• @hughesdikus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    2011 months ago

    It had today’s tiktok crowd. It was a huge hit. The only reason it failed is because of monetisation.

    Only reason YouTube is popular. No competitor can match it in those terms.

    Saying Vine was ahead of its time is like saying Digg or MySpace was ahead of its time. No it was at the precipice and just horribly failed to manage its growth and responding to competitors

    • @dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      311 months ago

      It was a huge hit.

      It had 200 million monthly active users at peak, which is a decent number but still smaller than every other major social network. I don’t think that’s entirely due to monetization. I think one of the factors is that a lot of people still had small data caps at the time it initially launched (2013), which is not really conducive to spontaneously consuming and uploading video from mobile phones.

      • @StorminNorman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        211 months ago

        Data caps may have played a part, but it would’ve been insignificant. They were 6s videos after all, and the average American was already using over 1GB of data even back then. Instagram had about the same amount of users at the time. And their willingness to give their users more flexibility than vine was by giving users 15s videos and the ability to monetise was all it took. It wasn’t helped by twitter giving zero shits about vine. Which kinda makes sense, they had their own video thing going.