4 ms·

I still think that there is no incentive for developers to switch. This situation has a parallel to the Windows Phone app development grants. Microsoft is payi

by brackin 14y ago

I still think that there is no incentive for developers to switch. This situation has a parallel to the Windows Phone app development grants. Microsoft is paying startups to hire someone to develop a Windows Phone app. After speaking to these companies they say they highly doubt they'll get any value from it and don't intend to continue developing for the platform. You're offering developers an open platform to develop on that at the moment has under 1000 users. I think a developer could still make more money on a huge locked down platform like Twitter than on 'join.app.net'? Even if a developer eventually gets kicked off, I'm sure they earned a lot more in the time they were live than on a small platform. I think $50 yearly is too high for early adopters and even higher for the developers you need, I love the Pinboard.in model, they offer a one off price that is set based on the number of users. So the earlier you join the lower the price. Right now it's $9.84.

millan 14y ago
You made some good points, mainly that most developers will/already are taking the risk of being kicked out of the Twitter/Facebook/Etc. platform because that platform already has users. The way I see it, you as a developer are using what they (Twitter/Facebook/Etc.) built to market your app to their customers that they've spent the time to acquire, it's only fair that they can kick you out of their house whenever they want; that's the way a free market should work, fair or not. At this point, it sounds like App.net will turn out to be a high-quality network of developers and hackers building interesting stuff, but with no real market or audience. Developers don't build for developers. Your second point was that $50/year is too much for early adopters: I agree with you, but to even call anyone who's pledged the $50 'early adopters' is ridiculous at this point. No one even knows what App.net is going to be yet or what it could be, and it's a long ways off being released for early beta testing. What Dalton needs to be doing at this stage is just get people to sign up, for free. From there he can figure out if he'll have enough people to go ahead with it or not. It's not worth throwing $50 at. Yet.

by brackin 14y ago

millan 14y ago

You made some good points, mainly that most developers will/already are taking the risk of being kicked out of the Twitter/Facebook/Etc. platform because that platform already has users. The way I see it, you as a developer are using what they (Twitter/Facebook/Etc.) built to market your app to their customers that they've spent the time to acquire, it's only fair that they can kick you out of their house whenever they want; that's the way a free market should work, fair or not. At this point, it sounds like App.net will turn out to be a high-quality network of developers and hackers building interesting stuff, but with no real market or audience. Developers don't build for developers. Your second point was that $50/year is too much for early adopters: I agree with you, but to even call anyone who's pledged the $50 'early adopters' is ridiculous at this point. No one even knows what App.net is going to be yet or what it could be, and it's a long ways off being released for early beta testing. What Dalton needs to be doing at this stage is just get people to sign up, for free. From there he can figure out if he'll have enough people to go ahead with it or not. It's not worth throwing $50 at. Yet.