We envisioned a pool of differentiated, fast-growing third-party applications would sustain the numbers needed to make the business work. Our initial developer adoption exceeded expectations, but that initial excitement didn’t ultimately translate into a big enough pool of customers for those developers.
I've been a paying subscriber to App.net for the entire life of the platform (that is, until they cancelled my subscription this week).
When App.net launched many were drawing a line of comparison between it and Twitter. And since this announcement I'm seeing many drawing a line of comparison between App.net and Micro.blog. This isn't an apples-to-apples comparison.
If you read Dalton's vision above, it doesn't read anything at all like Twitter or Micro.blog.
App.net was an API for application developers to build on top of. Yes, something Twitter-like could be build on top of it. But so could so many other things. It had a data storage service, a push notification service, and even a crowd-funding feature called Backer that would, presumably, allow developers to pre-charge for new features for apps.
App.net was a very ambitious platform that, I believe, got pigeon-holed into a Twitter comparison because they created Alpha - a Twitter-like microblogging platform - as a demonstration of their own API. I think this muddied their messaging to the point where most people would describe App.net as a Twitter alternative.
Manton Reece's forthcoming Micro.blog is not anything at all like App.net. Though, many are confused about Micro.blog similar to how many were confused about App.net. (I've had at least three conversations about Micro.blog where people have no idea what it will do.) They are comparing it to Twitter even though Manton doesn't usually draw that line himself. And I think he will have to find a way to communicate its decentralization and the fact that it will work with your existing blogging platform so it too doesn't get packaged and framed as simply a Twitter replacement.