Why do People Choose BlueSky Over Mastodon?
Why do People Choose BlueSky Over Mastodon?
I's heard news that BlueSky has been growing a lot as Xitter becomes worse and worse, but why do people seem to prefer BlueSky? This confuses me because BlueSky does not have any federalization technologies built into it, meaning it's just another centralized platform, and thus vulnerable to the same things that make modern social media so horrible.
And so, in the hopes of having a better understanding, I've come here to ask what problems Mastodon has that keep people from migrating to it and what is BlueSky doing so right that it attracts so many people.
This question is directed to those who have used all three platforms, although others are free to put out their own thoughts.
(To be clear, I've never used Xitter, BlueSky or Mastodon. I'm asking specifically so that I don't have to make an account on each to find out by myself.)
Edit:
Edit2: (changed the wording a bit on the last part of point 1 to make my point clearer.)
From reading the comments, here are what seems to be the main reasons:
- Federation is hard
The concept of federation seems to be harder to grasp than tech people expected. As one user pointed out, tech literacy is much less prevalent than tech folk might expect.
On Mastodon, you must pick an instance, for some weird "federation" tech reason, whatever that means; and thanks to that "federation" there are some post you cannot see (due to defederalization). To someone who barely understands what a server is, the complex network of federalization is to much to bare.
BlueSky, on the other hand, is simple: just go to this website, creating an account and Ta Da! Done! No need to understand anything else.
The federalized nature of Mastodon seems to be its biggest flaw.
The unfamiliar and more complex nature of Mastodon's federalization technology seems to be its biggest obstacle towards achieving mass adoption.
- No Algorithm
Mastodon has no algorithm to surface relevant posts, it is just a chronological timeline. Although some prefer this, others don't and would rather have an algorithm serving them good quality post instead of spending 10h+ curating a subscription feed.
- UI and UX
People say that Mastodon (and Lemmy) have HORRIBLE UX, which will surely drive many away from Mastodon. Also, some pointed out that BlueSky's overall design more closely follows that of Twitter, so BlueSky quite literally looks more like pre-Musk Xitter.
For me it's that more people I wanted to follow are now on blue sky but I have both. I have been liking the community on blue sky a little more.
I never used twitter though so what do I even know lol
I'd say its because less people probably know of mastodon then bluesky, since on Twitter everyone seems to be making a bluesky account but no one a mastodon account which would result in less people knowing about it.
Twitter is evil
Mastodon has bad UX
BlueSky is fresh
Most people don't know much, and don't care that they don't know much. Half of US adults can't read at a 6th grade level. They don't care about and probably do not understand complex topics.
That's it. They just want cat gifs, and that's the end of the thought.
I knew someone who was smart and successful and politically aware. She didn't care about any of this. She was tired from work and just wanted the familiar ease or twitter. Trying to figure out which server to sign up for and finding content was too much work.
A lot of people have executive dysfunction. Making a choice is hard.
Simple - because it's not Twitter.
Bluesky has brand recognition (founded by the same dude as Twitter), more people and "feels like twitter", in the sense of what you see, more than mastodon. Also, news outlets seem to be migrating there.
Mastodon (and pleroma, misskey, etc) is seen as a place for weirdos and techies, with "nothing interesting going on". Several people mentioned this already one way or another, but that most servers/instances are "specific" about whatever means that people will feel that they might miss out on something by choosing the wrong server.
The only reason is the sign up/UX thing. Maaaaybe. And now a critical mass is there
Easy.
-
No one outside of the fediverse bubble gives a fuck about federation. It solves a problem no one has, and offers no real solutions to problems users have.
-
Mastodon offers nothing on the Twitter experience outside of "but it's federated"
-
same reason we just elected donald fucking trump. people will always take the easy option that makes them feel good.
BlueSky doesnt club you with nonstop Linux nerds
Mainstream tech adoption needs a neat clean wrapper imo. I think that's the biggest missing piece to fediverse, people want pretty, simple, plug and play.
If a wrapper like that could be put on top of/combined with all the good qualities that the fediverse offers, I think it would create optimal conditions for slow adoption.
Because the mastodon evangelists are horrible.
Back when there was any question of what platform to migrate to? Threads and bluesky were "Get an invite and make an account"
Mastodon was people insisting that EVERYONE needed to understand what federation is and the underlying philosophy. When really they should have just said "Sign up for one of these instances. It is like email where it doesn't really matter what provider you have". Countless times I tried to explain to folk on a message board or discord and would say "Just make an account on one of these four or five instances". And, like clockwork, someone would "well ackshually" me and insist that people can't use Mastodon without understanding the fundamental concept of federation and how picking the right instance is important and people can just delete and remake their accounts until they are satisfied.
So when it was time for the big influencers to move? They went to where people were already congregating and where they didn't need to host an educational seminar to tell someone how to make an account.
the discovery on bsky is pretty nice, i dont see an equivalent on my masto instance
I'm on both Mastodon and Bluesky. To me, Mastodon's biggest problem is its refusal to have an algorithm to surface popular content. Yes there are problems with algorithms, but I don't have the time or inclination to read every post in chronological order. A good algorithm would show me popular posts without manipulating me for profit.
Edt: a few people have misunderstood me. I'm not proposing "Mastodon shows me stuff from people I don't follow," I'm suggesting "Mastodon shows me stuff only from people I follow, but it shows me the popular stuff first."
Personal answer: I draw art for a stupidly niche internet community. I'm a less popular artist so I go wear the community already is. I found one other artist on Mastodon and several on Bluesky.
It's lack of marketing since it is not a business, and people conflating useful optional features with confusing usage.
Everyone I know moved to bluesky, after which bluesky basically immediately sold out to crypto people. I brought up the idea of "hey, this is why I think mastodon is a lot better, because it's impossible for it to sell out entirely", to which one person lost their fucking shit and responded stating that I was "fear mongering".
This person also said they didn't care if a business owned all their data and controlled their entire life because "all their data is owned already anyway".
This same person also said that after the recent US election they "spent the night throwing up until they were dry heaving and crying".
Why they claim to not care about their life being controlled by corporate entities, but claim to care so hard about their life being controlled by a government that they say they have a physical reaction to it is a subject I haven't broached because I'm sure they wouldn't be able to see their hypocrisy if they pointed the James Webb telescope at themselves.
In a nut shell, many people are incredibly stupid and not at all interested in their best interests unless the news tells them which interests they should care about.
Just because BlueSky isn’t federated doesn’t mean it’s (totally) centralized. It uses the AT protocol which means user data lives in a separate place than the app itself. While the BlueSky app is centralized all the user data (your posts, likes, etc) live in a separate place and can be self-hosted. This means that if BlueSky went bust or something, users could easily just move to a new platform that someone would inevitably create and all of their data, likes, follows would all be there.
I agree with the other commenter's points, but one thing I think people forget to mention is that BlueSky feels like Twitter in a way Mastodon just doesn't. When I am trying to pitch Mastodon to people, I usually compare it to Tumblr because the vibes are similar.
Mastodon is also flat out hostile to influencers, and by that I mean the platform is designed to be terrible to influencers. The lack of an alogarithm means you can't game the system, no quote tweets means you get less opportunities to spread, no reply limiting means your notifications are going to be going nuts from the replies. The culture on Mastodon is difficult to game too, since people there expect thoughtful responses to their replies.
People don't care about federation. Or vendor lock-in.
I haven't tried bluesky, but mastodon seems a little broken by design. I'd you go to a post you are always told that the host server may have more replies. Things like that make it seem immature and perhaps just a bad solution compared to a monolithic approach.
If you don't like the instance (why wouldn't I?) you can just move to a different one. Yes, and restart my network. It's not really a good solution. I would like to exist on mastodon and just use some server. If I don't like it, continue somewhere else.
The federalized nature of Mastodon seems to be its biggest flaw.
Just to be devil's advocate, perhaps the federated nature of Mastodon could be its greatest strength as well. Isn't part of the point of all of this to avoid too much centralized control of social media?
Sure, Mastodon may never have as much mainstream appeal as BlueSky, but I use both. One of the reasons why I like Mastodon is precisely because I want to interact with more of a niche community on a federated platform. To interact with the masses on a platform that is more centralized, I use BlueSky.
I’m gonna echo what others have said here. The mastodon signup process is too complex, and searching for instructions just leads to “what is the fediverse and/or activitypub” explainers.
I created a mastodon account a few years ago and it was my first introduction to the fediverse. It was frustrating and I only persevered because I REALLY wanted to replace twitter.
Once I got it set up, I realized that no one who I followed on twitter was there. My feed is currently like 2 people, plus a bunch of dead accounts from people who dipped their toe in but didn’t stay.
Joining Bluesky was simple, and there were already a bunch of accounts I wanted to follow. The recent influx has increased that, and it feels a lot like old school twitter without the nazis.
People originally joined twitter (and stuck with it for so long) because that’s where everyone else is. Mastadon is too clunky join and use, so people aren’t.
Because not everyone has the same opinion.
It doesn't mean they are wrong, it just means they like different things than you.
Of course I have to ELI5 in .ml
I had to switch Mastodon instances because of leftist infighting.
People have to choose a server with mastodon, and you can't just pick any server because of the mess of defederations.