df
@df
There's a reason telegram mini apps mostly suck, although telegram is a protocol and has hundreds of millions of daily active human users it's not a credibly neutral protocol, and is controlled by a for profit company with the same name there's a lesson in there
10 replies
1 recast
34 reactions
Stephan
@stephancill
i think there are more telling reasons tbh - no feed for miniapps to leverage for distribution - no open social graph - TON is a ghost chain (probably bc devex is terrible) credible neutrality is important for long term sustainability but there is lots of precedent for thriving mini app ecosystems on centralized platforms e.g. facebook, discord, and maybe twitter/reddit if you consider third party apps in general
2 replies
1 recast
11 reactions
df
@df
you're right, if they gave more distribution, there'd be better apps. But many devs don't forget so easily what Facebook/twitter/reddit did. Those precedents were a long time ago and I don't think they'd thrive the same way again, given the platform risks we expect today
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Andrei O.
@andrei0x309
There's also the reason that the subset of users who just want the social experience and don't that to interact with apps is far larger than those who want to interact with apps. Most people that have installed Telegram have not installed it for the apps. As an anecdote, I can exemplify me, that while I didn't use Telegram too much over the years, from all my Telegram usage, apps, don't account even for 0.2%, I am sure I am not the only one. There's a fine balance with apps, that depends a lot on your audience, it's not out of the realm of possibility that insisting strongly on apps integration can lead to an unwanted outcome of hurting growth.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
