11–20 of 86 posts
I thought it would be at the $9.99 price point, like Sparrow was. I am surprised by it being $20, but I understand given the limitations and will purchase it. What happens to the tokens when people pirate this app? Does it count towards their limit?
Almost definitely.
There have been many discussions here on Hacker News about the risks inherent in building your product—and hence livelihood—on top of someone else's platform, over which you have no control. Unfortunately for Tweetbot, this sort of complaint will possibly strike a chord with the almost negligible minority that would read a tech blog, and of those, an even smaller and more negligible minority will actually complain to…
This, and other actions like it, are only going to drive more people to the underground bot/warez economy wherein terms of use and official API channels don't apply. unfortunately in that world many of the tools also compromise user security as well. Unless Twitter, and other widely adopted platform providers, find a balance between corporate interests and supporting users interacting with their services in the ways…
Even if Tweetbot states something like "Twitter has limited the number of clients we can sell" they'll still think Tweetbot is stupid. But most of them won't think "I wonder if there is a way around this." And then head to some warez type solution.
Instead they'll look and see if there is an alternative, or more likely, just stick with Twitter's website.
I just don't buy the "This will drive people to pirated software" argument.
So, they aim for max 1.4 million in revenue (100k x $20 - 30% for apple, minus an unknown amount for beta testers) for the lifetime of the app. How many people have worked on it? It does show the limited upside of twitter apps under the new rules(yes, 1.4 million is still a lot of money, but no home run for a company).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This, and other actions like it, are only going to drive more people to the underground bot/warez economy wherein terms of use and official API channels don't apply. unfortunately in that world many of the tools also compromise user security as well. Unless Twitter, and other widely adopted platform providers, find a balance between corporate interests and supporting users interacting with their services in the ways…
I doubt it. In fact, I think of the majority of the people I know if they were to try and download Tweetbot and couldn't, they'll be mad at Tweetbot. Even if Tweetbot states something like "Twitter has limited the number of clients we can sell" they'll still think Tweetbot is stupid. But most of them won't think "I wonder if there is a way around this." And then head to some warez type solution. Instead they'll look…
There is a subtle distinction here.
I'm addressing the underground marketplaces where Tweetbot-like applications already flourish. These apps, quite often, don't use any API at all but instead rely on hidden browser windows and net.webclient interfaces to simulate browser actions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if the app is only around and viable for a year, if you use it every day, is it really so hard to justify spending $20 on it? I'm really glad we have companies like Tapbots, Panic, etc., pushing against the "race to the bottom" trend with app prices that we've seen lately. Good apps are HARD to do, and there's no reason they shouldn't command a price commensurate with the effort involved.
> Even if the app is only around and viable for a year, if you use it every day, is it really so hard to justify spending $20 on it? That's exactly what I'm worried about. It COULD be a year (and in that case, yes, it would be worth it), but no one can guarantee that. It could be tomorrow for all we know. And that is why I say it's a gamble I don't really want to take on a social networking app (no matter how nice th…
If they stopped supporting it tomorrow, it wouldn't disappear from your device. The earliest it would possibly break would be in the next major OS upgrade.
Y'know, in about a year.
The idea that a measly $20 is too much to pay for months of engineering and design work up to now, let alone going forward, is utterly absurd.
I'd expect it from Joe Random Entitled-Guy, but I'd expect a higher standard from HN, where presumably the sentiment is that devs ought to be able to subsist above the poverty line.
So, they aim for max 1.4 million in revenue (100k x $20 - 30% for apple, minus an unknown amount for beta testers) for the lifetime of the app. How many people have worked on it? It does show the limited upside of twitter apps under the new rules(yes, 1.4 million is still a lot of money, but no home run for a company).
They have a limit over 100k (2x their current user base) IIRC, since they already have 100k+ users on Tweetbot.
Twitter is weird.
I thought it would be at the $9.99 price point, like Sparrow was. I am surprised by it being $20, but I understand given the limitations and will purchase it. What happens to the tokens when people pirate this app? Does it count towards their limit?
Yeah. There's no way for Twitter to tell them apart.