

I supported App.net with $50/year, here’s why - DanielRibeiro
http://andrewchen.co/2012/07/18/i-supported-app-net-with-50month-heres-why/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AndrewChensBlog+%28Andrew+Chen+%28%40andrewchen%29%29

======
ForrestN
After watching the video, from a consumer's perspective I have literally no
idea what the service is going to do. Is it sharing things with my friends? Is
it a clone of twitter that is more developer friendly but that costs money to
use? Is it a new HTTP? Apologies if I'm being dense but I really don't
understand.

~~~
arunoda
Me too. What is it?

Is it kind of facebook or twitter? >he mentioned it is paid? So how you
acquire customers?

Is it kind of streamed timeline as a servers?

If he can't tell me what it does in 1 min, I never ever gonna pre-order or
back it up.

------
CodeCube
"App.net has the potential to be something more fundamental, like the web
(HTTP) or email (SMTP)."

Unfortunately, I have my reservations about this ... both of those protocols
are, by definition, decentralized. They don't depend on a specific 3rd party
provider as is the case with app.net (unless I'm misunderstanding their
proposal). That definitely seems like the biggest weakness with app.net,
especially for people who want it to become a ubiquitous piece of
infrastructure.

Don't get me wrong, I'm excited for app.net, and I hope they really deliver
... I've had several ideas where a generic 'feed' would be quite useful.

~~~
nkwiatek
It reminded me of this comic: <http://xkcd.com/927/>

Add one more private feed company to the pile.

------
southpolesteve
"App.net has the potential to be something more fundamental, like the web
(HTTP) or email (SMTP)"

To do this, wouldn't you need to abandon the centralized server? Neither of
these services are paid products (the hosting is paid).

A big reason that services like twitter, Facebook, and linkedin work at all is
that they are centralized. Value is derived from all the accounts and data
being in one place. Arguably THE reason that HTTP and SMTP work is that they
are decentralized. Anyone can implement the protocol on any server.

I don't really see how app.net can straddle this divide. From what I can tell,
the current aim is to be a centralized service that has an api. That still
sounds to me like a paid twitter with a less restrictive api. Seems to me the
focus needs to actually be on an open protocol. One that any server can
implement to display a feed[1].

[1] RSS? Maybe with some more bells and whistle.

~~~
southpolesteve
Another thought:

Seems like what App.net should be doing is designing and promoting an open
protocol for feeds and then become global indexer of those feeds. Of course,
Google might give them some trouble. I am sure Google is chomping at the bit
to index the next evolution of the web.

------
reedlaw
Am I correct that App.net is to Twitter what Vimeo is to Youtube? That is, a
paid service with no ads. If so, why not just launch the service like any
other web company? They can bootstrap with paying first customers. As a web
developer myself I know how expensive a project like this can be, but I don't
see why I should pledge before the service is even launched. How do I know
I'll even like what they build?

~~~
voidfiles
It's always hard to find a market for your product. This is one way to make
sure there is a market before building a product.

~~~
reedlaw
True, but it's not a competitive advantage in this age of countless social
networks to ask for $50 before launch. And to overcome the bias towards non-
paid services there will have to be some serious advantages. If it's just
Twitter with a better API I can only conceive paying $5 a year for personal
use.

~~~
voidfiles
I am not so sure that is the case. Kevin Kelly wrote about having 1000 true
fans. I think his argument works here too.

[http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/03/1000_true_fan...](http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/03/1000_true_fans.php)

If you think about how Twitter needs to reach 100 of millions if not billions
of users to possibly become sustainable, or figure out how to squeeze more
money out of the users they have. Then compare that to the App.net proposal.
Especially the part about making the user the customer. Then you can see how
having a small set of faithful users might be more sustainable.

Dalton wrote more about this in his post: <http://daltoncaldwell.com/an-
audacious-proposal>

disclaimer: I work for App.net, but this post represents my own views.

------
obilgic
I watched the video 5 times yesterday and 2 times today, I still have no idea
what the product is, only thing I know is that it is a paid service with no
ads, I feel like idiot.

~~~
voidfiles
Have you read this <http://daltoncaldwell.com/an-audacious-proposal>

~~~
Produce
Even after that it's still not clear. So it's a messaging service without ads?
Uhh... So what? How is this audacious or fundamental to the web in any way,
shape or form? It just sounds like a Twitter rip off with a different business
model. I'm not even sure what the business model is supposed to be except that
it's 'not ads'. What a confusing pile of confusion this project is.

------
andrew_null
Hi, OP here. I failed on the title, it's $50/year not month. I fixed it on my
blog but now it's too late :(

------
sylvinus
Looking at how much they raised until now, I'd say that if they don't have
some powerful communication relays planned for the next 2 weeks they won't
make it to $500k.

I don't know whether this is due to the fact that they're not on Kickstarter
or that the project is just not viral/exciting/relevant enough.

------
madprops
Isn't this kinda the goal of Status.net?

~~~
frewsxcv
This is what I don't understand. Status.net is a great, open,
decentralized/federated platform but we still have developers reinventing the
wheel. I see why I should support App.net when they haven't said anything
about how open their platform will be.

------
wylie
At first I was skeptical, but look at how successful Facebook's Open Graph is
for a range of "social" platforms. Facebook is a pain to develop for, so if
app.net is significantly easier it would make me think twice about integrating
into Facebook first.

~~~
andrewhillman
The reason why you develop for FB first is because they have the users. Are
you going to develop for app.net first if the users are not using app.net? I
think it is really risky to build ontop of an API that has few users. What if
you dedicate the time integrating app.net and then 10 months later they decide
to fold. I integrated picplzs API and a few months later they decided to fold
the service. Complete waste of time.

------
arihant
I hope they really do an awesome job on implementing this. Nobody wants
another OpenID or Diaspora (not that they were bad projects, but it just shows
how disconnected hackers can be from masses). I would hate this thing to end
up as a hacker's toy.

------
codesimple
If we're talking real-time feed... I think app.net's idea is a step in the
right direction. However decentralized architecture will take time. The first
step is to create a generic feed experience.

We are actually starting to roll out <http://friendbox.io> \- A real-time
social platform for apps. Ultimately aiming to create an instant feed for any
mobile game or app. Will be open source so you could design and share UI's,
flows etc.

Don't back us, just join us :) <https://developer.friendbox.io/signup>

------
zacharyvoase
> (Note that I don’t actually know what it’s going to be, I’m just writing
> about what I hope it will be!)

I wonder how many other people are kvelling about what they hope it will be.

> Today, feeds are owned by companies, but what if they don’t have to be?

Well, wouldn't App.net _be_ the big company?

------
nagarch
So what is bad in advertising! do you think they are harm! or you dont' like!
do you advertise! or you dont advertise at all for your site! without
advertising how you get s ome traction!

~~~
Produce
Your communication style! is very unusual! even questions end with an
exclamation! am I the only one who's confused!

~~~
bcambel
! misunderstood!

~~~
nagarch
:) surprising?!

------
vipervpn
$50? With all the cake he's making? Maybe there really is a depression out
there.

