For a while I wished for a decent Instapaper client for Android, either paid or free. But eventually I gave up and switched to Read It Later, which is perfectly adequate for my needs. I don't see what all the fuss is about over Instapaper in particular when there are competing services that work just fine and that care enough to develop an Android app themselves.
Two features, that I love, that Instapaper has over Read It Later Pro are pagination and Readability support.
Scrolling works OK on PCs because of spacebar/PgDn it is pretty stupid on touch devices. However, pagination, at least as implemented in Instapaper, is not without it's downsides. I sometimes have issues with pagination not being consistent (moving back and forth are sometimes not exact opposites).
Since I am viewing content without ads and want people to be able to continue to write I support Readability. I don't know that they deserve the 30% cut they take but there isn't really much competition out there. Flattr doesn't count in my book though it is similar.
Don't forget the lock in. If you've been using Instapaper for 2 years, you might have a huge archive and a couple of good friends that share interesting stuff. You'd loose all of that by switching to Read It Later.
One thing that I sorely miss in Instapaper though is the ability to mark text fragments and save them as quotes (like in iBooks for example), and add notes to it. I'm reading all these texts, and I can't mark quotes or note my thoughts. I hate it. Does Read It Later offer such a feature?
You can export your stuff from Instapaper as CSV. Read it Later lets you export your stuff as HTML. If you wanted to switch you could probably script the migration in a few minutes.
I think a lot of people here are making an assumption that the majority of the effort here will be in building the application. But note Marco's words:
> then supporting and maintaining it in parallel with my iOS app indefinitely
and
> you’ll answer all support email that comes from it
I think Marco's insight is that he knows how much support work he gets just from the iOS application (notice all those posts he does about what proportion of devices have different versions of iOS on them, and the consequences for a developer). And I think his perception is that supporting an Android application could well be much more effort, at least partly because there are many more OS versions and device combinations. The developers here are probably thinking "hey this must be 90% development work, 10% answering emails"; Marco might be thinking of it more like "this could be 60% answering emails, 40% writing code" (I'm guessing at the numbers to illustrate the point, by the way).
Developing the application himself would involve learning Android development to a level where he can produce an application that meets his high standards. Contracting the development work out would still leave him needing to support the Android application. I can see why the option he's suggesting looks attractive.
I once (2000 or so) wrote a very smart webmail client used by my then client's customer service. The most used feature were context-sensitive canned responses. It would check the message for keywords (Bayesian filtering came later) and suggest the most likely answer. It was an ugly JSP-based thing that took me a month to write. It should be much quicker to do now with modern technology.
You need to make the canned responses use actual client data, have some variability and track what canned responses were used before for the client. We also allowed the human operator to customize the message and check if what the machine thinks is appropriate really is. We had more than 80% accuracy and we continuously measured that against the keywords found in the previous messages.
The "official Instapaper app" designation does come with one significant carrot: users of your app wouldn't have to pay the subscription fee that others have to pay in order to access the Instapaper API.
Is that enough to justify a 50/50 split? I don't know, but it is more than a blessing and promotion.
If developing an Android version is as easy as they put it, this can be a very profitable deal. It's safe to assume you'd make way more money than you would by building this as a contractor.
You get a few thousand paying customers to begin with. Your competing service would take at least a year to catch up, and has no guarantee of success.
Yet he already claims it wouldn't be profitable for him to do it. He's allowing you to build an application which he wouldn't make with to begin with, and them claim 50% of the profit...
He has an additional cost you aren't factoring into the equation: opportunity cost. This is the money he loses by not focusing on iOS. He isn't saying the app isn't worth building, he's saying the app isn't worth him building.
Seriously, these term are generous as far as these kinds of deals go, but I'm not sure you could make money on it. It would really depend on how good other existing clients are.
He's going further than saying it's not worth him building, he's saying it's not worth building at all. If it was worth building, he would hire someone to do it for him. He's saying he could accept it if it falls into his lap, costing him exactly $0.
I think none of this is relevant, it's pretty clear Arment personally doesn't believe that anyone can make an 'Android Instapaper' with the same quality, features, and level of support, running on enough compatible devices and sold through enough Android marketplaces, to make it _as profitable_ as just concentrating on iOS and be done with it.
The challenge he puts forward is for someone who disagrees to take up. Personally, looking at the Android ecosystem and the quality of applications in the Android Marketplace, I think he's right. It's perfectly possible to write great Android apps, and many exist, but if you look at who makes them, they are without exception applications made by big corporations who don't make money off the apps themselves, but from associated services, ads, etc.
The cost for him to make an andriod app would be much higher than an experienced andriod dev team since he has almost no experience developing on andriod phones
You've got an established brand, established channels for publicity, all the backend stuff covered, a completed API and all of the specifications worked out for you? And you'd not be happy to collect half the proceeds in perpetuity? I'd be thrilled with a quarter of that action. 50% is generous.
That sounds like an awesome deal to me. This guy has already built the business. It's turn-key. Hell, if I were an Android developer, I would start tonight.
Third party developers can only develop apps using the official API that paid-for users have access to. The official app doesn't require a subscription.
Asking for a 50% cut for someone else's work (which, in his own words, "almost certainly won’t be worth the investment") on a platform he's been trolling for years? Is he dense?
Instapaper is not just the app. It's the supporting web service and brand too. It's not 50% of a new thing. It's 50% of instapaper for android which is nothing without instapaper.
That's the point of his offer. He doesn't believe that developing Instapaper for Android will be worth it, but if someone does, he's welcome to give it a try.
My understanding is that there's a large part of Instapaper is server-side. Since there's no recurring subscription, only an initial fee, the maintenance of the service for existing users is supported by the initial fee paid by new users. This model would not make it possible to allow the developers of clients for other platforms to keep all the revenues for themselves as the costs of maintaining the service infrastructure are non-trivial.
Just checked out of curiosity and readitlater pro has 100k+ downloads. There couldn't be a clearer indication that Marco is leaving money on the table.
No, Google is doing a promotion of certain apps for $0.10 each day. If I remember well, the common price of the app is $1.00 (I bought if a long time ago). It is a great app and they are certainly making good money with it.
"What do you say?" -- I say Android 4.0 "save pages for viewing later offline" feature. I can't comment on the 50% cut as I don't know how much your API provides, but as for marketing I'd imagine I could target the "instapaper android" long tail and be done with it? Maybe not.
I'd happily pay $2.99 (or $4.99 or maybe even more) for a great Android Instapaper app over using "save pages for viewing later offline". The reason being that Instapaper deals with multi-device sync properly for me. For me, the real "magic" of Instapaper is being able to bookmark interesting looking articles on my laptop before I leave home in the morning, read some of them on the iPad at a cafe on the way to work, read/bookmark some more in gaps at work on my work machine, and skim through articles on my phone while in the queue at the bank or post office... As a mobile developer, I alternate between a few phones, and I really miss the Instapaper iPhone client when I'm carrying an Android device...
What is this talk about "ripping off my iOS app’s private API"? Is there a reason it shouldn't be available for Android, and Android apps should use an inferior API?
I understand people would not make some API public until they are ready to support it, but here this guy seems offended because people somehow stole his work - which seems ridiculous.
It's not about an "inferior API".
The web version of Instapaper is free - but if you want to use a native client on your phone then you either have to pay a subscription fee to get API access, or buy the official iPhone client.
The Android community has moved on. Instapaper had its day, and will be around for some time. But there are way better apps, that have a commitment to all platforms and more features, faster dev iteration. Spool is the one for me.
Looks like a rather good deal to me. Being backed by Instapaper automatically gets you a lot of users. What would be the chances for any indie developer to get half of those users without Instapaper's support ?
- users that have heard of Instapaper and need an app that does what this does. When they need an app that does a certain thing, the majority of the users will pick the popular brand.
- users that have switched from an iPhone recently and have been using that
- users that have seen the app on a friend's phone
etc ...
Seriously now, if you built a game now, and got EA Games to publish it for you, wouldn't you like to get 50% of the profits? Not anyone can build a minecraft
Case 1 and 3 would be new business, you'd still have to convince those users that Instapaper is right for them, there's nothing automatic about it. Also what makes you think Instapaper is the popular brand on Android?
Case 2 I'll concede but that's hardly "a lot" of users.
> Surely not the ones using the Instapaper iPhone app...
Of course those as well, when times comes to change devices, keeping existing services is an important factor and may make or break the decision to switch from $CURRENT_PLATFORM to $OTHER_PLATFORM.
I agree. I use Instafetch and it covers 100% of what I used on the ios version of Instapaper to the point where I couldn't tell you what other features IP had over IF.
Marco, if you're reading this: don't do it. Even with a 50/50 split, you're going to be leaving a tonne of money on the table.
IMHO, you should contract someone you respect to do the V1, buy the code from them and own all the rights, and start maintaining it along side your iOS version.
Marco - thanks, but your API still says it's BETA. If I want to develop an app - and provide integration with social networking sites - having a stable API for the core product is a must.
Standing up for Android? 70% of apps in android market wont work on Kindle, Plus you cannot directly install from Android market on Kindle as it goes to Amazon App Store. What Are you even talking about who will test the apps on so many devices ?
Android has come a long way: 100 million activations, 450,000 developers, 215 carriers, 310 devices, 112 countries, 400,000 activations per day, 200,000 apps in the Android market, 4.5 billion apps installed.
(shamelessly stolen from :http://jjinux.blogspot.com/2011/07/google-io-2011.html)
If that is not all to deter you, Developing the class of games you can develop on Obj-C because it produces native code. cannot be done on Dalvik/java. Writing GL/SL shaders is very tough compared to Obj-C which has better support as it is C.
You have excellent debugging tools at your disposal on iOS and then look at Android Debugger :( You never know, You can never optimize your games on android the way you can on iOS, Just because it generates a native executable. Sure some day even android would support native apps, But that day the app delivery promise would be broken. You would have to make games for at-least the major mobile manufacturers and test them on major variants. And You would still end up not reaching potentially every android device. Because of Hardware profile inconsistency. So the whole reachablity is a myth.
Add to that the day someone starts developing an App on android in C++ whats the advantage ? There were many Open platforms before android whats new ? Look at Openmoko.org
Sure android is great for freeloaders but the consumer just ends up paying the same amount in-spite of the OS being free. What the point really that android is making ? that no one else before it made ?
Android is a ton of hype + Google Marketing + Semiconductor Gangs(Samsung+LG+others..)
Standing up for Android? 70% of apps in android market wont work on Kindle
The Kindle is not Android. I mean, technically- to the HN crowd- it is. But as far as Google, Amazon and the consumer are concerned, it isn't. So Android Market not working with it is an irrelevance.
OpenMoko? No-one used it. "What's new" with Android is the millions of people using it. Of course there is plenty of money to be made there.
Frankly give me an example of straightaway success like iOS on Android, Just one example would be enough. I tell you there is none. And then there is a growing problem of pirated apps on android. Now i will give you an example of straight away success on iOS, tapulous.com and many more are there, iOS is where millions could be made, Android impossible. Lead by example.
3 years into Android and those devices still can't display webpages at the speed and precision that we'd need them to. I haven't had the chance to try out Ice Cream Sandwich yet, but I have this rule of thumb: html5 is crossbrowser alright, but not crossplatform yet.
When I look at how my desktop's chrome browser is faring with Twitter being laggy to scroll, with processes taking up far more ram than what the android heap would allow, all this while the devices display sizes increase radically and hog for even more graphic performance... I simply don't see HTML5 as any sort of reasonable option for Android, at least until the market is filled with ICS+ API level devices. And even then, I still haven't seen if ICS can handle webviews properly enough for building full apps.
I'm continually surprised by developers throwing out figures like 50% this or that… the (30%) apple app store is a great example.
If you've ever actually RUN anything, you'll know that 30% is pretty much nothing — try retail, or farming.
I think Marco is looking to be proven wrong. He doesn't believe enough in android as a platform — but, what he is offering is the support of his massive audience for someone to have a crack at.
What's with the copy-paste headline by Marco? And for daring to say something as ridiculous as that, I'm surprised this guy gets so often on the front page of HN.
Forget we even asked Marco! We don't need Instapaper for Android. We'll survive. Now Android 4.0 has a "read later" feature in the stock browser, anyway.
This is a bit of a tangent, butI have a droid x2 I bought less than 6 months ago, and I have absolutely no idea if 4.0 will ever come to my phone or when if it does.
This is one of the many problems with android, and I doubt I'll buy another android phone primarily for this reason.
