For example the top story "Glass". Am I supposed to automatically know what that is about? Same with this story. I click on the title and it's basically an announcement for a new service named "Pixter". Why not put this in the title.
Is Hacker News a site exclusive to Silicon Valley insiders? I live far, far away from Silicon valley. Am I supposed to infer the topic of the article by looking at the title and go "Ah yes, that's the talk of the town you know. Glass and Pixter".
To make it clear I have added Pixter to the title
(PS: Despite my criticism, HN is by far the best tech news site around. To everyone involved: Keep it up!)
We finish the article by "Over the last year, paid services like App.net and Posthaven have gained traction. Pixter is heavily inspired by these services, we want to thank Dalton and the team over at App.net for inspiring us."
I don't like for the same reasons though, I'd prefer people put something descriptive there.
Live filter is pretty cool though.
Thanks for your feedback, will definitely look into it
We understand the need to come to other platforms, at the moment it is tough because of limited time. We have worked really hard over the past 3 months to come to this. There are only two of us, one designer and one coder.
I don't think that's a good way to sell a product.
We will look into it
I'm impressed it was built by two dudes in such a short timeframe. I've been working on my webapp for almost an entire year.
The first sentence had some strange effect on my brain. It's just a small typo but given the context my brain had some problems parsing it.
'break;'
Personally I'd be more likely to pay a one-off fee for a mobile app than a subscription, but that might be due to my low usage of them. I hope it works out for you :)
PS: we have a free account, which allows you to follow as many people as you want. It's like a read-only mode, writes are limited to 12 photos a year :) Every sign up helps!
Keep at it guys. The first few months of running a paid service is crucial, once you hit critical mass, there's gonna be no looking back.
Third parties that want to display your pictures can only do so for pictures that are shared publicly(more private options coming soon). They have basic caching options, but cannot store the image, and most importantly cannot use them out of context.
I would say inspired by both of them
Even for social networks and things, people will gladly pay money for value you provide.
The problem is that it's not the kind of thing that VC's will get as excited about, because unless you can grow into many millions of dollars of revenue fast, it's probably not an interesting way to turn over their money.
So, GMail, Tumblr, Twitter, Facebook, even something like Groupon could exist as a successful paid app with a one time or recurring revenue stream.
