Meta's freshest text-based social media sensation, Threads, caused quite a commotion during its grand unveiling.
After teasing a possible alternative to Twitter, Meta finally introduced Threads on July 5, and the response was positively charged.
Keen to break free from Elon Musk's Twitter, complete with its irksome rate limits and contentious updates, users swarmed to Threads, amassing a staggering 100 million sign-ups in a mere five days.
Threads swiftly gained a reputation as one of the fastest-growing social media platforms, though recent reports have cast a shadow over its seemingly meteoric ascent.
Despite the initial fervor, it seems the initial luster is fading for some, as fewer than half of those 100 million users remain actively engaged after signing up.
Threads' daily active users have plummeted by over half, shrinking from 49 million to 23.6 million within a single week.
Threads' audience constitutes approximately 22 percent of Twitter's size.
The bulk of Threads' downloads originated from India (33 percent), trailed closely by Brazil (22 percent), and the US (16 percent).
Threads version 1 appears to have skipped over some crucial Twitter features.
Where's the direct messaging function?
And what about the 'for you' tab to curate user consumption?
Threads leaving us hanging!
Twitter holds the live breaking news domain, cementing its status as the ultimate go-to for millions, be it politics or showbiz.
Anonymous avatars are Twitter's secret ingredient, allowing users to embrace an air of mystery.
Meanwhile, Threads has cozied up to Instagram, shedding the option for anonymity.
Attracting Threads users was as easy as pie since they just invited all 1.8 billion Instagram users to jump on board.
Meta's already inundated with more users than they can handle, so what's the raison d'être for Threads?
Even the Taliban seems to prefer Threads.
Threads appears to lack that awe-inspiring factor. It's akin to fortune cookies aspiring to be motivational, yet lacking the exhilaration of Twitter's drama.