

How App.net Plans To Power The Next Viral Social App  - sk2code
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/510516/how-appnet-plans-to-power-the-next-viral-social-app/

======
lkrubner
Right now a lot of the folks on App.net are worried about the future of
App.net. This conversation (from a week ago) was interesting:

<https://alpha.app.net/po/post/2549224#2546963>

Some highlights:

steven_aquino I'm still confused as to why ADN is doomed.

jonf @steven_aquino cause only 6% of the users post on a daily basis, and
we've only had 7,000 new users in the last 3 and a half months compared to
23,000 the first 3 months.

jonf @steven_aquino are 2000 users enough to keep it going?

lkrubner @alicia @steven_aquino - is ADN doomed? Where do you think we are on
this curve? <http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2012/03/the-startup-curve.html>

alicia @lkrubner Trough of sorrow.

alicia @duerig The more we wait, the more we can't replace the people who drop
out. You don't wait for the story to be complete; you do it now because every
delay costs.

saket @orian @duerig @alicia @steven_aquino @jonf After the original push for
funding, my feeling is that ADN has turned away from focussing on "an ad-free
social network" and is putting greater focus on ADN as an API for new social
services.

blenderhead @saket @orian I think a more pressing issue is new member
retention. Take care of that and word of mouth takes care of the rest. I still
feel it’s hard for most folks to jump in to the flow here without current
user-initiated engagement.

konrad @saket @orian In a way, app.net feels like “the old internet” to me.
What Usenet was in its heyday, before Endless September. So app.net really is
infrastructure – and the people who are there is what is actually appealing.

saket @mattischrome Thanks. :) To boil it down: either aggressively
market/drive/promulgate the _user_ community, or the API & get those killer
apps built so new users get pulled in. The seeming waiting is killing ADN.

saket @po I'd agree if there was some magic social service being developed
that'd make ADN the hot new place to be on the internets. Maybe that dev is
walking around somewhere, or that project is being built right now. But I'm
here for the community, not the API

saket ADN and it's API seems to be built on the concept of "build it and they
shall come". It's not a bad ideal, but what to do if no one does come?

po @saket Then that's it. It ends. We save $36 a year :)

alicia @teawithcarl I don't see the level of effort needed, which is leading
me to think that Alpha was created as a test, not meant to be permanent.
Perhaps its demise is factored in. And that's perfectly okay. ADN is more than
Alpha. 2/2 @duerig

bashfulpixie @prometheus so if impression is Twitter and ADN are the same, why
pay for one when other is FREE? That is the problem: Non-ADN users thing ADN
is just another twitter, with a LOT fewer users that costs money to use. So
question is: WHY?

\------------------

There are 2 ways to interpret the above conversation:

1.) App.net is doomed because its growth has slowed and it still has less than
30,000 members.

2.) App.net has a bright future because its membership is so dedicated and
smart and working hard to figure out how to make it a success.

~~~
RobAley
For most people, it doesn't solve a pain point they have. This type of social
network, for most people, is simply just nice to have, but not worth paying
for.

For some people, it's exactly what they need and solves their pain (or at
least would if there are sufficient number of other users). But there's not
enough of them, and the low number of such users isn't enough to sustain a
commercial company or a social community.

------
taylorbuley
App.net is one of the only tech services I've paid for and from which I'd like
my money back. I'm assuming they don't do pro-rated refunds for a reason.

~~~
bitcartel
Is this from an end-user or developer perspective?

~~~
taylorbuley
A marketer from App.net reached out to me so I figured I'd share below what I
told him. This is my experience, and I doubt it's representative of the
majority of people. I was merely venting frustration about a refund process
that (apparently) requires a special incantation via email support.

As for feedback, from an end-user experience I have not found the product very
compelling, certainly given the price. The API is great but that doesn't
really matter if I'm not interested in using the product. When I signed up
amid the hype I guess I misunderstood the product and in the meantime hoped it
to evolve into something it has not -- namely, an infrastructure-y social
layer that I could build into other apps and not a closed social network with
a high barrier to entry.

------
tracker1
Without at least a limited free tier, I don't see App.net taking off... I do
like some of the things they've done, even paid for a year developer sub, but
don't plan on continuing.. just isn't worth it to me.

~~~
mcrider
Maybe they're just limiting their growth right now? I would agree that a
dropbox revenue model in the future would be a lot better (especially
considering how much they're comparing themselves to dropbox).

------
mattquiros
I never really understood the hype around App.net. It's a product that doesn't
solve any problem or pain point, neither does it address any need or want that
Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Google+ can't fix. And those for are free.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
It's an ideological product. Ideological products can work if the
psychological benefits to adhering to the ideology outweigh the price premium,
e.g. Tom's shoes. App.net, it appears, espouses a libertarian hacker ideology.
It got a lot of people excited in the libertarian hacker community - there is
your hype. The psychological value, however, has failed to clear the price
premium.

~~~
greghinch
Well, in the Tom's shoes comparison, if I want other shoes, they still cost
money. Comparing to what I would consider fairly fashionable shoes (which I
would include Tom's in), the premium is not too great.

On the other hand, App.net is a matter of paying at all vs not. The threshold
from free to even $1 is quite large (see: iOS App Store)

------
greghinch
I will probably get downvoted for this, but I still don't get App.net. Can
someone explain to me how I would actually convince all my friends to jump
ship from other social networks and pay money to do effectively the same
thing?

~~~
HardCode
This is why App.Net will fail.

You will find it hard, rather impossible, to convince young adults, college
students, and parents to pay for a service that's already provided for free--
especially when the paid service is a dead-end.

I don't like Facebook, but I have an account to talk with friends and shoot
the shit with people I don't want to have a personal relationship with. If all
those friends were not there (as is the case with App.Net), what would I do?
Play with all the cool features all day? Tell people how cool it is to "own"
my content?

If people do not come, I will never come. See the catch-22?

App.Net should cut it now. AWESOME idea, but will not happen.

------
jeena
It is so weird to read stuff like: "When these apps get acquired [like
Instagram did by Facebook], users don’t get to choose how to access their
data" but no mention about what happens if app.net gets acquired like
Instagram did by Facebook.

And then "openness and control over your own social-media content" how is it
more open then Facebook or Twitter where you, exactly like on App.net, can
download your content as a JSON file or something like that but you can't do
anything with it anymore after that. You can't just go to a different provider
and you can't either host it yourself, like you can for example with email,
because then you can't play with the other users anymore. You have either to
stay and pay or leve and make your data worthless, just some JSON file on your
computers hard drive. That is not openess and control over your own social-
media content, that is exactly the opposite, it is exactly what Facebook and
Twitter do too.

If you really are interested in openess and controll over your own social-
media content then you will need to take a different approach. I myself like
how Tent ( <https://tent.io> ) does it. There you're really in controll. If
you don't like one provider for whatever reason, just move your content
automatically to some other provider, or even, like I do, host your own server
without any drawbacks. You still have your network of friends you still get
their updates, you still have the data you put into it, you still can use the
same applications, etc.

------
cnahr
The trouble with proprietary social networks is not just that they mostly rely
on advertising but that they are proprietary. So is app.net and you have to
pay for it, too. Why would I pay to be confined in yet another (and very
small) walled garden?

------
taylorlapeyre
Meanwhile: [http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/30/3933144/dropbox-unveils-
so...](http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/30/3933144/dropbox-unveils-social-photo-
sharing-easier-photo-management-and)

------
dantiberian
Ignoring all of the other facets of app.net, because it's a paid service this
almost by definition limits it's virality. I can't imagine that Vine or
Instagram would have taken off if it required a subscription of $36/year or
$5/month.

Secondly, what is the benefit to the app developers themselves? Platform lock-
in is one of the strongest tools that they have to wield, why would they
willing give that up to avoid paying for an S3 bucket?

------
gfodor
a great example of a solution in search of a problem. maybe i'll be eating my
words but everything app.net does continues to scream that they are living in
a bubble where many people actually care about things like data portability
and privacy. few people do. they can carve out a niche perhaps but most things
i hear about app.net is how they are going to take over the world. i'm not
seeing it.

~~~
HardCode
There's no "niche", I want to talk with my friends, not a bunch of people
talking about security. You know?

------
mortdeus
They dont even need to remain a paid subscription service if they created an
html5/JS/webGL based appstore that would integrate closely to their service.
Imagine a fb where you could install custom widgets into the interface that
more reflected your personal tastes.

~~~
ihuman
Like the old facebook, durring the era of Superpoke and SuperWall?

------
manidoraisamy
App.net probably generated too much hype initially and attacked a broader
market. If it has to focus on a narrow market who are willing to pay, what
would that be?

------
loceng
All of the other 'backup' storage providers seem to be going in this
direction. It'll be a battle to the lowest cost system. Free usually attracts
the most people.

------
adjin
app.net is just a cool name

~~~
lucian1900
It's a terrible name. It has nothing to do with apps.

~~~
_djo_
I agree that app.net is an awkward name, but you're wrong about it not being
about apps: It's developed explicitly as a platform on top of which apps can
be built. Hence the File API.

The Twitter-like interface you see when going to the site is Alpha, an app
built on top of the app.net services. Similarly there are apps like Patter
which go in other directions, creating an IRC-like environment.

------
teawithcarl
Dalton is very patient, damn frugal, and smart. His API programming team is
off-the-charts talented (essentially 14 Stanford and Carnegie Mellon guys),
and here's the important part - they get along very, very well. So, the team
is tight, and thinking long term.

They've got a rock-solid cash position, and I wouldn't be surprised for Marc
Andreessen to re-invest after 2 years, just to own a piece of this flex
infrastructure for such a small $ amount.

Today's announcement is exactly what's next. Building more ways to "roll your
own social network". The API is amazingly rich - the developers love it.

For example, messaging is far beyond Twitter's broken DM mechanism. The API
allows you to DEFINE messaging protocols, and uniquely build a social network
with a distinct message system. It's software-definable, via the API.

What's actually happened in the first 5-1/2 months is that the "core API" is
finally finished. They've actually unbundled all the core social 2.0
infrastructures.

Watch for more creative "edge API" ideas (like this social Dropbox) to come
out, now that the core team of 14 is freeing up to invent.

~~~
neumann_alfred
I could swear I read this exact same comment, word for word, in the last few
days on HN.

~~~
J-H
He posted the same comment earlier on the App.net File announcement

