Essentially, Facebook Camera is a tool for Facebook. Sure, so is Instagram, but it doesn't have the "Facebook" name, a name that's now become all but synonymous with social media. And I'm sure Zuckerberg and his minions want to keep it that way, even if it means releasing an inferior app.
NEWS: iPads Could Scan Palms for Passwords
On the flip side of the question, why would Facebook buy Instagram if they were working on a photo app that "launches really fast" and "scrolls like butter"? As Warren mentioned, it all has to do with virility.
"People love, use and evangelize Instagram. It has the brand," she wrote. "It's the same reason Google bought YouTube even though it had Google Video. Instagram became synonymous with 'photo app' and that's not something you can just recreate.
"Moreover, Instagram was a truly mobile-first offering - which only allows users to upload photos from a mobile interface - and that zeroes in at the heart of Facebook's issues with mobile," Warren said.
"You could fairly ask, 'why didn't Facebook fix its mobile apps first?'" my DNews colleague Rob Pegoraro mused. "I don't know why - but, remember, this company took its sweet time to ship an iPad app, and its Android app only got to a position of feature parity with the iOS release relatively recently. I guess those are more complex creations than they seem," he said.