Here's Why People Are Backing App.net • Hacker News Board

Re: Here's Why People Are Backing App.net

#11

Post by spindritf » Mon, Aug 06, 2012, 6:13 PM UTC

ghshephard wrote: post #8

Any time I can transition a service that is important to me to one in which I am the customer, I grab that opportunity quickly. I'd happily pay gmail $10/month for mail in which I was the customer, and not the advertisers. $4/month for a user supported twitter environment sounds like a bargain - particularly as all the people I suspect I want to "follow" (or whatever the join.app.net terminology will be) - have alrea…

> I'd happily pay gmail $10/month for mail in which I was the customer

It's only $5/user/month and they offer a free trial. No ads, of course, and a SLA.

http://www.google.com/enterprise/apps/business/pricing.html

Re: Here's Why People Are Backing App.net

#12

Post by joebadmo » Mon, Aug 06, 2012, 6:13 PM UTC

App.net strikes me as a half-measure. It's still a centralized system with one company acting ultimately as a gatekeeper.

I want a twitter that acts more like email, on open, distributed systems that leave me in full ownership of my own content. I see very little reason for something like Twitter to go through a centralized party this way.

Re: Here's Why People Are Backing App.net

#13

Post by brennannovak » Mon, Aug 06, 2012, 6:13 PM UTC

jameszol wrote: post #3

I like Twitter. I don't mind the ads. And Twitter is close to letting us download our own archived tweets: http://searchengineland.com/twitter-tweet-archive-tool-comin... If ads interrupted my experience, then maybe it would become a pain point worth addressing or paying for. Until then, I'll stick with the free, ad-supported Twitter.

What bothers me the most about Twitter is how, with a few sharp blows, they've destroyed the 3rd party client / app market which was perhaps the most amazing aspect of Twitter and it's surrounding culture when I first started using it in 2008

Re: Here's Why People Are Backing App.net

#14

Post by brennannovak » Mon, Aug 06, 2012, 6:14 PM UTC

thomasbk wrote: post #2

They could run it from a non-profit instead of a private company. Would be an interesting experiment!

Definitely! That would be an interesting experiment!

Re: Here's Why People Are Backing App.net

#15

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Aug 06, 2012, 6:16 PM UTC

joebadmo wrote: post #12

App.net strikes me as a half-measure. It's still a centralized system with one company acting ultimately as a gatekeeper. I want a twitter that acts more like email, on open, distributed systems that leave me in full ownership of my own content. I see very little reason for something like Twitter to go through a centralized party this way.

[deleted]

Re: Here's Why People Are Backing App.net

#16

Post by timdorr » Mon, Aug 06, 2012, 6:16 PM UTC

kmfrk wrote: post #4

It seems like a weird decision that they don't stick to the 140-character limit.

They're not making a Twitter clone, they're just cloning some of the features of networks like Twitter and Facebook.

Re: Here's Why People Are Backing App.net

#17

Post by debacle » Mon, Aug 06, 2012, 6:17 PM UTC

1as wrote: post #9

I backed this almost immediately, and expected them to be a lot closer to the goal than they are now (still more than $300,000 off with only seven days to go). I'm very surprised with the apparent lack of resonance with the idea from people around here. So what are some of the reasons you aren't backing?

My justification, from just a few days ago:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4330336

Re: Here's Why People Are Backing App.net

#18

Post by ghshephard » Mon, Aug 06, 2012, 6:17 PM UTC

spindritf wrote: post #11

ghshephard wrote: post #8

Any time I can transition a service that is important to me to one in which I am the customer, I grab that opportunity quickly. I'd happily pay gmail $10/month for mail in which I was the customer, and not the advertisers. $4/month for a user supported twitter environment sounds like a bargain - particularly as all the people I suspect I want to "follow" (or whatever the join.app.net terminology will be) - have alrea…

> I'd happily pay gmail $10/month for mail in which I was the customer It's only $5/user/month and they offer a free trial. No ads, of course, and a SLA. http://www.google.com/enterprise/apps/business/pricing.html

Yup - gordon@shephard.org has been going to Google Apps for at least 4+ years @$50/year - My break point is about $10/month (or $120/year) - particularly as I get the fairly awesome 2-factor auth from Google.

Re: Here's Why People Are Backing App.net

#19

Post by brennannovak » Mon, Aug 06, 2012, 6:22 PM UTC

joebadmo wrote: post #12

App.net strikes me as a half-measure. It's still a centralized system with one company acting ultimately as a gatekeeper. I want a twitter that acts more like email, on open, distributed systems that leave me in full ownership of my own content. I see very little reason for something like Twitter to go through a centralized party this way.

With enough (and the right kind of) clients a "Centralized" service could be seen as distributor to independent nodes. From there, with the right archiving / sharing features of those "clients" those independent nodes can start to become a decentralized service. The internet itself relies on centralized DNS standards organization & servers. To me, App.net (and their commitment to users being customers instead of a product) represents a move in this direction.

Re: Here's Why People Are Backing App.net

#20

Post by pg_bot » Mon, Aug 06, 2012, 6:31 PM UTC

I don't think this project will work due to several inherent economic factors. If I understand correctly app.net takes a free service (twitter, fb) has removed the best features of those services and then wants to charge money for that product. Dalton has put himself in the position of a reverse browser war which doesn't seem very viable to me.