Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Invites

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 956 posts

Re: Apple Invites

#371

Post by briandear »

joshuamorton wrote: post #303
in_cahoots wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just spent $70 to send out birthday party invites to 40 parents on Evite. The free version sends an invite with ads, links to Amazon, and other tacky stuff. As an iPhone user with two kids switching to iCloud+ is cheaper than the alternatives. And I think many other parents will agree.

...Why? The competition I see for this is partiful ( https://partiful.com/ ), which is free, handles invites for folks without accounts (I don't have one, I am invited to parties via text message), and is clearly the inspiration/competition apples for this app given the visual similarities.

Free how? Who pays? Just benevolence?

Re: Apple Invites

#373

Post by echelon »

briandear wrote: post #356
echelon wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It shouldn't be allowed in the US. Lina Khan was going to put a stop to it, but tragically that didn't reach its culmination.

Why? Does the color affect functionality or are we going to pass laws based on feelings?

> are we going to pass laws based on feelings?

This is very concrete fuckery.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/21/apple-doj-antitrust...

https://www.npr.org/2024/03/28/1241473453/why-green-text-bub...

https://techcrunch.com/2024/03/21/doj-claims-green-bubbles-a...

Re: Apple Invites

#374

Post by _ea1k »

canucker2016 wrote: post #357

I think some demographic info can be useful in judging the potential uptake. Apple iPhone ownership amongst USA teens: 2024: 87% 2019: 83% 2014: 67% https://www.iclarified.com/95177/87-of-us-teens-own-iphones-... https://www.pipersandler.com/news/piper-jaffray-completes-se... https://www.pipersandler.com/news/different-new-cool-accordi... Smartphone marketshare for iPhone in various countries: 65%: Norway 59%: Sweden…

Yeah, and they'll likely make this Appley only to create social pressure for even more uptake.

Yuck

Re: Apple Invites

#375

Post by afavour »

echelon wrote: post #327
happyopossum wrote: post #222

My wife is in a position (board chair for a co-op) that results in her sending out a lot of invites to events. Evite has kinda been the go-to in her social/co-op group for ages, but man it suuuuuuucks these days. Ads everywhere, annoying patterns, and lacks a bunch of nice features that this seems to have. Very happy to see this

Luma and Partiful are really good. This Apple thing is going to turn into a "green text" social signalling thing all over again. If you have an Android, you won't be invited. More scummy Apple social engineering bullshit. Kids that already hate on those having Android colored text bubbles are going to bully each other even more. And of course kids need the latest iPhone, too. Apple is playing into this brilliantly an…

Non-Apple users are able to reply to invites so no one is going to miss any parties.

Re: Apple Invites

#376

Post by briandear »

lordofgibbons wrote: post #362

I really hope this fails. Apple will use it's dominant position to create lock in like how they did with iMessage instead of cooperating with other platforms on a common standard. Oder friends and family are surprised when they want to video call over Facetime and find it hard to believe other people's phones don't have Apple apps.

I hope it succeeds. I hate FB and other “you are the product” products. I don’t care about “common standard” — I care about the best UX.

Re: Apple Invites

#377

Post by pkamb »

Zak wrote: post #341
pkamb wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Apple already has claimed the "friends and family network" via iMessage. Did Facebook go to a groups/influencer algorithm by choice or is it the result of IRL friend posters all moving to private chats once everyone got iPhones?

That's only true if everyone in the group has an Apple phone, which has decreasing probability with every additional member. Excluding people from a conversation because they don't have the right brand of phone would be pretty antisocial.

In the USA, someone insisting on using an Android when everyone else in their social circle has an iPhone (and they do!) is what's seen as anti-social. No one wants to use the degraded green bubble SMS experience so they simply exclude the Android user and continue using blue bubble iMessage.

Re: Apple Invites

#378

Post by john2x »

thesuitonym wrote: post #320
john2x wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still waiting for iMessage to work with Android phones.

iMessage has been compatible with RCS for months now.

A quick search suggests the Android user end needs to install 3rd party apps for it to work? Has that changed recently?

Re: Apple Invites

#379

Post by pkamb »

dboreham wrote: post #364
ghaff wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, using iMessage involves flipping a switch in some Messages setting--and everyone I know in the US just texts, except for texting with international folks.

Quick note that I'm in the US and my experience is: most random people use SMS; closer friends and family some use Signal, some Discord, some email; colleagues use Slack; overseas taxi drivers etc. use WhatsApp.

By "use SMS" you surely mean "use iMessage" much of the time.

Re: Apple Invites

#380

Post by ToucanLoucan »

echelon wrote: post #334
svnt wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it funded? That is your answer.

Not everything is in the position or can afford to transitionally tax the whole of the internet itself like big tech. You're paying for Apple Invites whether you realize it or not. There's immense value in making their platform more sticky. In a few years you'll read articles about uncool Android kids not getting invited to parties. And that's your answer. One of these behaviors is way more insidious.

> You're paying for Apple Invites whether you realize it or not. There's immense value in making their platform more sticky.

I'm not stuck to Apple's platform, I'm quite happy here. Apple services aren't drenched in ads end to end. Apple's services aren't constantly asking for nickels and dimes; it's one charge, every month, for a buffet of services that are regularly added to and actually improved, making them distinct from... fuck, the rest of the Internet basically, which seems to boil down to a revolving door of stupidly named services backed by VC funding that get popular, quickly, because they don't charge anything and aren't drenched in ads, and then slowly they add the ads, but there's an ad free tier for not much money, oh but now there's ads in that tier, which is also more expensive, and then the service shuts down because they didn't hit 60 billion users before their runway ran out, but there's this new service...

And while I'm certain they do some spying and whatnot to facilitate targeted ads, they at least pay lip service to my privacy, and my experiences developing stuff for their hardware tells me that at least there is a whiff of security to their hardware. There are a lot of things as a developer I'm straight up not allowed to do.

The "insidiousness" of Apple's plan so far seems to be, largely, making damn good products that people want to use, and backing them up with cloud services that work well. I wish more tech firms took that approach to be totally honest.

Post reply on HN