles too and view their posts: https://www.threads.net/@zuck https://www.threads.net/@zuck. But there's no broader browser yet it seems.

sanderjd 3y ago

Right. But this demonstrates why that's dumb. People can't even share press about their app without using a different product. Edit: Someone kindly pointed out that you can see the content in the browser without an account from following a direct link. (You just can't have the app installed or it will open that and drop you on the login page.) This makes me a lot happier with the product!

SECProto 3y ago

> Threads is a mobile-only app, like Instagram Instagram can be used in a desktop browser just fine.

hotpotamus 3y ago
Let's imagine that I don't have an Instagram account because I don't. (I never really understood it because it just felt like a slightly differently flavored Facebook and I already had a Facebook account.) Up until this weekend, I could simply view a Twitter post regardless of whether I had an account. And while I've never been much of a Twitter user, I did find that useful as a lot of local news and weather type stuff would get posted and I could easily view them. Is there any analogy to that with Threads?
- Grazester 3y ago
  You can view single IG posts without an account.
- uxp100 3y ago
  You could view a tweet if linked to it, but it would limit your ability to view a feed or navigate elsewhere. Which is similar to instagram, but insta is more aggressive with stopping you, whereas twitter gave a slightly larger grace period. Twitter removed that behavior under Elon, then developed something even more restrictive. Great. Neither are good, and unfortunate that tumblr has recently ish copied this (for default css at least). Real shithead behavior. Unfortunately, Facebook looks the best out of all of them. If a restaurant posts their specials on Facebook, I can see them. Basically not true for other social sites.

snarkyturtle 3y ago

Chill it's been in development for like 6 months and they wanted it to scale to 10M users. I'm sure a web interface is on the roadmap.

superq 3y ago
Six months and it still doesn't have a basic and open web interface. Not impressive. Many apps, including HN, operate for years with only a web interface.

tredre3 3y ago

Instagram launched in 2010 (but really gained traction only in 2011). It has been available via the web since 2012 but it took until 2015 for the web version to reach feature parity with the app version (namely posting and discovery). Based on that, I think it's safe to assume that a full featured web version of Threads should be up within a year. Threads already has some web presence (you can view threads and profiles).