Originally Posted by mjtomlin
This is mainly about digital content being purchased from and delivered to an iOS device. Apple doesn't sell air conditioners. Why would Apple be worried about users buying air conditioners? Apple does sell digital books. They should worry about their competition getting a free ride on their own platform. They are essentially giving their competition an advantage. Does Amazon allow other book stores on the Kindle device? Nope. So maybe Apple should just completely ban other book stores. Wouldn't that be more fair? Or maybe Apple should make an iBook "e-book" device, that's the EXACT same thing, but not allow other book stores? There are other platforms that are more closed than Apple's, but for some reason only Apple is evil and controlling!?
You're using the same incorrect argument that anonymouse is using. Apple has not only allowed, but encouraged these apps to work the way they have. Their Ads for the iPhone even showed the Kindle app. That proved they knew exactly what it was doing, and approved of it. That Apple is now selling books isn't a good excuse to change the rules for everyone else.
What both you and he forget, or don't understand here, is that Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and Sony are retailers of books. Apple is a retailer of books. I've tried really hard here to show why what Apple is trying to do won't work, and isn't fair.
Apple will be more than removing all the money these companies get from the publishers. This will actually make the book they buy more expensive than what they can sell it for. They would incur a loss on every sale. Not a good way to do business. Meanwhile, Apple would incur no such problem selling their own. This could be restraint of trade, of Apple taking advantage of their position of owning the pipes, or at least some of them, as they would be charging unnecessarily.
I know you guys want Apple to be able to make as money as possible, but this isn't how they should be doing it.
Hmm... not sure if referring to physical vs. digital in this argument? With physical media there are materials, manufacturing, printing, and shipping. That's overhead that doesn't exist with digital. So there is a huge cost difference.
While you may be using your own store to sell items through, you're still using Apple's massive distribution channel (i.e. platform) to sell through.
Again, it has nothing to do with physical media or not. Goods are goods, and a product is a product. What's the difference between a program that comes in a box, and the same one that you just download? Nothing! Apple's servers aren't being used to sell these books, and so Apple shouldn't require that they also be sold in app.
That's one of the oddest things I've heard of. They know they can't stop out of app purchases like this, so they add the requirement to also sell in app.
Hmmm... apparently you missed something in my post, because that was not my philosophy. My thinking leans more towards others making a profit at Apple's expense and then, only when they are a direct competitor to what Apple offers. See, for every Kindle book sold through the Kindle iOS app is a sales lost for the same book in the iBook Store. Free apps only make money through advertising (which Apple has the ability to extract revenue through iAd).
Did you really read what I said about this? Or did you just skim? I've bought over a hundred books on my iPad so far since early May. Most of those books were bought either from Barnes& Noble or Amazon. Why? Because Apple has a miserable book store! There are very few books in it. They've caused this problem, and now they're trying to profit off others who have been more successful at it. They should fix their own problems instead, and make up with all the publishers they've been giving a hard time to. Amazingly enough, other booksellers are making a profit doing this.
The reason why Apple gave way on iAd, was because it looked as though the government was going to investigate them for restraint of trade. What Apple wanted to do was apparently illegal in allowing only their own agency.
Personally, I don't agree with what Apple is doing, but I do understand why they feel the need to. Just a reminder, this in no way affects the user, except forces these other companies to offer the user direct sales and downloads in the app. What they've been doing before is pushing the user to a web site from within the app to make the purchase, then syncing with the server to gain access to the content. That is a loop hole to get around Apple's In-App-Purchasing rule.
Furthermore, these companies should be able to create a free "reader" that doesn't give access or link to the store from within the app. It would only allow you to access/sync and then view that content. Apple can't do anything about that.
This does affect the user. The average user doesn't spend time on forums, and doesn't understand any of this. They just see what they see. If Amazon, for example, needs to raise prices for in app sales by 30% to make up for the loss, that's the price people will see. If they take the loss, then people will see that price. People rather do what is simplest. If in app prices are too high, it will drive them to Apple's poorer store. When people can't find the books there, they will get pissed at Amazon for higher prices, and won't understand why it's happening. They may not even understand they can go to Amazon's own store instead. That's the real world.
What you suggest about a reader is silly. What would be gained? A couple of more steps for the consumer to jump through? The end result would be the same, except for lower satisfaction with Apple's products, as they won't have to do that on other platforms.
So you guys are right, let's drive customers away from Apple. Good thinking!