I think there is definitely something to be said for the view that App.net is this elusive concept that people are wildly dreaming about. Look through at the 100 submissions about App.net per day, there are so many different speculations, even contradictory ones, but not a lot of information coming out.
There's a group that thinks App.net is not the point, they think App.net is somehow the social network backbone or "social-network-as-a-service" or something. But that doesn't make a lot of sense to me because App.net is charging. So if you start you're little niche social network "MechanicWorld," which seems like back-to-the-future but ok, are the users paying MechanicWorld or App.net (how would they know App.net exists?). Is MechanicWorld going to offer free signup, provide an advertising based business model, and simply subsidize the free user accounts? If that's the case, what's the point of App.net again?
Some people think it is a twitter but for people that visit HN/TechCrunch ... don't those people use Twitter? That's a pretty strange market, but this one is a bit of a strawman, I've only heard it a bit and I don't think Dalton has intention of this.
I think it is still very vague what it is and how it will work. I think most concrete, least nebulous, it could be is "Twitter that You Pay For - Period." It has been covered to death, but I don't think you can rival Twitter with that.
Do you really see CNN blasting it all over the place, restaurants putting "Follow us on App.net, ($50/yr)," etc? That's the weight, unfortunately Twitter has. Twitter has people believing they are responsible for the Arab Spring (yeah right) -- I don't know how App.net is going to get this kind of press.
And the other thing, App.net, really? That's the name? When I first heard about it, I thought "Oh, ok they seem to have some completely unrelated business already and are just using this 'App.net' thing temporarily" but I don't see anything implying that is going to change; I'm going to assume someone is working on this, because that's no name for what they're trying to do (whatever it is exactly).
Nevertheless, it is nice to see something besides "We are revolutionizing the way users share photos or communicate" "... but we don't know how we're going to make money -- advertising?"
There's a group that thinks App.net is not the point, they think App.net is somehow the social network backbone or "social-network-as-a-service" or something. But that doesn't make a lot of sense to me because App.net is charging. So if you start you're little niche social network "MechanicWorld," which seems like back-to-the-future but ok, are the users paying MechanicWorld or App.net (how would they know App.net exists?). Is MechanicWorld going to offer free signup, provide an advertising based business model, and simply subsidize the free user accounts? If that's the case, what's the point of App.net again?
Some people think it is a twitter but for people that visit HN/TechCrunch ... don't those people use Twitter? That's a pretty strange market, but this one is a bit of a strawman, I've only heard it a bit and I don't think Dalton has intention of this.
I think it is still very vague what it is and how it will work. I think most concrete, least nebulous, it could be is "Twitter that You Pay For - Period." It has been covered to death, but I don't think you can rival Twitter with that.
Do you really see CNN blasting it all over the place, restaurants putting "Follow us on App.net, ($50/yr)," etc? That's the weight, unfortunately Twitter has. Twitter has people believing they are responsible for the Arab Spring (yeah right) -- I don't know how App.net is going to get this kind of press.
And the other thing, App.net, really? That's the name? When I first heard about it, I thought "Oh, ok they seem to have some completely unrelated business already and are just using this 'App.net' thing temporarily" but I don't see anything implying that is going to change; I'm going to assume someone is working on this, because that's no name for what they're trying to do (whatever it is exactly).
Nevertheless, it is nice to see something besides "We are revolutionizing the way users share photos or communicate" "... but we don't know how we're going to make money -- advertising?"