Meta's Threads App Has 'Just Under' 100 Million Monthly Active Users, Says Zuckerberg (9to5mac.com) 23
"Threads is officially a success," writes long-time Slashdot reader destinyland. 9to5Mac reports: During Meta's quarterly earnings call today, CEO Mark Zuckerberg offered an update on the Threads, saying that the service has "just under" 100 million monthly active users. When Threads launched in July, the app quickly rocketed to having 100 million users within just a few days. While that growth is believed to have slowed down, as expected when something takes off so quickly, Zuckerberg says the service is currently at almost 100 million active users. Note the difference in terms, too. Having 100 million "users" is one thing, while having 100 million monthly active users is quite different -- and more impressive.
The number is also impressive when you consider that Threads isn't available to the millions of people who live in the European Union. As noted by The Verge, Zuckerberg also reiterated today that Meta's goal is to turn Threads into a "billion-person public conversations app" that is "a bit more positive" than some of the competition. According to Zuckerberg, Threads is on the way to achieving that goal.
The number is also impressive when you consider that Threads isn't available to the millions of people who live in the European Union. As noted by The Verge, Zuckerberg also reiterated today that Meta's goal is to turn Threads into a "billion-person public conversations app" that is "a bit more positive" than some of the competition. According to Zuckerberg, Threads is on the way to achieving that goal.
A "bit more positive"? (Score:3)
Meta's goal is to turn Threads into a "billion-person public conversations app" that is "a bit more positive" than some of the competition.
Yeah... Let's not try to make it leaps and bounds better than Twitter. The bar is very low and it is Facebook after all.
When people link to threads (Score:5, Interesting)
When news orgs, blogs, etc, start linking to thread posts instead of Xitter posts, then I will believe it's a success.
And I do think it will be a success. It is backed by a highly profitable company while Xitter is looking to paid subscriptions to make up for their budget shortfalls.
That said, no matter who wins, we all lose. Social media is simply cancerous to human civilization. We would all be better off if Xitter and Facebook/Threads all failed.
Re: (Score:1)
Social media is simply cancerous to human civilization
I recently discovered that it doesn't have to suck. You really should give Mastodon a try: it really is what Twitter should be it if wasn't run by Big Data and psychopathic billionaires.
The big problem with social media the way it's been done so far is that the social part of it is more or less simulated and manipulated to extract as much monetizable data out of the people who patronize the service. That's why so many people engage in so much socialization online and end up feeling so lonely: the human inte
What instead of full-text search on Mastodon? (Score:2)
You really should give Mastodon a try
I have an account on PMG, a Mastodon server. (I'm refraining from self-promotion for the moment.) One problem I've run into with Mastodon is its lack of full-text search. This prevents me from being able to find what other users have been saying about a topic unless I somehow manage to correctly guess the hashtag that other users have used for that topic. How do other Mastodon users work around this?
Re: (Score:2)
I've started seeing links to threads in discord these days. This especially since linking Twitter no longer does the preview (you have to use vxtwitter)
Re: (Score:2)
When news orgs, blogs, etc, start linking to thread posts instead of Xitter posts, then I will believe it's a success.
Xitter has always had two roles. Its works as a social network for people to chat with friends and it also works as a service for people to post announcements to the general world. The social network aspect does a good job of filtering and promoting the most interesting announcements, though it also mean that people are occasionally chatting with friends and part of their conversation goes unexpectedly viral.
Either way, new orgs, blogs, etc, link to Xitter because of the announcement feature. But Threads ha
Re: (Score:2)
When news orgs, blogs, etc, start linking to thread posts instead of Xitter posts, then I will believe it's a success.
You're defining success only by what you think the purpose of Threads to be. If $100million people are using Threads without any such corporate links then maybe you go that purpose wrong. It's like saying I will consider McDonalds a success only when they offer a medium rare tomahawk steak on their menu.
That said you weren't getting the threads link because at present it doesn't exist. Threads was snap rolled out without even a website to access it, much less the ability to share / embed content or track en
Must be a cool, secret club (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, no wonder I don't hear much about this "Threads" app, it's because you're not on it!
Re: (Score:2)
I am not on it
Are you sure? Do you really *know* you're not on it?
Define Active... (Score:3)
Re:Define Active... (Score:4, Informative)
Monthly Active Users is actually a well-defined term. It's defined as
the number of unique users who engage with an app or website within a predefined 30-day period.
https://www.appsflyer.com/glos... [appsflyer.com]
So yes, if someone visits once this month, they are included in that number. And yes, if your grandparents accidentally click that link, they too are counted.
This is a better measure than "number of users" because that number may include people who haven't used an app or service in years.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a Twitter account set up back in 2010 or so but I haven't logged in or posted anything in years.
I do occasionally come across to a XneeTwitter link which I do click on.
So... does that count me as an "active user"?
If I cancel and delete my account will I still be counted as an "active user" when I click on a link?
Re: (Score:2)
So... does that count me as an "active user"?
Oh you'd better believe it does! They're going to count you as an "active user" if there's any way the marketing department can call you an active user.
Even if you delete your account, you can still be considered a user, because they can track you based on your IP address.
Re: (Score:2)
If your grandparents accidentally click on a threads link are they 'active users'? If someone visits once a month are they 'active'?
Yes and yes, obviously. They need those inflated statistics to make advertisers think they'll have an audience.
Re: (Score:2)
If your grandparents accidentally click on a threads link are they 'active users'? If someone visits once a month are they 'active'?
Yes, but they also have to have an account to be in that stat.
Re: (Score:2)
If your grandparents accidentally click on a threads link are they 'active users'? If someone visits once a month are they 'active'?
I think it consists mainly of people who actively regret saying (in 2020) that "private social media companies are great! They should do whatever they want!"
A very skewed definition (Score:3)
Just because someone looks at something once a month doesn't mean they actively "engage" with it. Or give half a fuck about it.
How many here search for an answer in google, find a link to it on Reddit, Twitter or Facebook, click on the link, click away all the "would you please sign in" popups, read the answer they were looking for, then close it and don't look back?
According to this statistics, you're one of their "active users".
Because Facebook is so much better than Twitter (Score:2)