Keep in mind that there's a cognitive cost to evaluating alternate services, too. If Pocket works for you, and trying out InstaPaper costs you an hour and $5, the $5 are negligible. The hour isn't.

That's IMHO the big problem with all app market places - there's a glut of solutions for every problem. Nobody can be reasonably expected to sift through this, and so we end up with lots of small apps.

Corollary to that: By now, it's almost a waste of time to develop an app in a segment where a cheap clone can be knocked off in a few weekends.

That's a good point. And an interesting observation I'd never consciously taken into account.

> Interesting to me that you both don't really seem to love Pocket - you're just happy it almost does what Instapaper does, for free.

I'm a former Instapaper user that loves Pocket. I was barely willing to try Pocket since my queue was already in Instapaper, but I was tired of my chosen platform being treated as second-class. Android Instapaper apps sucked except for the excellent PaperMache (Yes, I have an HP TouchPad), which was just slow on Android.

So, I moved to Pocket and I love it. The text formatting on my CM9 tablet is GREAT by default, keeps images (in offline mode, too) and has a VERY attractive grid of unread articles that shows an article thumbnail. It's a much more enjoyable experience.

That said, I bought Instapaper for and tried it out. I'd be happy with the new Instapaper app had I never switched to Pocket, but Pocket is just better than Instapaper in their current iterations. I'm definitely glad there's competition on Android now though.

One Instapaper feature I miss though: auto-tweeting articles that I have starred.

I love Pocket. It's one of my favourite Android apps. Apart from the great features (video, paging, tagging) I've always found the parsing algorithm to be superior to the alternatives. Another plus is their dedication to support many platforms, which means I'm not tied to Android.

Ultimately I liked Pocketso much I paid for the pro version, just like many others[1]. Their business model seems pretty sound and they have a lot of users and the product is excellent. What is so exciting about Instapaper?

[1] http://getpocket.com/blog/2012/01/what-devices-did-read-it-l...

Eh, I just think the service read it later type apps provide has been commoditized. I have used pretty much every one of this kind of app. They all do the same, relatively unimportant thing with about the same level of polish. In the words of Jobs, it is a feature (of future browsers), not a product.

well, all those $5s add up when you buy enough apps, and that's the whole economics of the app market. you spend small amounts on enough apps, and you won't even realize how much you have spent compared to one time payment to all apps as a bundle.

Also I never understood the appeal of instapaper, what exactly does it do better than pocket? I never used instapaper, so any answer would be appreciated.

As a user of both (though it's been awhile since I've used Instapaper) I think Pocket does more than Instapaper (handles videos), I'm also curious to hear what Instapaper does better, if anything.

Actually, there's a third option: people that have never used instapaper (because it's never been on any of our platforms). Some people like me have boycotted Apple hardware for years. (Shock, horror)

It does more than Instapaper though I think. As far as I can tell Instapaper doesn't handle video like Pocket does?

(I've been using Pocket since before it was Read-It-Later on my iPhone and paid for it on iOS and again after switching to Android, maybe Instapaper does more now).

why is this reply being downvoted? Damn it people, if you don't agree, reply. don't downvote.

(EDIT: shawnc's answer was being downvoted at the time of writing, now its' in green)