Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
If you're actively building a new v1 frame and not a v2 frame, why? Either reply publicly here or send me a private DC. Goal is to better understand what people are missing from v2. Reminder, v2 frames offer the ability to: - run a full mobile web app - users can add / save a frame to Warpcast (and other clients) - developers can send notifications to users in Warpcast
18 replies
22 recasts
168 reactions
Zach
@zherring
I have yet to see a simple elevator pitch for what frames 2 enables that I can't do with frames v1 (besides "more" (not sure I need that from WC yet)). I've seen demo videos and frames, but my app => WC imagination is already tightly scoped around a V1, and I haven't had the time to really dig into the lift::opportunity difference with V2.
2 replies
0 recast
6 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Elevator pitch in my original cast, but to restate: - Functionality: *any* mobile web app will now work as a frame (vs. static images) - Retention: ability to install and send native mobile notifications - Better mobile transactions: more reliable and faster
2 replies
0 recast
9 reactions
Zach
@zherring
Sorry yeah noted in the reply, first time I saw it broken down like that, thank you!
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Zach
@zherring
Do you have metrics for how much likelier a person is to click a button in feed, versus open up a separate web app frame in WC? I don't have any metrics, but my instinct is tap a button in feed is a lower lift. There are niceties to a V2 frame with pack.limo that I think I would skip if it means they're more likely to impulse swap in their feed straight out.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
