Once mocked, Facebook’s $1B acquisition of Instagram was a good move

Re:Once mocked, Facebook’s $1B acquisition of Instagram was ... by kowdermeister on Friday December 30, 2016 @02:33PM (#13286698)

Filters were a relatively new thing. It was executed so well that any crap photo was instantly turned into a piece of art without needing any special skill or experience. Other apps had (and still has) filters, but they looked kinda lame. They feel like an afterthought.

The sharing and social factor was built in. Take a photo and sharing was automatic, which is pretty neat.

The name was also a huge factor. Photo Filter App 2.0 wouldn't have cut it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Once mocked, Facebook’s $1B acquisition of Instagram was ... by beamatronic on Friday December 30, 2016 @02:40PM (#13286770)

Isn't it crazy to think you might have a great product, but the only reason it fails to go viral is the name

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Once mocked, Facebook’s $1B acquisition of Instagram was ... by kowdermeister on Friday December 30, 2016 @03:44PM (#13287278)

+ it's really hard to detect a failure point. I never read a postmortem post that featured "and we had a rather silly name". A good name can make or kill a brand. It should be obvious but often it's undervalued or overlooked.

It's fine releasing under a temp name, but you have to make it a top priority to change it asap. I could rant on this for long, but the long story short for B2C products it's essential. If you deliver surveillance software for governments you can get away with anything.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Once mocked, Facebook’s $1B acquisition of Instagram was ... by notahacker on Friday December 30, 2016 @02:50PM (#13286873)

Filters might have been a new thing to smartphone apps with friction-free uploading, but reasonable filters with cute names were included in software bundled with the very first digital cameras...

[ Parent | on HN ]