or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple and Microsoft at odds over SkyDrive app subscription fees [ux2]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple and Microsoft at odds over SkyDrive app subscription fees [ux2] - Page 3

post #81 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

 

I'm sorry, but I don't understand why "established players" should get some sort of special treatment. Is the point to discourage "new players" from getting into the market?

 

I also don't understand why your hypothetical user bought an iPad and not a surface if the only reason they are buying is for Office.

 

 

 

So you would prefer people who use MS at work, and have Office, buy a Surface. That is the absurdity of these rules.

I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #82 of 100
What is interesting to me is how none of the mac websites have publicized that when you share a file from the skydrive website it doesn't open, stream or work at all an ANY iPad. To be fare it does work on iPhones and iPod Touches etc.. and on Macs but not on any iPad.
post #83 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

 

So you would prefer people who use MS at work, and have Office, buy a Surface. That is the absurdity of these rules.

 

If that's the only reason you are buying a tablet, as in the hypothetical situation given, that would seem to be your best bet since Microsoft always makes sure Office works best on its own platforms. Admittedly, it's far fetched, but that was his scenario.

post #84 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Sorry folks, but I'm so not caring about some fee-based storage app on iOS peddled by a company that grows more irrelevant by the second. 

 

 

Maybe.  But a lot of people (myself included) feel SkyDrive is a very good cloud choice for business and iCloud isn't even on the radar.  So while I have no MS love and rarely use their products, SkyDrive is well worth the fee.  I generally use SkyDrive for large amounts of backups and storage, DropBox for easy sharing of smaller files and iCloud for backing up my Apple idevices.  

 

MS may truly suck as a company, but iCloud is behind SkyDrive in usefulness for many folks.

post #85 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

 

 

It isn't very tough. Apple's policy is simple. If Apple's helps you sell something for actual money, it wants a 30 percent cut. It brought you a customer. Apple's gauge of whether it is helping somebody sell something is if the party offers a pay option through its iOS app. Apple also does not want developers to permanently advertise on their iOS apps that they can purchase something through another means by doing as you suggest offer a link that opens else place. Apple will not approve the app with such a link. 

 

Apple's view is we let developers host apps in our App Store and don't charge them anything to do it UNLESS they make money from being on the App Store. Apple excludes advertising money. Developers keep all of that. 

 

If Microsoft removes the in app upgrade and any in app links to where people can get more storage, this will only effect people who know about the options for additional storage through Apple. People who already used Skydrive aren't hurt at all. So, Apple's practice is fair.

 

This is the same way Apple treats companies like Netflix and Amazon. Neither Netflix or Amazon offer in app purchases for this reason. 

 

 

If I use iOS device to buy something from eBay, should I pay 30% to Apple?

post #86 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by macfb6 View Post
If I use iOS device to buy something from eBay, should I pay 30% to Apple?

 

You should really try not to embarrass yourself this badly, but it's rare we see so many things wrong with such short posts.

 

First of all, people buying things on their iOS devices don't, "pay 30% to Apple." They don't pay anything to Apple, unless they are buying something from Apple.

 

Secondly, developers are not permitted to sell "real world goods" using In-App Purchasing. So, if you download an app and use it to buy something on eBay, it won't be using In-App Purchasing, and no one will be paying 30% of anything to Apple unless Apple is the one selling what you bought on eBay.

 

Please, if you just absolutely have no idea what you are talking about, educate yourself a bit before you post.

post #87 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

You should really try not to embarrass yourself this badly, but it's rare we see so many things wrong with such short posts.

First of all, people buying things on their iOS devices don't, "pay 30% to Apple." They don't pay anything to Apple, unless they are buying something from Apple.

Secondly, developers are not permitted to sell "real world goods" using In-App Purchasing. So, if you download an app and use it to buy something on eBay, it won't be using In-App Purchasing, and no one will be paying 30% of anything to Apple unless Apple is the one selling what you bought on eBay.

Please, if you just absolutely have no idea what you are talking about, educate yourself a bit before you post.

annoymouse the great defender of the IAP ripoff. Not getting paid by Apple but their greatest defender.

It's simple. This policy is wrong and misguided. It stops vendors with their own credit card facilities having a simple button to pay for content when running on the iPad or pay the 30% tax, it has caused microsoft and others to delay or abandon apps for the iPad, it makes life worse for consumers. It's lose lose. Apples dumbest move. Dumber than maps.

Tim Cook - tear down that wall.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #88 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


I doubt it. They'll have to charge up front for Office apps, Apple will get their 30%, and Office will be likely be the profitable suite of apps in record time. MS would lose more than MS would. Now, if WP8 was popular I think it would be a different story.

 

I am not sure what you are trying to say here, did you mean to say 'Apple would lose more than MS would.'?

 

I also understood that the Office suite for iOS would be subscription based -- with the current understanding of Apple's policy would mean Apple would collect 100% and then cut a check to MS for their 70% retaining 30% for the duration. I am not sure subscription type sales were really thought of much like this before but when I bought last seasons subscription to "Breaking Bad" I am pretty sure that the TV producers had to settle for the 70% (or sell DVD's) at the end of the season.

post #89 of 100
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post
It's simple. This policy is wrong and misguided. It stops vendors with their own credit card facilities having a simple button to pay for content when running on the iPad or pay the 30% tax, it has caused microsoft and others to delay or abandon apps for the iPad, it makes life worse for consumers. It's lose lose. Apples dumbest move. Dumber than maps.

 

Complete foolishness.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #90 of 100

OK   thanks for your input Microsoft,

 

We have examined your application to waiver our Terms & Conditions.

 

Our decision as outlined below.....

 

 

GTFO

May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
post #91 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


annoymouse the great defender of the IAP ripoff. Not getting paid by Apple but their greatest defender.
It's simple. This policy is wrong and misguided. It stops vendors with their own credit card facilities having a simple button to pay for content when running on the iPad or pay the 30% tax, it has caused microsoft and others to delay or abandon apps for the iPad, it makes life worse for consumers. It's lose lose. Apples dumbest move. Dumber than maps.
Tim Cook - tear down that wall.

Yeah   OK

 

Thank you

 

President Reagan

 

Your comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the 'Apple Business Model' is outstanding!

May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
post #92 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot View Post

I am not sure what you are trying to say here, did you mean to say 'Apple would lose more than MS would.'?

I also understood that the Office suite for iOS would be subscription based -- with the current understanding of Apple's policy would mean Apple would collect 100% and then cut a check to MS for their 70% retaining 30% for the duration. I am not sure subscription type sales were really thought of much like this before but when I bought last seasons subscription to "Breaking Bad" I am pretty sure that the TV producers had to settle for the 70% (or sell DVD's) at the end of the season.

The opposite. I think MS would lose more than Apple would if MS doesn't bring MS Office to iOS. People aren't buying iDevices primarily for Office apps. They might be very useful at times and add considerably value to certain users but if they aren't on iDevices it won't push people from buying an iDevice or push them to WP8 or WinRT devices. This is a huge market for MS to tap just as MS Office is highly profitable for MS on Mac OS X.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #93 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

 

So you would prefer people who use MS at work, and have Office, buy a Surface. That is the absurdity of these rules.

 

Well .......

 

Considering it carefully, the absurdity (ridiculousnessludicrousnessincongruityinappropriatenessrisibilityidiocystupidityfoolishnessfollysillinessinanityinsanityunreasonablenessirrationalityillogicality,pointlessnesssenselessnessinformal craziness [pick one only])

of buying a surface, is the only way to go  ;-)

May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
post #94 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


The "rambling post" was clear enough.
.........................................................................[content removed for clarity]

 

Yep, as clear as mud.

 

hehe

May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
post #95 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzExige View Post

 

Yep, as clear as mud.

 

hehe

I am working on a a remedial version for ya. With pictures. 

I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #96 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


The opposite. I think MS would lose more than Apple would if MS doesn't bring MS Office to iOS. People aren't buying iDevices primarily for Office apps. They might be very useful at times and add considerably value to certain users but if they aren't on iDevices it won't push people from buying an iDevice or push them to WP8 or WinRT devices. This is a huge market for MS to tap just as MS Office is highly profitable for MS on Mac OS X.

 

What Apple would gain from it's 30% would take a long time to make up for a few tens of thousand defectors to surface, or Android, because Office is not there. (And tens of thousands is low balling.)

 

Same with the Kindle Fire, people who prefer their Kindle app experience to have an integrated purchasing facility within the app, might defect to the Fire. A few tens of thousands of defectors ( again, low balling) and Apple loses a few hundred euro each, it needs to sell millions of e-books to make it up. iBooks wasn't worth pissing off Amazon. 

I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #97 of 100
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post
What Apple would gain from it's 30% would take a long time to make up for a few tens of thousand defectors to surface, or Android, because Office is not there. (And tens of thousands is low balling.)

 

Same with the Kindle Fire, people who prefer their Kindle app experience to have an integrated purchasing facility within the app, might defect to the Fire. A few tens of thousands of defectors ( again, low balling) and Apple loses a few hundred euro each, it needs to sell millions of e-books to make it up. iBooks wasn't worth pissing off Amazon. 

 

You're acting as though Office matters in any meaningful capacity.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #98 of 100
There needs to be some clarity here...

If MSFT removes all links to purchase additional storage or anything else from the app and Apple refuses the app because it is possible to buy storage from outside the app and MSFT isn't making it available inside the app Apple is changing the rules in midstream and is totally in the wrong....

Something we can all agree on?


If MSFT is continuing to push for links to purchase the upgrades outside of in app purchases inside of the app then the app should be rejected unless or until MSFT enables the ability to make the purchases in-app...

Something we can all agree on?


If the answer is yes to both like I think it should be from reasonable people then we need more information. If the answer is no to either, is there an objective reason to come to that conclusion?
Edited by jgibson24 - 12/15/12 at 11:10am
post #99 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzExige View Post

Yeah   OK

 

Thank you

 

President Reagan

 

Your comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the 'Apple Business Model' is outstanding!

You guys are all arguing about busines model here. It's _not_ the problem.

 

MS's business model has proven to be the best model for 25 years (at least). It doesn't make it a moral, sane, or even legal model, as have proven the numerous suits they lost (against the US government, against companies, against the EU...)

 

The question is simple: is it fair that to offer their customers the best possible coverage (as in "offer an iPad app"), companies that already would sell their product if such app wasn't there need to pay a 30% tax to Apple? Obviously, it's not in the interest of anyone but Apple, just as MS's model is only in the interest of MS. As it should, since companies are, after all, no non-profit organizations...

 

Bottom line of my argument: yes, Apple's trying to get as much $$$ as they can from their iPad's success, and no, governments shouldn't let that go unchecked. That's precisely one of the things governments are for, preventing abuse of power by money-hungry corporations, in the interest of the voter, who also happens to be a consumer.

 

 

 

Addendum about my feelings on the 30%: 

 

The question here is: can X develop an app that does the same thing as an Appstore app without going through the AppStore? Anyone who's done web-apps knows the answer: unless your app is pretty simple, native code wins every time. It so happens that native code necessarily installs through the AppStore.

 

The _only_ way that Apple's 30% tax would be acceptable is if Apple stopped demanding that native code executing on the iPad has to be distributed through the AppStore. That's the only choice: open up, or cease the tax. It's pretty clear that unless the government steps in (and in the case of MS, it took the government a mere 15 years to step in, and close to 20 years to actually achieve a result), Apple's only going to change something if their sales o down, which won't happen, because apart from having horrible policies, they do make stupendous hardware. Maybe in 2028?

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply
post #100 of 100

The dispute between Microsoft and Apple has serious consequences for App developers who publish 'free' apps in the App Store, only to then charge users to activate the app or to upgrade to a version with better functionality.

 

As Microsoft seems to be at odds with Apple's stance that all in-app purchases should require a 30% payment to Apple (in perpetuity), will this force app developers to develop HTML5 web apps to by-pass app stores?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple and Microsoft at odds over SkyDrive app subscription fees [ux2]