44 ms·

I swear I still have no idea what app.net is.

by cheez 14y ago

alanh 14y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App.net#App.net http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App.net#App.net > It is designed to be similar to Twitter, but have no advertising, instead relying on user and developer subscriptions. They began directly crowd funding it on July 13, 2012, with a goal of $500,000 and about 10,000 backers. [They] exceeded the goal by August 13th, raising at least $750,000 with over 11,000 backers. The service is currently in alpha. ADN has made explicit promises to try to align their own incentives with those of both users and developers.
- cheez 14y ago
  So another Twitter. I remember hearing something about an open application bus which was way more enticing to me.
  - _pius 14y ago
    It's the latter.
  - ldayley 14y ago
    IMO this is really what this developer payment scheme is all about (based on the discussions with Caldwell, et al on app.net). As a twitter clone it is sufficient (minus the network effect), but it is really a messaging and identity platform waiting to be defined by the applications written on top of it. Caldwell alludes to this near the end of the OP.
  - natrius 14y ago
    This sentiment is common, but I don't see what makes an open application bus useful.
- Sharma 14y ago
  Yeah for that part, now somewhere in that developer program information it says : "Developers are free to monetize their applications through their own mechanisms; this program should be thought of as a “bonus” for building software that App.net members use and love." So developers can add advertisements and now no advertising feature of app.net is void?
  - Karunamon 14y ago
    An application utilizing a platform and the platform itself are two different things.
    - Sharma 14y ago
      No.Utilization is fine but application utilizing platform should not invalidate platform's one of the main reason it was supported by many! What you are saying is acceptable if users are allowed use those developed apps freely(without app.net membership)but here first we need membership to access these apps!
      - Karunamon 14y ago
        Then don't use the applications which use ads. App.net itself is still free of ads - you cannot say the same of Twitter. This is akin to saying that Windows 8 is filled with advertisements because the Music and Video apps link to the appropriate store frontends.
Khao 14y ago
And you have to pay for it. Which means actually no social interaction ever because none of my friends would pay for such a thing.

I swear I still have no idea what app.net is.

by cheez 14y ago

I swear I still have no idea what app.net is.

alanh 14y ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App.net#App.net http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App.net#App.net > It is designed to be similar to Twitter, but have no advertising, instead relying on user and developer subscriptions. They began directly crowd funding it on July 13, 2012, with a goal of $500,000 and about 10,000 backers. [They] exceeded the goal by August 13th, raising at least $750,000 with over 11,000 backers. The service is currently in alpha. ADN has made explicit promises to try to align their own incentives with those of both users and developers.

cheez 14y ago
So another Twitter. I remember hearing something about an open application bus which was way more enticing to me.
- _pius 14y ago
  It's the latter.
- ldayley 14y ago
  IMO this is really what this developer payment scheme is all about (based on the discussions with Caldwell, et al on app.net). As a twitter clone it is sufficient (minus the network effect), but it is really a messaging and identity platform waiting to be defined by the applications written on top of it. Caldwell alludes to this near the end of the OP.
- natrius 14y ago
  This sentiment is common, but I don't see what makes an open application bus useful.
Sharma 14y ago
Yeah for that part, now somewhere in that developer program information it says : "Developers are free to monetize their applications through their own mechanisms; this program should be thought of as a “bonus” for building software that App.net members use and love." So developers can add advertisements and now no advertising feature of app.net is void?
- Karunamon 14y ago
  An application utilizing a platform and the platform itself are two different things.
  - Sharma 14y ago
    No.Utilization is fine but application utilizing platform should not invalidate platform's one of the main reason it was supported by many! What you are saying is acceptable if users are allowed use those developed apps freely(without app.net membership)but here first we need membership to access these apps!
    - Karunamon 14y ago
      Then don't use the applications which use ads. App.net itself is still free of ads - you cannot say the same of Twitter. This is akin to saying that Windows 8 is filled with advertisements because the Music and Video apps link to the appropriate store frontends.

Khao 14y ago

And you have to pay for it. Which means actually no social interaction ever because none of my friends would pay for such a thing.