The most popular app for sharing photos from iOS devices is Instagram, which allows users to take photos, apply an effects filter (if they desire), and then post them to the Instagram website, where they can be viewed by anyone with the link. A new contender in the photo sharing arena debuted in March: Color, an app that allows users to not just share photos with others, but lets them see all photos in the immediate area. Privacy concerns aside, this is meant to allow the user a more complete picture of their immediate area, which can be a lot of fun in social settings. The problem is that it is dependent on there being sufficient users in the immediate area. It works just fine in places like the Mission District of San Francisco or Williamburg in Brooklyn. Jersey City? Not so much.
Color itself warns you not to "use Color alone," but that operates on the premise that all of your friends have iOS devices, have downloaded Color, and would want to spend their time with you looking at pictures you all just took. Color received a lot of flack for its limitations, as well as leaving a lot of people confused as to how they managed to raise $41 million in funding. In response to these criticisms, Color released an update that fixed some of the problems: they added text labels to the formerly unmarked icons, and added the ability to see photos that are nearby and in the user's history. Unfortunately, this doesn't do anything in areas with low population density (or low iOS density) so many users have still found no use for the app.
What's a user to do? They could always wait for the install base of Color to improve, or for the app to add more features. It also looks as if Apple is looking to create their own social photo app with iOS 5. This is a rumor largely based around a user digging around the code for iOS 4.3, but if anyone were to leverage the social possibilities of the iOS family, it would be the company that designed it.
Comments