Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | bighi's commentslogin

> if the church invented the notion of marriage

It didn't. Specially not the Christian church. The Christian bible was the basis for the christian religion. It was written before the religion existed. And it already mentions married people.

We have evidence of marriage going back to the 2300's BC. And it probably existed before that, we just didn't find the evidence yet.


I think they BUY mobile apps.

Their modus operandi seems to be:

1) Buy successful mobile app.

2) Increase the prices to insane amounts.

3) Profit off of the people still using the overpriced app.

4) Use the profits to buy another mobile app.


They probably intend to keep the app running. And nothing else.


Evernote had subscription since the beginning


For the first few years I could ignore the subscription because I didn’t want those features. Then they eventually made the subscription required for really basic things, so I left Evernote.


Not only decent, Evernote was great before they ditched their native apps.


4. If you're going to do the rewrite, don't take many years working on it, just to release a broken product missing lots of core features.

5. If you're releasing a broken product missing core features, don't take many YEARS after release to un-brake your product and build some of the missing features again.


Most EVERNOTE users wanted it? I sincerely doubt that even 20% of Evernote users want that.

People that want a collaborative Docs app already have Google Docs. Evernote is mostly a "digital cabinet". It's where notes and documents go to die (in a good way).


I've used the collaborative feature in google docs only a few times even tho i write google docs like daily. most docs are authored by 1 person. the side comments, however, are invaluable


I think number 1 could be done, but not like Evernote did.

It's been what? 3 years since they released their javascript app, and they still didn't rewrite some important old features. Just last week we got back the option to start writing a note in the title instead of the body.

3 years!

I could write an entire Evernote competitor from scratch in 3 years, as a single developer (as a javascript app, not as multiple native apps).

And they STILL don't have reliable note-synching.

It took them too long, and their app is too crappy. But a GOOD rewrite would have worked just fine.


It is much harder to rewrite an existing product since you have to retain compatibility. If the old version of the app was crap then presumably the persistent data structures are also crap, but you can't discard them. So you end up building a compatibility layer or migration process, but in the end you have to support the same general data model as the old version.


A rewrite is not the same as a writing a similar app from scratch.

You need to worry about deciding what functionality to preserve, what to change, and what to throw away. Most rebuilds either fail because they skip this step and the result is inadequate for the job, or they do this step and get bogged down in the minutiae of locking down requirements, digging into edge cases, and stakeholder management.


Why is it so hard to implement apparently simple features? This is surprising to me.


And it used to be so good. Not being ironic. For example, coca-cola patented their formula. It didn't prevent other companies from making their own "colas", like Pepsi. They just couldn't make it using the exact coca-cola formula. Which is fair, I'd say. You have to create your own way to achieve that result.

The equivalent in software should be "you can replicate the idea, but not the code behind it". But somehow that became "you can't replicate the idea at all", which is super broken.


coca cola never patented their formula, it's still a secret

same with WD40/KFC/...


That's exactly how it should be. Intellectual "Property" is only property so long as it's kept secret. Once the secret is out it's just information.

IMHO Patents are unethical. Patents for IP are an atrocity and Software Patents are a crime against humanity.


And Coca-Cola has an ingredient benefit - the fact they have a license to put coca into the drinks is completely unique in the industry AFAIK. It might be troublesome for a competitor to get that same license.


Technically, Coca-Cola puts in a coca leaf extract that is produced by Stepan Company. They are the ones who have the only license to import coca leaves in the US and they use them to make medical cocaine. The extract they sell to Coca-Cola comes after all the good stuff is gone. Coca-Cola never touches the leaves.


Thank you for the details. I guess in that case Pepsi could buy them from the same place, although I suspect there is an exclusivity agreement there!


Coca-Cola buys the extract from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepan_Company which, IIRC, is the only one with a license to import the leaves.


Thank you for the details. I guess in that case Pepsi could buy them from the same place, although I suspect there is an exclusivity agreement there!


Kids at young age are more a thing than a person, so it kind of fits.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: