7 ms·

Twitter Loses Ability to Properly Display Instagram Photos

38 points by lleims 14y ago

davidu 14y ago
Companies fight, users lose. Same story, different day.
- freejack 14y ago
  Companies compete, users win. The press nearly always gets this wrong and the viewpoint has taken root in our collective thinking. Competition is about customers, not competitors. With competition, customers should get better stuff, more stuff and cheaper stuff. I've seen very little "users losing" in the past 10 years, despite continuous reporting to the contrary. Were this not the case, we wouldn't even have a twitter, facebook or instagram - we'd all be using the same thing provided by the same company and it would most definitely be outmoded and suck. Competition works. Get used to it, change sucks.
  - talaketu 14y ago
    What better/more/cheaper stuff do IG users gain from this? No comment from IG. When companies "compete" by buying out the competition and shutting down trade, there is a loss of choice and utility and a loss to consumers.
    - freejack 14y ago
      There is a loss of choice and utility available from Instagram, which create an opportunity for a competitor in the market. This increases choice and utility for consumers. In the long run, the market always wins and consumers benefit. (granted, this is a simplistic view and subject to the whims of regulatory distortion and other externalities - I think my core premise is sound though. Even though these specific companies might be limiting options that just creates more opportunity for competition and stronger benefits for customers...)
  - untog 14y ago
    I've seen very little "users losing" in the past 10 years, despite continuous reporting to the contrary. To take an example relevant to the OP, what about Twitter shutting down third party clients? How was that a win for the user?
    - freejack 14y ago
      It opens the door wider to competitors like app.net. The more restrictive twitter gets, the less competitive they will be and the larger the opportunity for competitors will get. This all benefits users in the long run.
  - j_s 14y ago
    > Competition is about customers, not competitors. Who are FaceBook's and Twitter's customers? Certainly not the users. So it's still possible that users lose.
    - ketralnis 14y ago
      No, but what they're competing for is audience size. And their audience is their users.
- skeltoac 14y ago
  Free services, weak businesses, revenue leaks, leaks plugged, addicts butthurt. SSDD.
- kmfrk 14y ago
  Twitter is learning that cutting off competitors is a two-way street.
danielpal 14y ago
This is likely going to hurt Instagram more than Twitter, but Instagram can now afford it. Though some part of me can't help but to feel somewhat glad. Twitter has been treating developers like crap for the past year; is somewhat comforting to see them getting a taste of that.
- kamjam 14y ago
  This was my instant feeling about this. Karma has a way of coming back to bite you in your ass, and the way twitter has been behaving lately...
- twoodfin 14y ago
  Does Twitter care that much? Presumably in the not-too-distant future they'll be rolling out an enhanced camera/photo tool in their client, precious filters and all. If it's decent, I suspect it'll replace Instagram for many Twitter users. Especially if Instagram still doesn't allow their pictures to show up in the card view.
  - iamben 14y ago
    I half agree with you - I don't expect Twitter cares that much - the people sharing photos on Twitter via IG will keep doing so, but I wouldn't expect any Twitter based service to replace IG. The two things are used pretty independently (as in I don't see many people just using Instagram to push filtered photos to Twitter).
  - dannyr 14y ago
    Instagram is not about the filters. It's about the community of people sharing photos. Unless Twitter creates a section/site dedicated to just photos, it will not be a threat to Instagram.
    - cube13 14y ago
      Are they sharing their photos on Instagram itself, or were they just using the social network integration features? I would wager that the majority of users of Instagram don't really care about the Instagram social network, instead using the application to share photos through Facebook and Twitter. Instagram's FAQ actually puts their social network integration as a major feature of the app, even mentioning Twitter as one of the compatible networks.
lutusp 14y ago
So let me get this straight -- people are allowing their photos to be encoded with a proprietary encoding, even though any number of free, open-source encodings are readily available? Follow-up question: Why? After the noise dies down, I hope this issue will be seen as another argument against proprietary graphic encodings and software patents in general.
- danielpal 14y ago
  Because the majority of people don't even now what encoding is, less care about it.
- micampe 14y ago
  what proprietary encoding? Instagram photos are JPEG, they disabled embedding them through HTTP.
debacle 14y ago
Man, what posturing we're going to see in the coming months between Twitter and Facebook. In 12 months we'll all be back on MySpace.
arcatek 14y ago
It's funny because the cards documentation is still using Instagram as example. :)
zaidf 14y ago
Extremely short-sighted move on Facebook's part. This is a move meant as retaliation to Twitter's API insanity but really, all it does is makes you look as evil as twitter in the eyes of the users. The only problem is that twitter itself has a much lower bar it holds itself to than facebook. And when facebook stoops to twitter's level, it has much much more to lose than twitter.
nakedrobot2 14y ago
THIS is in the New York Times (blog) and creating such a storm in a teacup? I think part of me died inside. Are any of the great minds in the world really worried about this?

38 points by lleims 14y ago

davidu 14y ago

Companies fight, users lose. Same story, different day.

freejack 14y ago
Companies compete, users win. The press nearly always gets this wrong and the viewpoint has taken root in our collective thinking. Competition is about customers, not competitors. With competition, customers should get better stuff, more stuff and cheaper stuff. I've seen very little "users losing" in the past 10 years, despite continuous reporting to the contrary. Were this not the case, we wouldn't even have a twitter, facebook or instagram - we'd all be using the same thing provided by the same company and it would most definitely be outmoded and suck. Competition works. Get used to it, change sucks.
- talaketu 14y ago
  What better/more/cheaper stuff do IG users gain from this? No comment from IG. When companies "compete" by buying out the competition and shutting down trade, there is a loss of choice and utility and a loss to consumers.
  - freejack 14y ago
    There is a loss of choice and utility available from Instagram, which create an opportunity for a competitor in the market. This increases choice and utility for consumers. In the long run, the market always wins and consumers benefit. (granted, this is a simplistic view and subject to the whims of regulatory distortion and other externalities - I think my core premise is sound though. Even though these specific companies might be limiting options that just creates more opportunity for competition and stronger benefits for customers...)
- untog 14y ago
  I've seen very little "users losing" in the past 10 years, despite continuous reporting to the contrary. To take an example relevant to the OP, what about Twitter shutting down third party clients? How was that a win for the user?
  - freejack 14y ago
    It opens the door wider to competitors like app.net. The more restrictive twitter gets, the less competitive they will be and the larger the opportunity for competitors will get. This all benefits users in the long run.
- j_s 14y ago
  > Competition is about customers, not competitors. Who are FaceBook's and Twitter's customers? Certainly not the users. So it's still possible that users lose.
  - ketralnis 14y ago
    No, but what they're competing for is audience size. And their audience is their users.
skeltoac 14y ago
Free services, weak businesses, revenue leaks, leaks plugged, addicts butthurt. SSDD.
kmfrk 14y ago
Twitter is learning that cutting off competitors is a two-way street.

danielpal 14y ago

This is likely going to hurt Instagram more than Twitter, but Instagram can now afford it. Though some part of me can't help but to feel somewhat glad. Twitter has been treating developers like crap for the past year; is somewhat comforting to see them getting a taste of that.

kamjam 14y ago
This was my instant feeling about this. Karma has a way of coming back to bite you in your ass, and the way twitter has been behaving lately...
twoodfin 14y ago
Does Twitter care that much? Presumably in the not-too-distant future they'll be rolling out an enhanced camera/photo tool in their client, precious filters and all. If it's decent, I suspect it'll replace Instagram for many Twitter users. Especially if Instagram still doesn't allow their pictures to show up in the card view.
- iamben 14y ago
  I half agree with you - I don't expect Twitter cares that much - the people sharing photos on Twitter via IG will keep doing so, but I wouldn't expect any Twitter based service to replace IG. The two things are used pretty independently (as in I don't see many people just using Instagram to push filtered photos to Twitter).
- dannyr 14y ago
  Instagram is not about the filters. It's about the community of people sharing photos. Unless Twitter creates a section/site dedicated to just photos, it will not be a threat to Instagram.
  - cube13 14y ago
    Are they sharing their photos on Instagram itself, or were they just using the social network integration features? I would wager that the majority of users of Instagram don't really care about the Instagram social network, instead using the application to share photos through Facebook and Twitter. Instagram's FAQ actually puts their social network integration as a major feature of the app, even mentioning Twitter as one of the compatible networks.

lutusp 14y ago

So let me get this straight -- people are allowing their photos to be encoded with a proprietary encoding, even though any number of free, open-source encodings are readily available? Follow-up question: Why? After the noise dies down, I hope this issue will be seen as another argument against proprietary graphic encodings and software patents in general.

danielpal 14y ago
Because the majority of people don't even now what encoding is, less care about it.
micampe 14y ago
what proprietary encoding? Instagram photos are JPEG, they disabled embedding them through HTTP.

debacle 14y ago

Man, what posturing we're going to see in the coming months between Twitter and Facebook. In 12 months we'll all be back on MySpace.

arcatek 14y ago

It's funny because the cards documentation is still using Instagram as example. :)

zaidf 14y ago

Extremely short-sighted move on Facebook's part. This is a move meant as retaliation to Twitter's API insanity but really, all it does is makes you look as evil as twitter in the eyes of the users. The only problem is that twitter itself has a much lower bar it holds itself to than facebook. And when facebook stoops to twitter's level, it has much much more to lose than twitter.

nakedrobot2 14y ago

THIS is in the New York Times (blog) and creating such a storm in a teacup? I think part of me died inside. Are any of the great minds in the world really worried about this?