Vine was different. I just posted this on another thread couple of days ago.
>
Vine was 6 second long video clips. Comparing Vine to TikTok is somewhat like comparing TikTok to YouTube videos. They are different.
Lot of TikTok popularity has come from offering songs/lip syncing functionality (done better by their acquisition of musica.ly). That wouldn't have worked on 6 second Vines.
> Vine was 6 second long video clips. Comparing Vine to TikTok is somewhat like comparing TikTok to YouTube videos. They are different.
As an aside, it's insane to me that the differentiating feature of an entirely new video hosting platform can simply be the length of the content it supports.
The world of tech companies is truly bizarre. Why doesn't Google launch dozens of Youtube variants under their own branding with their own slightly different length restrictions to just dominate the market?
It's more than just the length. TikTok has some pretty good and simple video editing features that make it very easy to quickly produce decent quality content on your phone.
The music integration was the biggest example of this, and probably why the lip-syncing/dancing videos became so popular on the platform.
For the rest of us that don't follow social media systems closely (just looked up, I'm trusting my search results):
TikTok allows 15 second videos (only 2.5x the length of Vine videos) but also has a way to string multiple videos together for 60 seconds of play time (10x longer than Vine had).
So this is actually a pretty fair comparison (old Twitter @ 140 vs new Twitter @ 280) if you ignore stringing them together.
My sister, who uses TikTok quite a lot, referred to TikTok earlier today as "The New Vine", leading me to suspect some portion of the user base is there for similar reasons/content and that there's enough overlap for it to not be a wholly useless comparison.
