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

Instapaper 3.0 is here

blog.instapaper.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 68 posts

Re: Instapaper 3.0 is here

#51

Post by masklinn »

statictype wrote: post #43
larrywright wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the Android ecosystem awesome?

I bet it is. There are probably a whole bunch of killer apps there which would never make it to the AppStore. Grooveshark is one example that comes to mind.

> Grooveshark is one example that comes to mind.

Why does it come to mind? What it so different between Grooveshark and Spotify that Spotify is on the AppStore but Grooveshark can't be?

I see their iPhone application page saying they can't be on the AppStore, but no explanation as to why they can't be (and no, "Apple is unwilling to work with Grooveshark to approve our application." is not an explanation) and the blog post announcement does not provide any more information. The only mention I found is an other, older blog post saying the following:

> Earlier this afternoon, Apple sent us a letter notifying us that, due to a complaint they received from Universal Music Group UK

Apple's behavior seems logical and sensible here as the "gatekeeper" of their store, it's not their job to resolve trouble between UMG and Grooveshark.

And again, Spotify was still in the AppStore last time I checked, so what Grooveshark's app is not, in and of itself, "a [...] killer apps there which would never make it to the AppStore."

Re: Instapaper 3.0 is here

#52

Post by statictype »

masklinn wrote: post #51
statictype wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet it is. There are probably a whole bunch of killer apps there which would never make it to the AppStore. Grooveshark is one example that comes to mind.

> Grooveshark is one example that comes to mind. Why does it come to mind? What it so different between Grooveshark and Spotify that Spotify is on the AppStore but Grooveshark can't be? I see their iPhone application page saying they can't be on the AppStore, but no explanation as to why they can't be (and no, "Apple is unwilling to work with Grooveshark to approve our application." is not an explanation) and the blo…

Why does it come to mind?

It comes to mind because I really wanted Grooveshark on my iPhone and would have paid for it but it's not there. (Except by jailbreaking and I'm not willing to do that)

Apple's behavior seems logical and sensible here as the "gatekeeper" of their store, it's not their job to resolve trouble between UMG and Grooveshark.

They're already trying to resolve trouble by doing what UMG wanted. In any case, we could nitpick over that point for hours.

And again, Spotify was still in the AppStore last time I checked, so what Grooveshark's app is not, in and of itself, "a [...] killer apps there which would never make it to the AppStore."

Seriously? Last time I checked, Spotify was only available in about 7 countries. (Last time being 5 minutes ago). I don't see how you could even compare the two services. They work differently.

In any case, my comment wasn't specifically about Grooveshark, rather, to point out that there's a whole class of apps that people may want but would never be available on the App Store for various reasons (legitimate or otherwise) but will be available on Android.

Re: Instapaper 3.0 is here

#54

Post by masklinn »

statictype wrote: post #52
masklinn wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Grooveshark is one example that comes to mind. Why does it come to mind? What it so different between Grooveshark and Spotify that Spotify is on the AppStore but Grooveshark can't be? I see their iPhone application page saying they can't be on the AppStore, but no explanation as to why they can't be (and no, "Apple is unwilling to work with Grooveshark to approve our application." is not an explanation) and the blo…

Why does it come to mind? It comes to mind because I really wanted Grooveshark on my iPhone and would have paid for it but it's not there. (Except by jailbreaking and I'm not willing to do that) Apple's behavior seems logical and sensible here as the "gatekeeper" of their store, it's not their job to resolve trouble between UMG and Grooveshark. They're already trying to resolve trouble by doing what UMG wanted. In an…

> Seriously? Last time I checked, Spotify was only available in about 7 countries. (Last time being 5 minutes ago). I don't see how you could even compare the two services. They work differently.

I asked how different they were, because I can't see it apart from Grooveshark's ignoring of IP (which is very much the root of them having been evicted from the AppStore until their resolve the situation). Which is I fear a very debatable "feature".

> In any case, my comment wasn't specifically about Grooveshark, rather, to point out that there's a whole class of apps that people may want but would never be available on the App Store for various reasons (legitimate or otherwise) but will be available on Android.

You specifically pointed out to Grooveshark as an example of that kind of applications. It's not.

Re: Instapaper 3.0 is here

#55

Post by suchire »

DanielRibeiro wrote: post #26
redacted wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The icon is a direct copy of the iOS app icon, and the app is in violation of Marco's API rules ( http://blog.instapaper.com/post/3208433429 ). Outright theft? Maybe not. But definitely not kosher. [ Also, the 'developer website' is an inaccessible Chinese social network page. Awesome! ]

Interesting... Which Api Rules does it violate btw?

How about the "Terms of Use" that say "Apps and other products and services may not use Instapaper’s name, logos, or other trademarks in their titles or logos, or in any way that implies endorsement, sponsorship, or false association with Instapaper"?

http://www.instapaper.com/api/terms

Re: Instapaper 3.0 is here

#56

Post by DanielRibeiro »

suchire wrote: post #55
DanielRibeiro wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting... Which Api Rules does it violate btw?

How about the "Terms of Use" that say "Apps and other products and services may not use Instapaper’s name, logos, or other trademarks in their titles or logos, or in any way that implies endorsement, sponsorship, or false association with Instapaper"? http://www.instapaper.com/api/terms

Thanks. It was an honest request for clarification, not a challenge of your point.

Re: Instapaper 3.0 is here

#58

Post by precipice »

peterbraden wrote: post #27

Big fan talking here, it's how I primarily read long form content (iphone and kindle) This sentence worried me though: >With these great new additions, many customers won’t even >need the bookmarklet anymore. Without the bookmarklet Instapaper stops being useful to me - I have no interest in another source of information, however 'social' or curated that may be. I feel that instapaper is trying to move into the 'shar…

Marco has mentioned before that the bookmarklet is his biggest support headache. If the current bookmarklet is working for you, there's little reason to take that away; but having some other way for people to get a good experience from Instapaper -- something easier that anyone could use without knowing what a bookmarklet is -- makes tons of sense.

He does kill features from time to time, but he always seems to mention that those features were very lightly used. Presumably that's not the case here (since otherwise it has been hard to make the app valuable, before this new feature).

Re: Instapaper 3.0 is here

#59

Post by joebadmo »

masklinn wrote: post #54
statictype wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it come to mind? It comes to mind because I really wanted Grooveshark on my iPhone and would have paid for it but it's not there. (Except by jailbreaking and I'm not willing to do that) Apple's behavior seems logical and sensible here as the "gatekeeper" of their store, it's not their job to resolve trouble between UMG and Grooveshark. They're already trying to resolve trouble by doing what UMG wanted. In an…

> Seriously? Last time I checked, Spotify was only available in about 7 countries. (Last time being 5 minutes ago). I don't see how you could even compare the two services. They work differently. I asked how different they were, because I can't see it apart from Grooveshark's ignoring of IP (which is very much the root of them having been evicted from the AppStore until their resolve the situation). Which is I fear a…

Are you denying, then, that there are a whole class of applications that are possible on Android that aren't on iOS?

My first example of this is always Locale. It's really, really great. http://www.twofortyfouram.com/

It's not available on iOS, and as far as I can tell, can't be. I would actually love to get an iPhone because the hardware is so amazing and software is so polished (for the most part... notifications, I'm looking at you), but given the choice between polish and control, I choose control. At least in this case.

So, to answer the question in the GGGGP: yeah, the Android ecosystem is awesome.

Post reply on HN