Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
What Safari’s Reading List means for Instapaper (marco.org)
193 points by ankimal on June 6, 2011 | hide | past | web | favorite | 89 comments

I think marco is totally right that this can only help instapaper in the long run. Let me tell you a story from my own experience:

My partner and I created an iPad game for cats. We wanted to get some extra marketing boost so we contacted friskies (purina). In Nov (2010) I exchanged a few emails, and talked to them on the phone about our game. I sent them a video and they told us they loved the idea and they would get back to us. Then one day, silence. We didn't hear anything for months.

Then a couple weeks ago they released the Friskies "Games for Cats" which are suspiciously similar to our game. The blogosphere exploded. "Friskies releases creative iPad game for cats" "Friskies is oh so clever etc."

We were pissed. But sales improved. A lot.

I tried to track their rankings so I searched for them on the AppStore. Hmm, thats odd. I couldn't find them. It turns out /they didn't make native apps/ they were "simply" HTML5 pages on their website that you open in browser [1].

So what was/is happening is people see "Friskies iPad Game for Cats" they grab their iPad and search for "game for cats" on the AppStore and then they find our game and we profit.

Also, most people who have cats and iPads don't even think to look for a game for their cat. So by Friskies putting marketing into this they actually increase the size of the market (to be honest, I hope they run a TV commercial advertising their "ipad game for cats").

Moral #1 of the story is: BigCo might steal your idea, but they will likely mess it up and it can end up helping you.

Moral #2: high water raises all the boats

[1] I realized HTML5 is a "real" app, but most normals don't yet view it that way. They expect to find apps in an app store.

UPDATE: formatting

That's a lot different than functionality being added to the OS. What Apple is doing is effectively what MS got in trouble for. Apple is adding functionality to the OS that exists as a standalone application out of the OS (this is probaby the main reason why antivirus doesn't ship in the box with Windows).

The question MS had to answer was if this functionality was crucial to the operation of the OS. The TCP/IP stack apparently was deemed so. IE wasn't deemed crucial.

The difference between MS and Apple is that MS had a desktop monopoly. Apple has no such monopoly in mobile devices. Although if Apple keeps touting their 90% tablet market share, they could inadvertantly put themselves in the middle of antitrust crosshairs again.

I know Marco has said that he would not use legal means to stop Apple -- but he shouldn't rule it out forever. Because trust me, Apple would have no problem doing it to him.

You're engaging only a facsimile of Marco's argument, which he frames in terms of Starbucks and indie coffee houses: yes, Starbucks put a lot of coffee houses out of business, some times in a predatory fashion. But the good coffee houses often saw their sales increase, sometimes dramatically.

Apple is educating Marco's market about deferred-reading. They are inevitably going to add far more people to the total market that they'll take from Marco. As the market expands, he needs to capture smaller and smaller fractions of it to remain successful.

Meanwhile, Apple may have also done Marco a positioning favor, by establishing a low end market that he can position a niche against. He calls it the "deluxe" market now (which it is; the $5 I spent for iP is some of the best money I've spent on the app store), but that also leaves an opening for a "Pro" niche that commands an even higher price point.

I'm sure this situation leaves Marco with a lot more teeth gritting than he hoped to have. I don't want to downplay the situation. But I think Marco's got as good a shot as ever to make something big out of iP; maybe an even bigger one, albeit with more alpha.

You're confusing Microsoft's illegal anticompetitive actions with their defense.

They tried to destroy Netscape through a number of illegal means. Their defense was to argue that IE was nothing more than a component of Windows, which was and is correct. If they had merely shipped IE with Windows they wouldn't have broken any laws, but that was never really the issue; it was only the issue MS wanted people to focus on.

Not correct. See my other response. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2627487

Microsoft had a very real monopoly on personal computers, and they engaged in illegal anticompetitive practices to maintain that real monopoly, illegal practices this simply wouldn't have worked in a fair market with real alternatives for consumers and manufacturers. 

The only monopoly Apple has is a monopoly on iPhones.  Their only interest is to make their product as attractive as possible in a market jam packed with innovative alternatives, and history is filled with instances where features are added to an OS at the expense of a previous 3rd-party add-on.  

I don't think there is any comparison between Microsoft of the late 90s and any tech company today, when it comes to monopolies and anticompetitive behavior. 

Wrong product. Apple itself states it has 90% marketshare in tablets.

If I were Apple legal I would advise against explicitly stating tablet marketshare.

Why? They have not engaged in any illegal practices—at least as far as anyone here knows—to secure this position, and the tablet market is in its infancy.

If the market were years-old and Apple was buying out competitors and paying retailers to not stock alternative devices, then there would be a problem. But they're not.

Why? They have not engaged in any illegal practices—at least as far as anyone here knows—to secure this position, and the tablet market is in its infancy.

This is something that people continously get wrong. What are perfectly legal practices for a non-monopoly may no longer be legal once you're a monopoly.

For example, if Apple had a monopoly on mobile phones it might be illegal for them to block "replicated" functionality in their app store. Today its perfectly legal, but in a monopoly situation, its not.

For example, one of the things that MS was accused of was not allowing OEMs to put Netscape shortcuts on the desktop. If Windows wasn't a monopoly that's a perfect fine requirement. And as it stands today, Apple has strict requirements for what can get preinstalled on their phone/tablet by carriers -- virtually nothing.

Another thing MS was accused of by Netscape was withholding technical information. Apple does this today. In fact the Camera+ app, not only had to find technical information w/o docs, but once it did find the information, Apple removed their app from the app store. Imagine if MS removed Netscape once Netscape found the info they were looking for.

MS was also accused of "Giving Internet Explorer Away". All of these new features in iOS are basically free. Again, giving away something at below "cost" is fine if you're not a monopoly, but might be illegal when you are one.

MS was also accused of making it difficult (financially or technically) to remove IE. Again, you can't remove IE in WP7 or Safari in iPad, AFAIK. Both perfectly legal.

Now I'm not saying MS was in the clear. They were in fact a monopoly and did these things. My point though is that Apple is treading this line with the iPad. With the iPhone they're too small of a market. But with the iPad being the dominant tablet (by a huge margin), they're behavior, which would be perfectly legal for the iPhone, is now questionable.

The point is that Apple isn't a monopolist. They like to inadvertently brag that they are, but they are not, thus any comparison with Microsoft's monopoly abuse is moot.

Factors to consider would be how do you market your product and how markets are defined.

Consumer end - we are the leaders in tablets Judicial end - we represent a very small percentage or personal computers which can come in tablet form

Absolutely. But the more they say things like "post-pc", having removed the word "Computer" from their company name, and that the tablet shares an OS with the phone, but not their PC, all together would begin to make a case.

I just think they'd be prudent to be cautious.

> What Apple is doing is effectively what MS got in trouble for.

Microsoft got in trouble for telling manufacturers not to ship Netscape.

That was one aspect. Here's some notes from the Real antitrust lawsuit, note that a big part of this is "universal distribution" and "pricing" (since WMP is free).

But here's a question for you -- do you think Verizon, Walmart, or AT&T can disable any Apple provided functionality and have Instapaper run on first use? If one of them found a way to do it Jobs would shut it down so fast that they didn't know what hit them.

"Real's 64-page complaint accuses Microsoft of "tying" its Windows Media Player to its Windows operating system, shutting out competitors such as Real and instantly achieving

"virtually universal distribution." From October 2001 to March 2003, for example, Microsoft's "tying" ensured that Windows Media Player was preinstalled on about 95 percent of PCs shipped, the suit reads. By contrast, it continues, RealNetworks' digital media player was preinstalled on less than 2 percent of the estimated 207 million new PCs shipped.

RealNetworks said Microsoft has failed to share important information about the Windows code, thus hurting the performance of its RealPlayer product. For example, Microsoft refused to disclose details about certain security features, preventing Real from using them directly, according to the lawsuit.

Other charges allege that Microsoft used contractual restrictions and financial incentives to "force PC makers to accept Windows PC operating systems with the bundled Windows Media Player and to restrict the ability of PC makers to preinstall or promote competing digital media players."

According to the suit, PC makers told Real that their contracts with Microsoft kept them from removing or changing the status of a Windows Media Player; promoting RealOne subscription services during the first run of a new PC; and providing a desktop icon for Real Networks. "Microsoft's agreements with PC makers are exclusionary and anticompetitive," the suit concludes.

The suit also says Microsoft's pricing practices stifle competition. It alleges that Microsoft effectively forced competitors to provide free versions of their software to compete with Windows Media Player--a practice that has resulted in significant losses for RealNetworks. "Microsoft's below cost pricing, separately or together with Microsoft's other exclusionary conduct, poses a dangerous probability of creating a monopoly in the digital media markets," RealNetworks said in the filing. "

The key difference is that MS _started_ to act like this when they achieved monopoly status, but Apple has behaved, in iOS context, consistently from the very beginning. You cannot demand Apple to allow preloading something when they are monopoly, if they did not allow that _never_ and were all the time very public about mentioned allowance policy.

Here's hoping Apple doesn't use their 95% market share in smartphones to force everyone to adopt their plain text website view as a standard.

Here's hoping they do get to 95% market share.

That lawsuit only got started after Microsoft had already lost the Netscape case, where their use of similar techniques was already ruled to be illegal.

But will people be unsatisfied with Reading List enough to bother looking for alternatives on the App Store?

Non-Apple platform sync seems to be the biggest missing feature, but what else is there that folks would pay for?

Figuring out what else Reading List is missing that users would pay for is precisely what Marco is going to have to do.

But that's where the broadened visibility will help significantly. With whole new classes of people discovering this category of App, wishing that it did X, and searching around for alternatives that provide X, he'll probably see an uptick in people asking him about features like X that he's in a far better position to quickly iterate around than Apple is.

Great point!

Off the top of my head, the big ones are offline reading, keeps your furthest-read position (especially across devices), Kindle integration. I'd pay $5 for any one of those alone.

The new features in 3.0 that Marco seems to think are the differentiating features are the ability to see friends' saved articles and editorial content. The editorial picks are pretty good, but nothing that you couldn't get with Reading List. The social integration works if you know people who have Instapaper.

But those first three are really the nicest bits, in my opinion.

Instapaper also works from any browser on any platform. I don't see that happening with Reading list anytime soon.

My partner and I created an iPad game for cats.

I have to derail here. What inspired you to do this? Sounds like a fascinating idea.

It was part art, part joke. It turns out, it also fulfilled a real "need" people had: an interspecies gaming experience with their cat.

I want to improve the cat/human connection by letting the human use the iPhone to control the mouse on the iPad. Keep a look out for that feature in the coming months.


The hardest part about adding that feature isn't the bluetooth communication between devices. (That's easy, Apple provides sample code.) Rather, the most difficult part is designing an interface that is easy to use.

I can't tell you how many iterations we've been through to design a way to pause the game that is 1) hard for cats and 2) memorable and intuitive for humans.

I call this the Game-For-Cats-Law-of-Touch-Screen UI: any UI feature that is too hard for a cat is too hard for your average iPad user.

I call this the Game-For-Cats-Law-of-Touch-Screen UI: any UI feature that is too hard for a cat is too hard for your average iPad user.

I am partly in awe of your skill and this extremely insightful comment, and partly terrified.

I can't tell you how many iterations we've been through to design a way to pause the game that is 1) hard for cats and 2) memorable and intuitive for humans.

Look in the app store for a Baby App called Rattle. It has a simple, effective way to get to the menu that babies can't do by accident.

It has a little "i" icon that, when held, brings up a non-obnoxious, non-modal, hardly noticeable translucent text message saying "drag this down with 2 fingers". Do so, and the menu appears. Do anything else and it reverts back to the game.

FYI, my (larger) dog CAN press both buttons at the same time.

Here's my smaller dog playing with a sound board: http://www.flickr.com/photos/joshu/5702009514/in/photostream...

I think you forgot one thing, Apple is no Friskies my friend

Counter-example (massive): all the games made by zynga.

I think these arguments are best applied to situations where a large entity is stepping out of their core domain, or maybe more accurately into someone else's. Apple isn't likely to put nearly as much sweat, smarts, and energy into Read It Later as Instapaper.. Friskies employees have probably put less energy into their game than has been used to comment on this article... but Zynga's single-minded mission is to make very well-liked games.

I knew the guy who made the original faux-MMS app. When Apple added MMS to iPhone, his app died swiftly.

I also knew the guy who made the original, best voice recorder app too. He made a mint, but then Apple made it a native app, and his app pretty much died too.

Never underestimate the potential of the platform-owner to take what he wants from your business.

Excuse me in advance for 'edw519'ing out:

         - - - - lots of features w/ mainstream appeal - ->

         - - - - has network effects -- - - - - - - - - - >

         - - - - wants to be cross-platform - - - - - - - >

                                |                LARGE MARKET
                                |  .-- instapaper?
     .-- MMS                    |  |
     |                          |  |
  hard           SPECTRUM of DIFFERENTIABILITY            easy
                    |           |                       |
                    |           |                       |
                    `-- voice   |                       `-- music 
                        recorder|                          social
                                |                           network?
     SMALL MARKET               |

It remains to be seen where deferred-reading is on this spectrum. My gut is that it's somewhere in the middle, but that the total market for it --- notably unlike special-purpose voice recorders --- is so big that you might not need to work too much harder to retain the status quo.

My point is that it's not as simple as you make it out to be. There's plenty of room on iOS for a better calculator (like PCalc); plenty of room for portfolio tracking, even for special-purpose camera interfaces.

How you put MMS as having no network effects and not being cross-platform is beyond me.

I didn't. I said network effects are among the things that make products easier to differentiate, because users aren't just shopping for 80% features, but also care about the community of people already using specific products.

That is clearly not the case with MMS functionality.

Your objection is isomorphic to the claim that IP has "network effects", and phone numbers, and zip codes.

Do you actually disagree that MMS is in a different position that Instapaper? Or are you just infuriated by my silly ASCII graphic?

I disagree in the ways in which it is different. I think these axes are not good descriptors. And I do not enjoy beating my wife, for what it's worth.

Write a glib comment, get a glib response! What are the axes you think are better descriptors?

"Never underestimate the potential of the platform-owner to take what he wants from your business."

I'm not sure there's a more wrong way of looking at it. Apple didn't make an MMS app to steal some dev's profits. They made an MMS app because it's an obvious natural app to make and put on every phone.

Never underestimate the potential of an early entrant to whine about the loss of their perceived feifdom.

Thanks to Safari's reading list, I'll likely stop using the Instapaper bookmarklet on my iPad. But the most common use case I have for Intapaper is when I see an article on my laptop in Chrome and want to read it later on my Kindle 3. So I expect I'll be using Instapaper for a while longer.

This is a generalizable pattern for survival for all the other apps Apple "killed" today - you can still compete for any users that don't live 100% in the Apple ecosystem.

This is a bit off-topic, but I have the exact same most common use case, and I just switched in the last few days to using the Readability add-on to Chrome, which has a "send to Kindle" button. I was previously using Wordcycler to sync my Kindle with Instapaper by plugging it into my laptop, but this allows me to skip that step. Now I can just hit the sync button on the Kindle directly and it downloads the saved articles.

Readability seems to render articles slightly better, too, and more often keeps the byline, which was the most annoying part about Instapaper for me.


Cheapshot for link bait.

I don't even have an iDevice, but I'm still a fan of Instapaper: about 50% of my Kindle usage is reading Instapapered versions of tech blog posts on the train.

In theory it automatically sends the articles every morning, although I've found that the automatic sending is a bit flaky. I would (as a matter of public record [1]) happily pay for the service if that feature were more reliable.

[1] http://twitter.com/#!/samstokes/status/77852689605726208

I'm a happy (paid) Instapaper user and hope it prospers, but I'm old enough to remember what happened when IBM brought out its original PC back in the early 1980s.

Apple claimed that IBM's entry into the space was a good thing because it validated the concept of personal computing, of which Apple had been a pioneer.

Then IBM proceeded to eat Apple's lunch, even though (in the opinion of many) Apple had the superior machine.

(Edited slightly for style.)

> I remember Apple's response when IBM brought out its original PC back in the early 1980s: Apple claimed that IBM's entry into the personal computing space was a good thing, because it validated the concept. Then IBM proceeded to eat Apple's lunch.

It seems to me you're stopping the story in kind of a weird place, there.

Apple's market cap is currently something like half-again as much as IBM's. Apple became a better company for the competition, and it's impossible to understate how much their current success benefits from the vast explosion in personal computer adoption that IBM's entry into the market brought about.

Competition makes products better. Increased awareness brings a lot more people and money into the market. Marco is a smart, talented guy who is well-poised to benefit, here.

Yes, but Apple still nearly died before they got their act together. That kind of turnarounds are rare

Apple nearly died because during that period because they were an inflexible organization that reacted slowly to changing market conditions while operating under increasingly out-of-touch management.

Unless the argument here is that Marco is a dumb guy who for some reason isn't in a position to pivot quickly and react to change, I'm not seeing any parallel here with what happened to Apple in the early 90s.

Marco's still the market leader here. He has to fuck up before he's in the position of needing a turn-around. I'm not sure why you're taking it as fait accompli that he will be unable to react appropriately; he's a smart guy.

I agree that he is a smart guy with a good possibility of still winning here.

But as for being market leader, as soon as this ships in iOS he won't be that. Would you have wanted to be Netscape when MS started bundling Internet Explorer in their OS?

I wasn't around in those times, but wasn't Netscape fighting crap with crap? Marco says that his advertising to Reading List people is how IP is more.

> Apple's market cap is currently something like half-again as much as IBM's.

That's been true in recent years. But who would have thought it remotely possible before The Return of Steve in mid-1997? Before then (and for some time afterwards), many people regarded Apple as a zombie company.

Agreed, but Apple had to do some insane revamp of their products before they could turn around. Although I'm not a student of business stories, I bet you a small caffeinated drink that those kinds of turnarounds are massively rare.

For the curious, here's Apple's famous ad: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kengz/198041571/sizes/o/

someone should do a parody of that ad

Except that foreseeably, there will be no way for Instapaper to have the same intuitive interface that Reading List benefits from. The only possible future for Instapaper is as a functionally superior app with a inferior interface. There's no way that Apple's going to lend the same degree of control over the functionality of Safari to any third-party app developer.

A pessimistic response is logical and probably the only rational response. There's simply no way to compete with Apple's Reading List because Apple's made it that way.

Instapaper, which is really a wonderful app has this weird workflow for use: Install the app, and to install the bookmarklet (some rudimentary Safari integration), you have to go to a page, create a empty bookmark, go back and edit the bookmark with a copied-and-pasted javascript: url. I'm sure Marco has tried his best to improve the interface, but Apple's restrictions on the platform forbids it.

The best, easiest way to install the Instapaper bookmarklet was always to do it through the desktop browser and then rely on MobileMe to sync that to your iPad and iPhone. The problem was that not every iOS user was willing to throw down $99 a year for things like over-the-air bookmark synchronization.

Now that that syncing is going to be free and available to every user of iOS 5, the Instapaper bookmarklet installation process just got simpler, not harder.

It might get simpler, but the interface will never be as nice as Reading List has it. It'll never be as intuitive or user friendly. It'll never be able to have Safari integration.

OTOH he could achieve superior integration with iCab, Skyfire, Opera, Sleipnir, etc.

An equally easy but free way to install is to sync browser bookmarks with iTunes.

So should Marco have tried to patent the Instapaper concept?

No, I don't think the idea is Marco's or Apple's for that matter. But applications should be able to compete on merit, not the willingness of the platform provider. Be it regulatory or grassroots, Apple should be forced to allow third parties to do everything that first parties can.

Instapaper's killer-est feature for me is "Send to my kindle." I don't think Apple could get away with that anytime in the near future without some legal troubles with Amazon. Features like that are things that will continue to make apps like instapaper better than the baked in stuff. And it takes Marco a lot less turnaround time to deliver them than it would somebody like Apple, so I think there's still a lot of room to grow there.

You make an excellent point. You don't just integrate with one platform, you target and glue to others adding additional functionality. This will keep people coming back.

There seemed to have been a lot of pessimism regarding Apple announcements that seem similar other offerings like Dropbox & Reminder apps.

Marco has the best response.

He’s rightly convinced of the superiority of his product. Apple is chasing him at his own game. When people realize that there’s a whole untapped market for content reading services he’ll definitely stay the upscale, market leader in the field.

The true story of audion:


This has been posted here many times, and it is absolutely one of the best first person accounts of doing business with Apple.

Take this with a grain of salt. Of course he is going to say it only helps him. That is just entrepreneurship 101. You must always be positive and incredibly self assured in public. Executives always assure you that their business is going great and everything is good news up to the moment they file the bankruptcy papers (and in the case of chapter 11 bankruptcies even for some time afterwards).

But I doubt he is that optimistic on the inside. This is for reasons other people have already properly identified in this discussion (e.g., the Apple product will always have the better integration).

So Apple just went out and ate this guy's lunch. That's pretty much it. You may argue it is ok, you may argue they have a right to do that, but let's not pretend it did not happen.

I get the impression that Marco is putting a brave face on what is an awful realization.

I use the 'reading list' functionality of Instapaper. I have only used the social and editorial aspects to see what they were about and nothing more.

I don't use the social and editorial stuff either, but I use two Instapaper features Apple's thing is not likely to have: (1) I use the bookmarklet (and also, ocasionally, read an article from the website) from my Windows and Linux boxes, and (2) in addition to reading on my iPod touch, I download my saved articles as an ePub file to read on my Sony PRS-505 eBook Reader.

I sure wouldn't want to be Marco. I think "nice while it lasted" might be the best spin to put on this.

Pretty amazing to see Apple building best elements of Dropbox, Kik, Instapaper and more directly into iOS.

Quite the emotional rollercoaster for Marco - http://www.betabeat.com/2011/06/06/apple-killed-instapaper-r...

Indeed, Marco's initial reaction seems to have been http://twitter.com/#!/marcoarment/status/77796293510037504

He's clearly thought of this possibility, as evidenced by his post in late April about the potential impact of Reading List on Instapaper.

Will Apple's solution be limited to Safari? I would think Marco's customers are rather a tech-savvy crowd who wouldn't tie themselves to just one particular browser.

I use Instapaper for the multi-browser support (mostly in Firefox), but also for the Kindle support, both for reading in Kindle Webkit browser and as downloads.

I think Marco has a big chance to catch the long tail of read-later'ing.

If you look at desktop Safari's Reader Mode… It is a fantastic feature but I don't think I ever heard of anyone I know using it.

It should've been implemented in iOS Safari long time ago, btw, this is where it's been missing.

Marco is in a tough position because he depends on revenue from only one app available on only iOS.

It's a tough break, I'm sure he didn't expect anything like this before the Lion preview. I hope his business can survive.

"And they’ll quickly find Instapaper in the App Store."

Until Apple pulls the plug on Instapaper. Let's hope that never happens.

The competitive advantage for Instapaper is the ability to iterate quickly. If Apple delivers a growing band of people interested in reading the web later, Instapaper is better positioned to find out what tweaks and features will work best for them by risking changes to the core product.

The vast majority of the articles I add to Instapaper, I add from Firefox on my desktop at work. And virtually all the articles I read in Instapaper, I read when I'm off-network completely (I have an iPod touch). I don't think Marco has much to worry about yet.

Agreed, in fact offline reading (+Kindle syncing) is why I sought out the app in the first place.

I cant comment whether this will help InstaPaper or not, having never tried the product, but i love the way that the owner of instapaper rises to the challenge. It inspires me greatly for if and when my business may face similar challenges.

Instapaper will be ok, it has superior features not in Reading List. Same for Camera+ even though Apple added enhancement to native Camera app. Sparrow vs Mail app. iOS market is big enough for Marco to happily survive.

If Reading List gains a lot of ground, it may be time for Marco to think about developing an Android app. I'm a happy paid Instapaper user though, and continue to pay the subscription fee to support the service.

So it seems that Reading List does not support offline reading. For me that is the main reason to use Instapaper. I save a lot of stuff and then read it when I am for example on a flight without Wi-Fi.

There is your added value.

I'm surprised that he doesn't start trying to capture the Android market.

Google did the same thing to navigation service providers (arguably more brutal)

If proven essential, none of the platform is safe for him to rest on his laurel.

Having read Marco's blog and listened to his podcast, I can't see an official client for android from Marco ever. His opinion of android is crystal clear. As a Nexus One owner, it requires some effort to disregard most of the hyperbolic insults in his podcast.

So, I'd like to say I'm surprised too but all too often he pans the platforms as well as acts like he's making enough revenue for the hassle.

Fair enough, that's his call to make. Meanwhile, I'll keep using InstaFetch for its value added to my Android phone.

Dunno about this. It is hard to compete with native features of the OS. Specially on iOS where integration hooks are terribly missing.

Did Time Machine kill SuperDuper? Not for me.

I use Chrome, so no.

So the message AAPL is sending to app developers: do your job well enough and we will bake it into the OS.

No they won't. Focus on the broader ecosystem (Windows, Android, Blackberry, Windows Phone) and greater integration.

This is correct. Once you have a nice feature, you realize Apple's doesn't run everywhere.

Marco is also correct about social. A simple commenting system and a highlighter and a red envelope would be useful. People want insightful quotes highlighted and commented, and want to be validated when people reply to their messages.

Registration is open for Startup School 2019. Classes start July 22nd.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact