1,139 karma · joined February 3, 2011
But on the other hand...I'm really wondering why this needs to be an iOS app. Written content is perfect for publishing on the web, I really don't think you'll be running into any speed issues when you release this as a web magazine. And even if you would, why not make the content available both native and on the web?
I'm aware that Marco is an iOS developer, and that a lot of his readers (myself included) will have iOS devices, but for the sake of the open web I'm still slightly disappointed.
It's built into the normal iPhone texting application and turned on by default. When my Mom texts another Apple user, iMessage will automatically route her message over the Internet. She doesn't have to approve this, and honestly, probably won't even know the difference.
BTW, obviously all startups handle money in some way, but for these 3 it's a bit more complicated, as they're providing financial services to third-parties. (Ebay+Kickstarter to sellers/buyers, Stripe to sellers.)
I'd be interested to know what this policy change is though. I believe Visa didn't work on iZettle in the UK since launch.
That's where the problem lies, they first took money from users, and then "offer" to pay it back. They should've done it the other way around, only charging money for sites which actually signed up to the service.
They've done a good job at making it sound like a great service for publishers, but when you think about it a bit more it's quite shady.
Anyone who can enlighten me why this would be a good strategy? Seems like unnecessary fragmentation to me.
Maybe because you said definitely JavaScript, and the GP said he had javascript disabled, but your point still stands.
And from the author's viewpoint (Instagram is just "a few filters [...] a few sharing options") Instagram wasn't first either; Hipstamatic was doing the same thing way before them, with a different business model.
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width; initial-scale=1.0">