←back to thread

Apple Invites

(www.apple.com)
651 points openchampagne | 10 comments | 04 Feb 25 16:21 UTC | HN request time: 0.016s | source | bottom
Show context
happyopossum ◴[04 Feb 25 21:12 UTC] No.42938792[source]▶
My wife is in a position (board chair for a co-op) that results in her sending out a lot of invites to events. Evite has kinda been the go-to in her social/co-op group for ages, but man it suuuuuuucks these days. Ads everywhere, annoying patterns, and lacks a bunch of nice features that this seems to have.

Very happy to see this

replies(8): >>42938905 #>>42939482 #>>42939573 #>>42940233 #>>42942723 #>>42943533 #>>42945924 #>>42950529 #
nostromo ◴[04 Feb 25 21:57 UTC] No.42939482[source]▶
I organize a lot of events for a rugby team, and our events are now all on Partiful.

Maybe it'll go downhill like Evite and Facebook Events - but for now it's quite good.

replies(2): >>42939561 #>>42948653 #
svnt ◴[04 Feb 25 22:02 UTC] No.42939561[source]▶
How is it funded? That is your answer.
replies(2): >>42939650 #>>42939684 #
mjamesaustin ◴[04 Feb 25 22:10 UTC] No.42939684[source]▶
Currently Partiful doesn't generate revenue, which is evidence for its quality. As soon as the purse strings get attached, it'll be time to get out. But for now, it's an excellent service.
replies(2): >>42940852 #>>42942730 #
ryandrake ◴[04 Feb 25 23:32 UTC] No.42940852[source]▶
This tracks so well as an indicator, with many other products. As soon as the company starts making money, their product is going to become awful and it's time to find an alternative. Why can't tech escape this cycle?
replies(7): >>42941198 #>>42941578 #>>42942095 #>>42943386 #>>42944055 #>>42951325 #>>42956337 #
1. Schiendelman ◴[05 Feb 25 01:17 UTC] No.42942095[source]▶
It has. Apple escaped this cycle. Their software is great. Instead of you being the product, you buy the product. People then just complain the product is expensive. On this website, I roll my eyes.
replies(3): >>42943901 #>>42943947 #>>42949701 #
2. lostlogin ◴[05 Feb 25 04:42 UTC] No.42943901[source]▶
I want nice things, zero cost and complete privacy without adverts. Why is this so hard?

/s

replies(1): >>42960662 #
3. StressedDev ◴[05 Feb 25 04:49 UTC] No.42943947[source]▶
Agreed - If you want good products, you should support the people who create them. That means paying. If you want a privacy destroying enshitified product, keep using "free" products.
replies(1): >>42949836 #
4. rchaud ◴[05 Feb 25 15:21 UTC] No.42949701[source]▶
Apple stuff has always been expensive, and never once has Apple justified raising the price because they're 'privacy friendly'.

Apple has a multi-billion dollar ads business. You are still the product, even if the execution isn't as brazenly anti-consumer as Google and Facebook.

replies(1): >>42950394 #
5. bluSCALE4 ◴[05 Feb 25 15:27 UTC] No.42949836[source]▶
This isn't so simple. I love a lot of apps but I'm not willing to pay a monthly or yearly sub. I'll give you $5-$250 but I won't give you $5 a month.
replies(1): >>42958073 #
6. Our_Benefactors ◴[05 Feb 25 15:59 UTC] No.42950394[source]▶
> never once has Apple justified raising the price because they're 'privacy friendly'.

No, but they have made privacy a key selling point of their platform and communicated that clearly to customers.

Just because they never have formally stated “oh and by the way this increases the price of our products by X/unit”, doesn’t mean that feature isn’t included in the cost.

7. Schiendelman ◴[06 Feb 25 01:59 UTC] No.42958073{3}[source]▶
Well then you won't get maintenance or support. People need to eat long-term, not just once.
8. account42 ◴[06 Feb 25 09:30 UTC] No.42960662[source]▶
It's pretty easy actually - most open source software fits the bill. Quality software can be pretty cheap to make per user.

The only problem is services where hosting costs need to be paid somehow and network effects mean that for-profit competition will win the market even if the product is inevitably enshittified. Doesn't matter how good your open and community funded event platform is if Apple and Facebook can afford to shove their solution in front of everyone you want to interact with.

replies(1): >>42963792 #
9. Schiendelman ◴[06 Feb 25 16:13 UTC] No.42963792{3}[source]▶
What open source software is a "nice thing"? We're talking about high quality user experience here. I don't think it's controversial to say that's vanishingly rare in OSS.
replies(1): >>42970683 #
10. account42 ◴[07 Feb 25 08:49 UTC] No.42970683{4}[source]▶
Actually it's proprietary software that's more likely to be full of anti-patterns and flows designed in the interest of the corporation rather than the user while advanced functionality is missing because it might confuse the lowest common denominator user. Looking flashy and retard-safe design does not make a high quality user experience.