Slightly off topic: I've noticed many of my once-prolific snap friends are no longer posting as much, and instead are posting to instagram. Honestly it makes me a little sad, I have a ton of good memories from this app, and Snap in general seems much more concerned with user privacy than instagram and Facebook at large. Here's to hoping they make a comeback in the future!
I've got a similar anecdote: my friends in San Francisco or New York have moved over to Instagram entirely. My friends in the midwest or south (Chicago, Austin) still use Snapchat.
There's probably a network effect — a couple of strong links in the friend group in that city keeps it going. I also wonder if usage in coastal cities is a leading indicator.
Snapchat completely blew it with their app update, and Instagram just happened to release stories at exactly the right time to get their fleeing users.
Yea as I can't count how many times I've seen a "stories" feature open on someone's phone and asked "Oh I didn't know Snapchat had that?", only to be told that it was Instagram. Insta ate Snapchat's lunch - pretty brutally.
It makes me sad too, and I use Instagram and don't like Snapchat. Instagram has focused way too much on competing with Snapchat with "stories". I wish it would stop pushing this feature so hard; it gets in the way of the main photo feed experience for me.
You can mute Stories of individual people 1 at a time but it has helped me. I mute the people who are just overall obnoxious. If they post pictures I still see them.
> Snap in general seems much more concerned with user privacy than instagram and Facebook at large
Wait, is this the same Snap that convinced people to share intimate pictures by making them inaccessible after a short while, but retains the right to store those pictures indefinitely and to use them for other purposes?
(Mostly-but-not-entirely rhetorical question, since I never used it and haven't looked closely into their privacy policies - so I might actually be wrong.)
When Instagram copied Snapchat and released the stories feature, Snapchat should've quickly copied everything else from Instagram (except all the nastiness that Facebook pushes) and offered those as optional...like storing snaps permanently. Snap really missed the boat on this, along with the UI redesign that turned off the core user base.
Instagram is only going to get worse with Mark Zuckerberg pushing it. Snap could still be an alternative if it focuses on what users want and keep what users may not want as optional or as a new app altogether.
I do not know if SnapChat would succeed just by copying some functionality. Snap grew by offering an opportunity to share small, stupid day-to-day moments.
We are curious about what others do. That's why reality shows and gossip magazines were so successful.
But the point is that by introducing Stories, Instagram provided this opportunity to spy on the lives of others. But also the opportunity to build a profile. This is important for anyone who has the ability to entertain others for longer, the influencers. And make others believe they could be that too.
Just saving a snap would not be enough. Snap would have to provide a landing page for each user that could be attractive enough for others to start following it. And some small clips is not so attractive, because you have to wait without doing nothing. In Instagram, in a few second rolling someone feed you would like it or not.
In addition, Instagram's search system improved greatly during this time of competition. While on snapchat is non-existent.
An interesting 2016 article about Snapchat's confusing UI - "How Snapchat Built a Business By Confusing Olds" [0] and HN discussion [1].
> Compared with Twitter or Facebook, Snapchat can seem almost aggressively user-unfriendly. If you’re new to the app and looking for posts by your kid, your boyfriend, or DJ Khaled, good luck. It’s hard to find somebody without knowing his or her screen name. This is by design. “We’ve made it very hard for parents to embarrass their children,” Spiegel said at a conference in January. “It’s much more for sharing personal moments than it is about this public display.”
Snapchat ‘16’s UI is much different than Snapchat ‘18.
Snapchat ‘16 was “confusing” because it didn’t hand hold you and a lot of features weee behind invisible swipes. The features were there, it was just hard to realize that they existed.
Snapchat ‘18 isn’t confusing. It’s bad because they de-emphasized everything about why people used the app and instead heavily pushed their own content. It’s practically a different app with a different purpose - it’s a tabloid rag rather than a social network.
Snapchat felt more personal than FB/IG, and I guess Spiegal saw all the celebs using the app and killed the goose trying to monetize that.
It is depressing to me how low the bar is for our ability to learn an application. If the UI has more than a single list or button, it becomes "impossible to navigate". There was a time when users would expect some time getting to know their application and even, dare I say, read a guide or manual! Sometimes extremely powerful, creative, and useful tools will have a learning curve. Snap could offer some amazing capabilities, but because of this "simple is everything" mindset, they will face outrage if they expose anything beyond message passing.
There is a big difference between a complex UI on a complex application and an unintuitive UI on what should be very simple.
It is completely nonsensical how Snapchat works. You have to swipe every which way and there's no clues when to swipe where. You just have to memorize the magical incantation to do what you want through trial and error.
We as a society have built up a fantastic 'language' of UI. We know what buttons and menus, etc do. Snapchat throws away all the ways you want to intuitively navigate and give you no clues about what to do instead.
Remember these services are not designed to fulfill a previously existing need. They are designed to become addictive and create a new need, which they then have a monopoly on fulfilling.
The applications you are thinking of served preexisting needs, so it required more upfront complexity.
Something like Snapchat's UI does not have the burden of fulfilling a previously existing need. That is, until they redesigned it. Then suddenly, the new UI had to provide for a pre-existing need and as an obvious consequence, has been more difficult for both new and existing users.
How about returning localized stories specific to cities and college campuses? That feature was so important to so many people, and it was just suddenly killed last year.
I bought my first personal filter/lenses for a friends wedding. It was a big hit, to the point that nearly any large gathering someone will snapcash/venmo/applepay/payment method du jour me a few bucks to make a filter or lens and story for their event (christmas party, baby shower, housewarming, cocktail party, etc...)
This reminds me a bit of how OkCupid basically turned their app into Tinder: got rid of screen names, swipe to match, and can only message users you’ve mutually matched with. Maybe all dating apps will eventually become Tinder, and all photo-oriented messaging apps will turn into some hybrid of Snap/Insta.
By the way that's a really horrible feature of Android (don't know about iOS). I never gave permission to any app that it could be aware of my screenshots, and yet one of my contacts asked why I screenshotted their message. That's not the business of apps to know, at least without permission first.
All this confirms to me, is the fact that the app space is mainly a battleground for highly evolved corporate entities to fight for attention and profit.
Being unique or solving a purpose that's genuinely useful to its audience, doesn't seem to be a primary aim of businesses like Snapchat.
- Snapchat didn't exist until 7 years ago, so not sure they qualify as a highly evolved corporate entity
- Snapchat solves a unique communication problem (the desire to express yourself without it living forever). It still solves this problem today, however so do a lot of competitors.
Why not? You’re a highly evolved biological entity and you were from the very moment you were conceived! Evolution refers to your ancestors, not to any individual.
Can it solve a problem for which people are willing to pay? If not, advertising is the only source of revenue, which means they have to fight for people's attention.
I know an analyst at SnapChat, it's not a well managed company at all apparently. The way it was described to me was that a manager of a very popular lemonade stand suddenly is put in charge of Pepsi. They have very talented engineers, and analysts, but the glue to connect the employees - management, is so lacking that it's a shit show
Due to a lack of overall direction and a common goal, teams are isolated in their own silos (which they're good at), but there's no cohesion. At the moment the company is reactive to competitors, not innovative and a leader in the space like what you could argue they were a few years ago
The only axioma that gives you the best perspective of the business world is that the primary aim of ANY business is ALWAYS the profit. Even if they have the most melting motto or have the most sentimental text bullshit on their website, they all have a purpose.
And not saying that this is wrong. After all this is how the society works.
Snap is only on my phone because my phone storage fills up sometimes and I need space to save photos or videos.
I don't look at anyone's stories anymore. The people I care about, I make time to hang out with them in person or call them when I miss them. You know, like people used to before 2010.
I used to if it was a girl I was talking to or while my friends traveled. I just don't care anymore. Posting stories and checking who saw it, seeing others is a time waster.
I love my work, my hobbies, solitude, family, analog lifestyle as much as possible.
Readit News
There's probably a network effect — a couple of strong links in the friend group in that city keeps it going. I also wonder if usage in coastal cities is a leading indicator.
Wait, is this the same Snap that convinced people to share intimate pictures by making them inaccessible after a short while, but retains the right to store those pictures indefinitely and to use them for other purposes?
(Mostly-but-not-entirely rhetorical question, since I never used it and haven't looked closely into their privacy policies - so I might actually be wrong.)
Instagram is only going to get worse with Mark Zuckerberg pushing it. Snap could still be an alternative if it focuses on what users want and keep what users may not want as optional or as a new app altogether.
We are curious about what others do. That's why reality shows and gossip magazines were so successful.
But the point is that by introducing Stories, Instagram provided this opportunity to spy on the lives of others. But also the opportunity to build a profile. This is important for anyone who has the ability to entertain others for longer, the influencers. And make others believe they could be that too.
Just saving a snap would not be enough. Snap would have to provide a landing page for each user that could be attractive enough for others to start following it. And some small clips is not so attractive, because you have to wait without doing nothing. In Instagram, in a few second rolling someone feed you would like it or not.
In addition, Instagram's search system improved greatly during this time of competition. While on snapchat is non-existent.
> Compared with Twitter or Facebook, Snapchat can seem almost aggressively user-unfriendly. If you’re new to the app and looking for posts by your kid, your boyfriend, or DJ Khaled, good luck. It’s hard to find somebody without knowing his or her screen name. This is by design. “We’ve made it very hard for parents to embarrass their children,” Spiegel said at a conference in January. “It’s much more for sharing personal moments than it is about this public display.”
[0] https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-how-snapchat-built-a...
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11217075
Snapchat ‘16 was “confusing” because it didn’t hand hold you and a lot of features weee behind invisible swipes. The features were there, it was just hard to realize that they existed.
Snapchat ‘18 isn’t confusing. It’s bad because they de-emphasized everything about why people used the app and instead heavily pushed their own content. It’s practically a different app with a different purpose - it’s a tabloid rag rather than a social network.
Snapchat felt more personal than FB/IG, and I guess Spiegal saw all the celebs using the app and killed the goose trying to monetize that.
Otherwise, I (xennial) tried it twice and found the UI rather confusing.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapchat#Growth
.... I don't know that thats really a generation.
Deleted Comment
It is depressing to me how low the bar is for our ability to learn an application. If the UI has more than a single list or button, it becomes "impossible to navigate". There was a time when users would expect some time getting to know their application and even, dare I say, read a guide or manual! Sometimes extremely powerful, creative, and useful tools will have a learning curve. Snap could offer some amazing capabilities, but because of this "simple is everything" mindset, they will face outrage if they expose anything beyond message passing.
It is completely nonsensical how Snapchat works. You have to swipe every which way and there's no clues when to swipe where. You just have to memorize the magical incantation to do what you want through trial and error.
We as a society have built up a fantastic 'language' of UI. We know what buttons and menus, etc do. Snapchat throws away all the ways you want to intuitively navigate and give you no clues about what to do instead.
The applications you are thinking of served preexisting needs, so it required more upfront complexity.
Something like Snapchat's UI does not have the burden of fulfilling a previously existing need. That is, until they redesigned it. Then suddenly, the new UI had to provide for a pre-existing need and as an obvious consequence, has been more difficult for both new and existing users.
It's likely that they making all apps alike to match most grossing.
Deleted Comment
Being unique or solving a purpose that's genuinely useful to its audience, doesn't seem to be a primary aim of businesses like Snapchat.
- Snapchat solves a unique communication problem (the desire to express yourself without it living forever). It still solves this problem today, however so do a lot of competitors.
Why not? You’re a highly evolved biological entity and you were from the very moment you were conceived! Evolution refers to your ancestors, not to any individual.
Due to a lack of overall direction and a common goal, teams are isolated in their own silos (which they're good at), but there's no cohesion. At the moment the company is reactive to competitors, not innovative and a leader in the space like what you could argue they were a few years ago
A unicorn is not supposed to fill a niche, it’s supposed to fight till death.
And not saying that this is wrong. After all this is how the society works.
I don't look at anyone's stories anymore. The people I care about, I make time to hang out with them in person or call them when I miss them. You know, like people used to before 2010.
There I said it. I know I'm not alone.
I don't know about anyone else, but posting a story is the only guaranteed way to ensure I don't even check it.
That applies equally to Snapchat, instagram and facebook.
As a means of communication, it just doesn't work for me.
I love my work, my hobbies, solitude, family, analog lifestyle as much as possible.