3 ms·

From the article… Guests can view and respond to an invitation using the new iPhone app or on the web without needing an iCloud+ subscription or an Apple Accoun

From the article… Guests can view and respond to an invitation using the new iPhone app or on the web without needing an iCloud+ subscription or an Apple Account Sounds like there’s no Apple walled garden lock-in for recipients of the Invites? Only for creating/managing them?

apparent 2y ago
Just creating them. You have to have an iCloud+ subscription to be able to create them. Anyone can RSVP. When I think of people I know who have iCloud+ subscriptions, it's mostly people who thought they needed them because of the scary notifications their phones sent them about running out of their initial 5GB of storage (which of course is not enough for any modern phone). These are not people who are going to download and figure out how to use a new invite app. They are going to keep using evite just like they always have. There are some people who may use iCloud+ or a bundle because they like the fitness features or have a family that makes it make sense. I probably know some people like this. But I have never had a conversation with anyone about iCloud+, ever in my life. Only dealt with questions from non-tech-savvy family members who were scared about notifications that they were running out of space and needed to "upgrade" to this paid service.
- srockets 2y ago
  Siri, what is selection bias?
  - hanginChad 2y ago
    [dead]
- stephenr 2y ago
  So your complaint is, "how dare they charge for a service they're offering"? If you don't want to use it to create invitations, don't. There's zero requirement for you to have an account if others invite you to something, and it sounds kind of preposterous to complain about other people choosing to pay for a service that you can then participate with for free.
  - apparent 2y ago
    Where in my post did I say anything like "how dare they"? I just pointed out that the people I know who have iCloud+ are not likely to download this new app and use it. And it's obviously not likely to get anyone over the pay wall to buy iCloud+. This invitation feature has many free competitors. I don't begrudge Apple for creating this, but I won't be surprised if I keep getting evites and paperless post invites, and never an Apple Invite or whatever it's called.
- wqaatwt 2y ago
  What about people who actually run out of space? Or want to backup their phones?
etempleton 2y ago
I was actually pretty excited about this until so read it was iCloud+ only. I think it is maybe a long-term strategic mistake to lock this behind iCloud+ and also a bad omen for the direction Apple is going in. In the past this would have been a free app. If Apple did not lock this behind iCloud+ I think it would have quickly become a standard for a lot of users and been another feather in Apple’s cap of why a user might want an iPhone. Maybe they could have added upsells like gift an Apple Card or something or made money through affiliate gift giving links or something.
- apparent 2y ago
  Before I saw it was iCloud+ only, I thought it was a sort-of clever way to get people even more locked into the ecosystem. I assumed that the shared photos would add to people's reliance on iCloud, and get some to upgrade to higher tiers to fit all their photos. I was quite surprised to learn it wasn't free. I had heard about this "sherlocking" on Twitter but hadn't read the details. I can't think of a time when Apple Sherlocked something but didn't make it free. In fact, making it free is kind of part in parcel of Sherlocking, since that's what really kills the other business. Here, plenty of people will keep using the existing competitors because they don't want to have to pay for iCloud+.
  - freeAgent 2y ago
    I think they may have locked it behind iCloud+ because one of the big features it offers is a shared photo album, which of course utilizes iCloud. Anyone without iCloud+ is essentially going to be unable to use that feature. And yeah...it also pushes people into paying for iCloud+, though you can get on the $1/mo plan in order to access this, so it's not like it's very expensive.
    - apparent 2y ago
      You get 5GB of iCloud storage for free. I figured this was a way to get people closer to/over the limit. I get that the iCloud tiers start cheap, but having 50GB doesn't really do anything for me since it's still not big enough to back up an iPhone. And there's zero chance I'm going to start paying for a monthly service in order to get access to an evite clone that I would use a couple times a year. Maybe there are big partiers out there that would upgrade just for this, but this seems like an impending flop to me.
aidenn0 2y ago
But lots of features are likely to be unavailable to invitees (indeed the article specifically mentions a couple) without Apple devices. Apple loves to use network effects to make people with Android phones feel like outsiders.
- aardvarkr 2y ago
  It’s a calendar invite on a web page that links to a shared photo album viewable on the web along with a linked playlist… nothing locked down here
- klabb3 2y ago
  Yes. Exhibit A: the infamous green bubble stigma (US phenomenon only). Also, Apple should not be in the business of making social apps. Hardware and OS is plenty lock-in aka fiefdoms as it is.
  - aidenn0 2y ago
    > Also, Apple should not be in the business of making social apps. Hardware and OS is plenty lock-in aka fiefdoms as it is. I have some sympathy for Apple here; they are selling a premium walled garden, and nearly all popular social apps do one or more things that are rather antithetical to their brand.
- GiorgioG 2y ago
  The paranoia is real.
  - igor47 2y ago
    Apple has given me zero reason to trust it, and lots of reasons not to? I mean, it's a closed ecosystem. I'm not sure how this is arguable...
  - aidenn0 2y ago
    Almost weekly I have someone annoyed at me because I don't have an iPhone, so they can't AirDrop or iMessage or FaceTime me.

apparent 2y ago

Just creating them. You have to have an iCloud+ subscription to be able to create them. Anyone can RSVP. When I think of people I know who have iCloud+ subscriptions, it's mostly people who thought they needed them because of the scary notifications their phones sent them about running out of their initial 5GB of storage (which of course is not enough for any modern phone). These are not people who are going to download and figure out how to use a new invite app. They are going to keep using evite just like they always have. There are some people who may use iCloud+ or a bundle because they like the fitness features or have a family that makes it make sense. I probably know some people like this. But I have never had a conversation with anyone about iCloud+, ever in my life. Only dealt with questions from non-tech-savvy family members who were scared about notifications that they were running out of space and needed to "upgrade" to this paid service.

srockets 2y ago
Siri, what is selection bias?
- hanginChad 2y ago
  [dead]
stephenr 2y ago
So your complaint is, "how dare they charge for a service they're offering"? If you don't want to use it to create invitations, don't. There's zero requirement for you to have an account if others invite you to something, and it sounds kind of preposterous to complain about other people choosing to pay for a service that you can then participate with for free.
- apparent 2y ago
  Where in my post did I say anything like "how dare they"? I just pointed out that the people I know who have iCloud+ are not likely to download this new app and use it. And it's obviously not likely to get anyone over the pay wall to buy iCloud+. This invitation feature has many free competitors. I don't begrudge Apple for creating this, but I won't be surprised if I keep getting evites and paperless post invites, and never an Apple Invite or whatever it's called.
wqaatwt 2y ago
What about people who actually run out of space? Or want to backup their phones?

etempleton 2y ago

I was actually pretty excited about this until so read it was iCloud+ only. I think it is maybe a long-term strategic mistake to lock this behind iCloud+ and also a bad omen for the direction Apple is going in. In the past this would have been a free app. If Apple did not lock this behind iCloud+ I think it would have quickly become a standard for a lot of users and been another feather in Apple’s cap of why a user might want an iPhone. Maybe they could have added upsells like gift an Apple Card or something or made money through affiliate gift giving links or something.

apparent 2y ago
Before I saw it was iCloud+ only, I thought it was a sort-of clever way to get people even more locked into the ecosystem. I assumed that the shared photos would add to people's reliance on iCloud, and get some to upgrade to higher tiers to fit all their photos. I was quite surprised to learn it wasn't free. I had heard about this "sherlocking" on Twitter but hadn't read the details. I can't think of a time when Apple Sherlocked something but didn't make it free. In fact, making it free is kind of part in parcel of Sherlocking, since that's what really kills the other business. Here, plenty of people will keep using the existing competitors because they don't want to have to pay for iCloud+.
- freeAgent 2y ago
  I think they may have locked it behind iCloud+ because one of the big features it offers is a shared photo album, which of course utilizes iCloud. Anyone without iCloud+ is essentially going to be unable to use that feature. And yeah...it also pushes people into paying for iCloud+, though you can get on the $1/mo plan in order to access this, so it's not like it's very expensive.
  - apparent 2y ago
    You get 5GB of iCloud storage for free. I figured this was a way to get people closer to/over the limit. I get that the iCloud tiers start cheap, but having 50GB doesn't really do anything for me since it's still not big enough to back up an iPhone. And there's zero chance I'm going to start paying for a monthly service in order to get access to an evite clone that I would use a couple times a year. Maybe there are big partiers out there that would upgrade just for this, but this seems like an impending flop to me.

aidenn0 2y ago

But lots of features are likely to be unavailable to invitees (indeed the article specifically mentions a couple) without Apple devices. Apple loves to use network effects to make people with Android phones feel like outsiders.

aardvarkr 2y ago
It’s a calendar invite on a web page that links to a shared photo album viewable on the web along with a linked playlist… nothing locked down here
klabb3 2y ago
Yes. Exhibit A: the infamous green bubble stigma (US phenomenon only). Also, Apple should not be in the business of making social apps. Hardware and OS is plenty lock-in aka fiefdoms as it is.
- aidenn0 2y ago
  > Also, Apple should not be in the business of making social apps. Hardware and OS is plenty lock-in aka fiefdoms as it is. I have some sympathy for Apple here; they are selling a premium walled garden, and nearly all popular social apps do one or more things that are rather antithetical to their brand.
GiorgioG 2y ago
The paranoia is real.
- igor47 2y ago
  Apple has given me zero reason to trust it, and lots of reasons not to? I mean, it's a closed ecosystem. I'm not sure how this is arguable...
- aidenn0 2y ago
  Almost weekly I have someone annoyed at me because I don't have an iPhone, so they can't AirDrop or iMessage or FaceTime me.