3 ms·
Yeah, that also works as an explanation. Same principle—defend yourself by going on the offensive. There's a reason why Threads was only conceptualized after M
by lolinder 2y ago
Yeah, that also works as an explanation. Same principle—defend yourself by going on the offensive.
There's a reason why Threads was only conceptualized after Musk acquired Twitter and started talking about building an everything app. Pre-Musk Twitter was very content with its market and so wasn't a threat to anyone else. Musk's X was a different story (if he could execute on it, which at the time seemed more likely than it does now).
- ZeroGravitas 2y agoI may be wrong but I remember it almost exactly the opposite i.e. that Musk was clearly flailing with Twitter and Meta saw that as an opportunity to move into Twitter's market, which they would have struggled to do with competent management at Twitter.
- nordsieck 2y agoExactly. I don't think Meta would have been so keen to launch a competitor if people weren't so desperate to leave x (nee twitter) for another platform.
- JohnMakin 2y agoYea, lol, Musk's twitter was never, ever a clear threat to any competitor and Zuck smelled blood in the water. Elon fanboism has spun it the other way for obvious reasons.
- sangnoir 2y agoI'll also note that Twitter was pretty open and had lots of goodwill, which would have made competing against it really hard. Twitter getting rid of 3rd party clients (pre-Musk), and shutting down API access (post-Musk) burned a lot of goodwill, leading to large spikes of growth of the Fediverse, and creating a window of opportunity for a microblogging service from Meta.