Kind of like Apple decided to keep the 16 GB iPhone and get rid of the 32 GB iPhone instead of making the 32 GB one the base model...because people really wanted that and like it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Instagram Will Shift From Chronological to Algorithm-Based Feed
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Because it WON'T ****ING WORK DAMMIT. You'll just see the popular posts first and then everything else will remain a mystery.
So you really believe that because you're the exception to the rule, the 1 in 1,000,000 user, they should design it how you work, not how the majority of the site works? They'd run off almost everyone to satisfy you. That'd be a smart business choice.
Sorry, but the "uneducated brainwashed" are the majority of users and these places are designed with the interests of the majority of users in mind, just as the iPhone, iMac, MacBook, and every Apple product is. They aren't there to satisfy you, they're created to satisfy the majority.
[doublepost=1458095227][/doublepost]
No it won't. This update says very clearly, it will show posts from the accounts you engage with most, like your best friend or brands you love, and then the rest of the updates will still be right below it in chronological order like always. Stop crying and learn to read.
But people don't Check for yourself. Go and look at the pages you follow on Facebook. How many do you not care about? Most likely there are a good number. But since you obviously didn't take the time to unfollow them, Facebook has done it for you by not showing their updates. If you don't engage with a brand, they won't show you updates from that brand (yes you can still see ads and sponsored posts because brands can target people that like them but that's a different deal).
It'd be great if people unfollowed users they didn't care about, but the data makes it clear that they will not do so. To make the user experience positive, Facebook removes posts from those you don't engage with.
This is where the fun comes in. Lots of people complain and cry about seeing baby pictures or other silly stuff non-stop on Facebook but guess what, it's being shown to them because they engage with it. They stop and look at it, they Like it, they comment on it. If they scroll by (don't stop because that's an engagement signal too), don't like it, don't comment on it and you won't see more of it (yes it does take a bit of time before that changes). The truth is, those that cry about seeing too many baby pictures are the people that comment and 'Like' every baby picture they see.
If these algorithms were as bad as some people complain, Facebook would have driven their users off long ago, instead of having 1.44 billion active monthly users.
[doublepost=1458094580][/doublepost]
You may believe so but that's only because that's how you've used it until now. Men with horses believed they were superior even when the automobile was first introduced.
Every time there's an update to any social network we see people crying like crazy that they've ruined it. But give them a month and try to take away that update and they'd cry 10x as hard. Look at this thread. There are a ton of people crying about this even though they've never used it. They somehow know better than a social network with piles of user surveys, test groups, and million/billions of data points supporting the opposite argument.
Check how many pages I follow on FB? None. Why? Because I stopped using it because of the algorithm.
It kept defaulting to it when I click chronological after I come back. Now it's on IG, no surprise there.
If it keeps my choice as default, I'll be okay.
I don't miss any of the posts from those that I follow and care about on Instagram, let alone some outrageous 70% number.
And on Facebook the algorithm really doesn't give me things from the accounts I love the most, so perhaps getting that algorithm actually right (if that's really even doable properly in practice rather than theory) would be one of the first steps before spreading it to more places and making it the default.
However, even all that aside, even if it was showing me things I truly like and shouldn't miss, showing them to me in the order where I see something from a few hours ago followed by something two days go, then a few minutes ago, then a day ago, and then an hour ago...not the most useful way for me to see even just the things that are deemed most important to me.
[doublepost=1458095695][/doublepost]
And there's the key: essentially it will work better/best if you engage more and do it more often...they are definitely doing it for the users.
Last edited:
Well that kind of stinks, Instagram is basically going to be a popularity contest like Facebook.
Instagram today announced that it will introduce a new algorithm-based feed in the coming months, shifting from its current chronological-based feed. The move follows Twitter's announcement that it was moving to an algorithm-based feed. Instagram parent company Facebook has used an algorithm-based news feed for years.
The photo sharing company says that the new feed will be re-ordered to show moments Instagram believes users will care about the most. The algorithm will largely be based on a user's relationship to the person posting and the timeliness of their post. For instance, Instagram says if a user's favorite musician posts a video from the previous night's concert or a best friend posts a picture of a puppy, the new algorithm will ensure that the user does not miss it.
Instagram stresses that, as they begin on this process, the company only wants to optimize the order of posts. All the posts in a person's news feed will still be there, but in a different order. While it's unclear exactly when in the coming months users' feeds will begin to change, the company says that it wants to take its time to "get this right" and that they'll listen to user feedback along the way. Instagram did not mention whether the new feed will be an optional feature that allows users to opt out.
Instagram can be downloaded from the App Store for free. [Direct Link]
Article Link: Instagram Will Shift From Chronological to Algorithm-Based Feed
I only follow about 50 close friends on Instagram (I use FB for more mass engagement). I want to see every photo/video post they add in chronological order, not have some hidden and shown to me in random order.
Umm...isn't that the whole point of Instagram? To see what people are doing in the moment? To feel connected to their real-time life?
This just makes Instagram a crappy square shaped photo album.
Congrats, Facebook. You're about to ruin another stellar product.
This just makes Instagram a crappy square shaped photo album.
Congrats, Facebook. You're about to ruin another stellar product.
Well, if you want a free service, the company calls the shots.
So why are they doing this? Simple. Revenue.
Facebook/Instagram want to maximise the amount of time you spend on the site. They want you to trawl through the "newsfeed." They want you to have to scroll back and forth past multiple adverts in order to catch up with everything.
They DON'T want you to be reading the top few posts and moving on.
They will say they're prioritsing the most relevant posts, and I'm sure there is some intelligence behind it. I'm sure they're not simply scrambling up the chronological feed but let's be honest, this is being done for their benefit, not that of the users.
I know I sound like one of those ultra-liberal "illuminati confirmed!!!" conspiracy theorists (which couldn't be further from the truth!) This is just my appraisal of why these companies regularly do things that users don't want and, in any cases, are very critical of.
So why are they doing this? Simple. Revenue.
Facebook/Instagram want to maximise the amount of time you spend on the site. They want you to trawl through the "newsfeed." They want you to have to scroll back and forth past multiple adverts in order to catch up with everything.
They DON'T want you to be reading the top few posts and moving on.
They will say they're prioritsing the most relevant posts, and I'm sure there is some intelligence behind it. I'm sure they're not simply scrambling up the chronological feed but let's be honest, this is being done for their benefit, not that of the users.
I know I sound like one of those ultra-liberal "illuminati confirmed!!!" conspiracy theorists (which couldn't be further from the truth!) This is just my appraisal of why these companies regularly do things that users don't want and, in any cases, are very critical of.
instead of adding this to instagram after they have made it perfect why not test the perfecting on FB first and get everyone on board?
or better yet, give people the option, unlike how they did with removing the ability to stitch videos together.
vine just gave users the ability to view a feed by most recent, oldest, and most popular. why not do that but add another option that shows(whatever they want to call this new algorithm), or better yet the option to make a top 8 or something like myspace that makes sure you see the most important post first.
or better yet, give people the option, unlike how they did with removing the ability to stitch videos together.
vine just gave users the ability to view a feed by most recent, oldest, and most popular. why not do that but add another option that shows(whatever they want to call this new algorithm), or better yet the option to make a top 8 or something like myspace that makes sure you see the most important post first.
When are all these social media companies going to realize that they should just offer a permanent preference in their settings that allows a person to select either chronological or algorithm. I always want chronological and I should have the option to retain that.
In Facebook a lot of the good stuff I want to see don't come from the brands I interact with the most. I follow one company that announces news and great offers perhaps twice a year. But because Facebook algorithm those basically disappears. And some of my best friends post boring baby pictures. But because I interact with them in other subjects my feed still are filled with uselessness. A few friends are rarely on Facebook but when they are I don't want to miss those posts, but countless times I have and it will at times take some time to realize that Brother Facebook have decided that I will see the baby pictures again. It would have not been a big issue if I could have an option to always have "most recent" feed on, but I can't — it will eventually switch back. And Facebook do not do it just to cater for "their majority dumb users". It is because companies pays to be prioritized in the feed, but in the chronological feed that would not work. I don't make a big fuzz because usually the service is free and they need to make money, but for me the usefulness is limited now and I use Facebook rarely. Meaning also that when I do post I see that fewer people comment or like the few I like. Sometimes people ask why I never post, but I tell I do but they are simply not seeing those anymore because they are rarer.
The bottom line is: algorithms rarely work, but they make it much easier for ads to be prioritized by revenue for the social media companies.
great ... just as the stupid "Top News" on Facebook no one i know ever uses and makes no sense whatsoever with random crap just thrown together while missing out a lot of posts.
seriously, even if u go to "Most Recent" it makes no sense, all of the sudden i see a random persons "xy likes xy" but just once. if i look at someones page theres a lot more ive missed.
on top of it if i have people in a certain list their stuff doesnt seem to appear in the main feed either.
Oh and now Twitter started the same crap with their "What you've missed"
ugh!!! i can see it being somewhat useful for a Kardashian or Bieber with millions of followers but not for people that only follow peeps they actually know.
time to look into a 3rd party app just like for Facebook
edit: @OldSchoolMacGuy are you working for Facebook by any chance?
seriously, even if u go to "Most Recent" it makes no sense, all of the sudden i see a random persons "xy likes xy" but just once. if i look at someones page theres a lot more ive missed.
on top of it if i have people in a certain list their stuff doesnt seem to appear in the main feed either.
Oh and now Twitter started the same crap with their "What you've missed"
ugh!!! i can see it being somewhat useful for a Kardashian or Bieber with millions of followers but not for people that only follow peeps they actually know.
time to look into a 3rd party app just like for Facebook
edit: @OldSchoolMacGuy are you working for Facebook by any chance?
Last edited:
Not to be inflammatory at all, just a response with my personal experience. It just took me about 90 seconds of casual browsing to bring me to "two days ago" so I'd prefer a Chronological view rather than Instagram hiding pictures from low volume followers / low 'likes'. I'd guess it's harder for Instagram to datamine peoples 'best friends' on Istagram because it's a much more passive experience (unless they're logging how many milliseconds seconds you pause on a picture before scrolling on)
It's Facebook/Istagrams mistake of catering primarily to the 1% that have thousands of followed accounts. I'm not saying they shouldn't have a 'like' based option, but just make it selectable in a view tab rather than default to it. I deleted the Facebook app because they changed to this popularity system and no matter how much I tried, I couldn't default back to chronological. Maybe it's changed now, but it was just an annoyance and an insult that a computer algorithm was telling me who I should care about more.
Having said that, these are businesses and maximising clicks based on popularity is their game.
Last edited:
It's so they can control what you see in case anybody posts anything Facebook doesn't like (wrong politics).
I can't really be the only one that relies on my memory of the last photo I saw to tell me when I've scrolled down far enough to see everything new since my last visit. I thought the whole point of social media was to give you glimpses of whats going on in everyone's life, not just the ones who you (supposedly) interact with most. But apparently it's better for us all to just see what the cool kids are up to and forget about the losers.
I don't miss any... I mostly only follow people from real life, which means ~30 accounts. I miss 0%, now they get hidden and are in random order, why the **** would i want that?
First off yes, as a long time Facebook for Business user and active advertiser on FaceBook's platform I've seen them do things their users hate. I've read reports of their active engagement in testing functions that skirts the line between ethical and unethical practices. That being said, it's their product now and they can do as they please with it. The purpose of this change is entirely for prepping the feed for advertisers to "pay to play". Expect to see more adverts and sponsored posts in your "preferred" stream of content.
Oh and also, their algorithms suck. But the wealth of data they have on their users behavior and preferences is a gold mine for advertisers. Enjoy your curated Instagram stream! lol
If you follow 50 people who dont post stuff very often, chronologic order might make sense. However if you're following 200-300+ people, with half of them Insta junkies, you start missing stuff from your best friends or family members..
I would rather have this as an option, under Advanced tab or sthing. Let people choose how they want to see their own content.
Oh additionally, I'd like an extra tab where I can enter a username and follow every single move they make. Who they followed, what they liked, what they have searched, etc.
I would rather have this as an option, under Advanced tab or sthing. Let people choose how they want to see their own content.
Oh additionally, I'd like an extra tab where I can enter a username and follow every single move they make. Who they followed, what they liked, what they have searched, etc.
Last edited:
Another sign social media has peaked, companies copying bad ideas and unnecessary tweaks from each other because what else can they do? At least when Apple copies Android (or the other way around), they try to copy a good idea/feature with some tangible benefit, not something that degrades the experience, pushing you toward an alternative/competitor, if one's available. That's the current story with FB and Twitter.