or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by malax

You're right.  Philgar's recent posts are full of errors and mischaracterizations.   Apple is never buying anything from the publishers; there is no wholesale price.  Amazon was never limited by the proposed agreement; the MFN clause just gave Apple the ability to implement a lower price under some conditions.
Unlike many posters here, I don't blame the judge, I blame the law.   I don't think Apple did anything wrong, but I'm not terribly surprised that they (were determined) to have violated some aspects of the law.  Most people here are applying a standard of "what the law should be" rather than what the laws say.  And since we're not lawyers, what do we know.   It's like when we watch the Winter Olympics every four years and deem ourselves experts on the rules of...
For those arguing that of course "App Store" is invalid, explain all the following trademarks: The Room Store Workday Salesforce The Running Store   It's easy to forget that before Apple created the App Store it was not generic.  Nowadays it seems obvious and generic and presumably that factored into Apple dropping this issue.   I do find it amusing that Amazon chose or got stuck with "Appstore" instead. 
  My point was there is zero evidence (so far at least) that Apple implemented this change.  Given that the list that someone assembled above shows that this affects maybe 20 apps, and given that Apple has made no announcement about this, the safer bet would be that this is not some Apple-funded promotion. Because, you know, usually people promote promotions.  As in: "Hey we're giving you these free apps to thank you for your business!" etc.  In all the example you cite,...
Why do we think Apple is "giving these apps away for free?"  The only fact is that some apps are free now that weren't free recently.  The sellers control the pricing.  So either they worked out a deal with Apple or they decided to buy mindshare by giving away their older apps.  Infinity Blade (the original) was changed to a free app after a few years and I'm sure it helped sell a lot of copies of Infinity Blade II.  I seriously doubt Apple is footing the bill for this.
  Of the 5 watches I've purchased over the past 2 decades, I think 1 cost less than $200.  So what was your point?
  Ah.  The article implied otherwise: " even though all it really does is play back the album. It does not add the songs to a user's music library."
There are lots of problems with this.  Not the least of which is that people who bought a Samsung to "get" the album early aren't actually getting the album.  Instead they are getting some app that happens to play the album.  That's not even close to getting a free album.  The fact that the crappy app just happens to ask for (presumably) unncessary permissions is just gravy. 
  Slightly off topic does how does Google even make any money off Android?  It can't be a significant portion of their revenue.
Agreed.  They must have gotten tired of waiting for Google to offer $3B.
New Posts  All Forums: