or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Editorial: 2013 was a terrible year for both Apple's competitors and its media critics
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Editorial: 2013 was a terrible year for both Apple's competitors and its media critics - Page 5

post #161 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

If you sell your product at a brick & mortar store do they take a cut? When Amazon sells products how do they profit? It is the developers choice to agree to those terms to be part of the App Store.  They don't have to be a part of it. What you seem to leave out are the expenses that developers would have to pay that they don't pay for being a part of the App Store.

Yes they do. The cut is added to the final selling price.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #162 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


Yes they do. The cut is added to the final selling price.

So someone that is selling a product at the App store could factor in those expenses. Correct? I don't see what your point is?

post #163 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


I understood that you asked me what's Apple's cut for Google's revenue, and the answer is that Google pays Apple a flat yearly rate instead of a percentage.

No, that's not what I said. Please read the post.

post #164 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Then why are they developing apps for iOS?  If you are correct then they don't need the Apple ecosystem and, in fact, would be better off without it since then they would not have to give up 30% of their profit.

Did you not read where I wrote Apple needs devs and devs need Apple? But Apple doesn’t pay developers to make apps, they do it on their dime in hopes that they'll earn money in the app store, and even though Apple provides storage and handles the transaction they do nothing to ensure that a developer makes money, that's totally on them and if and when they do Apple makes money from them not for them.

 

What I read, which you repeatedly asserted, is that the developers would make money with or without Apple's help. It was a ridiculous claim to make, and I'm not surprised that you are now backing off to the trivial observation that Apple does not guarantee them an income.

post #165 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

No, that's not what I said. Please read the post.

How did I misunderstand "where is the cut of the profits?" Do you mean Apple's cut of Google's profit? Or Google's cut of the profit made on it's search engine?
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #166 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


Did you not read where I wrote Apple needs devs and devs need Apple? But Apple doesn’t pay developers to make apps, they do it on their dime in hopes that they'll earn money in the app store, and even though Apple provides storage and handles the transaction they do nothing to ensure that a developer makes money, that's totally on them and if and when they do Apple makes money from them not for them.

Welcome to the free market. Providing storage & handling the transaction is an expense for Apple. That isn't exactly nothing.

post #167 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


How did I misunderstand "where is the cut of the profits?" Do you mean Apple's cut of Google's profit? Or Google's cut of the profit made on it's search engine?

The consumer's cut. After all it if they are the product don't they deserve a cut?

post #168 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

What I read, which you repeatedly asserted, is that the developers would make money with or without Apple's help. It was a ridiculous claim to make, and I'm not surprised that you are now backing off to the trivial observation that Apple does not guarantee them an income.

It's possible that they coulde, again if the side loading of apps were allowed one could buy the apps elsewhere for their device and theoretically a dev would make money without any help for Apple, but a dev has no choice but to sell their app on the app store but does that ensure that the app will make money? No
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #169 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

The consumer's cut. After all it if they are the product don't they deserve a cut?

Does Apple pay consumers a cut? They make a ton of money on them as well. How many people don't opt out of Apple sharing their information?
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #170 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

What I read, which you repeatedly asserted, is that the developers would make money with or without Apple's help. It was a ridiculous claim to make, and I'm not surprised that you are now backing off to the trivial observation that Apple does not guarantee them an income.

It's possible that they coulde, again if the side loading of apps were allowed one could buy the apps elsewhere for their device and theoretically a dev would make money without any help for Apple, but a dev has no choice but to sell their app on the app store but does that ensure that the app will make money? No

 

Now you are clutching at straws.  Possible...could... if... theoretically....  So, if the developers could sell their apps elsewhere, would that ensure that the app makes money?  Or is that another completely irrelevant distraction to the discussion?

post #171 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Now you are clutching at straws.  Possible...could... if... theoretically....  So, if the developers could sell their apps elsewhere, would that ensure that the app makes money?  Or is that another completely irrelevant distraction to the discussion?

No but neither does being in the app store ensure them money. My whole point is that these devs could make money without Apple but Apple could not get their cut if it weren't for devs making apps. Apple doesn't make money for them it makes money from them.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #172 of 257

1) I’ll state this again; you should have a section dedicated to charting these analyst and their accuracy. List every prediction with links, then state Future, Correct, Wrong, and run a % Accurate total. 

 

2) You should supply more links to their predictions even if just footnotes. 

 

3) When you prove wrong a claim for items such as sales numbers, profit margin, etc., you should stet actuals and link to your source. 

 

4) You should never stop writing these articles :)

post #173 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Does Apple pay consumers a cut? They make a ton of money on them as well. How many people don't opt out of Apple sharing their information?
Apple doesn't make a "ton of money" on consumer information. Read their earnings calls - Apple makes money on devices first and foremost. Then on iTunes and The App Store. iAd is so far down the list I can't even find it.

Contrast this with Google whose primary source of revenue is advertisements.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #174 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

No but neither does being in the app store ensure them money. My whole point is that these devs could make money without Apple but Apple could not get their cut if it weren't for devs making apps. Apple doesn't make money for them it makes money from them.

You can expand upon your outrage by also shaking your fist at the firms who hire programmers and then pay their operational support people a cut for their help, rather than only paying the people who actually write the code.

Or in the other direction, you can be outraged that Apple's App Store operation also is forced to pay a share of its cut to cover the costs of hosting the store and maintaining iTunes' servers.

Or you can give up your naive position and concede that the cut Apple takes is well worth it to App Store developers or they'd be targeting other platforms instead.

In fact, nothing worthy of note is being developed for side loading on Android devices outside of an app market, because app shoppers aren't using Google to search for developer's home pages to buy their apps directly.

Users that matter are overwhelming using the iTunes App Store to download and manage their apps.
post #175 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

The consumer's cut. After all it if they are the product don't they deserve a cut?
Consumers get their cut.

Google Search at no additional charge. And Google Maps. And Navigation. And G-Mail. And YouTube. And Translate. And Image Search. And News. And Earth. And Finance. And Scholar. And Patent Search. And Alerts. And Shopping. And Blog Search. And Trends. And Docs. And Drive.

Nearly every internet visitor can find things of value somewhere in that list. Who else provides anywhere near this level of services, even for a subscription charge? Further who else even has the expertise and engineering to do so? And in return for services of value you see a few ads. Not even targeted ones if you wish to opt out.

Ads. That's it.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #176 of 257
This was a very well written article. This article was written by someone that truly cares about his craft and his profession. I have been an Mac user and Apple shareholder for several decades. I have posted similar (but not as comprehensive) retorts to Apple bashers over that same period of time. As long has there have been message boards I have been an Apple supporter. No company or person on earth if perfect. Apple does an excellent Job making products that I have enjoyed using in my personal an professonal life. The company is second to none. Why certain segments of the media and populace hates Apple is beyond me. Apple's products add to an improve our lives. They challenge other companies to make products that we want. They make technology into what it is supposed to be and extension of ourselves that allows us to be more productive in all aspects of our lives. Thanks again for a great read. (It took me awhile to get through it, since I was clicking all the links).

THANKS FOR A GREAT READ and THE EDUCATION THAT YOU GAVE ME.
post #177 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Consumers get their cut.

Google Search at no additional charge. And Google Maps. And Navigation. And G-Mail. And YouTube. And Translate. And Image Search. And News. And Earth. And Finance. And Scholar. And Patent Search. And Alerts. And Shopping. And Blog Search. And Trends. And Docs. And Drive.

Nearly every internet visitor can find things of value somewhere in that list. Who else provides anywhere near this level of services, even for a subscription charge? Further who else even has the expertise and engineering to do so? And in return for services of value you see a few ads. Not even targeted ones if you wish to opt out.

Ads. That's it.

Really had to stretch to make your list longer, didn't you?

Google was self-supportive (and profitable) for a long time. What pisses people off about Google is increasing ads by a substantial amount to increase their profits while not doing anything to make their existing products better.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #178 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

My point is that developers would make money with or without the walled garden, Apple doesn’t make the money for them.

So why do they use Apple's "walled garden" for the Mac App Store? It's still the same 30% cut and there is a much richer selection of titles with some developers no longer maintaining their own website, downloads, licensing service since MAS started. I never tell techtarded friends and family to buy apps outside the MAS if it's available there.

And let's remember that free apps that are popular cost nothing to be hosted or advertised or anything else the iOS or Mac App Store does. Those having 30% taken are paying for these other apps but I don't see that as a problem, especially when you consider how much vendors like BB and MS charged before Apple released the App Store in 2008.

"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 #179 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

You can expand upon your outrage by also shaking your fist at the firms who hire programmers and then pay their operational support people a cut for their help, rather than only paying the people who actually write the code.

Or in the other direction, you can be outraged that Apple's App Store operation also is forced to pay a share of its cut to cover the costs of hosting the store and maintaining iTunes' servers.

Or you can give up your naive position and concede that the cut Apple takes is well worth it to App Store developers or they'd be targeting other platforms instead.

In fact, nothing worthy of note is being developed for side loading on Android devices outside of an app market, because app shoppers aren't using Google to search for developer's home pages to buy their apps directly.

Users that matter are overwhelming using the iTunes App Store to download and manage their apps.

There isn't any outrage on my part, lost patience yes outrage no. How many times have I read on here somebody extolling the virtues of a app only found on the Cydia store? So those apps do in fact exist. My contention is that if Apple indeed did make money for developers then they'd all make money and it's well known that most developers never even recover the money it took to make the app. Yes Apple provides the venue for these developers to earn money but how much they earn is entirely on them. A app will benefit from Apple's platform whether it sells or not.

Let's look at another content maker, say Beyoncé. Do you believe Apple made her money or she made money on the strength of her talent? Had she decided to release her album on Amazon, would her fans flocked to Amazon to purchase her album? Of course they would have. She chose iTunes and in doing so made Apple a nice amount of money but she would have done the same for Amazon had she gone with them.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #180 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

Really had to stretch to make your list longer, didn't you?

Google was self-supportive (and profitable) for a long time. What pisses people off about Google is increasing ads by a substantial amount to increase their profits while not doing anything to make their existing products better.

Well that's hardly true now is it? It's not difficult to find numerous examples of recent updates and new features added to existing Google services. I bet you could find examples for yourself if you actually wanted to even using the less-capable Bing for your search. 1rolleyes.gif

Try these search phrases if you can't figure out what to ask for:

Google updates Maps
or
Google updates Search
or
Google updates GMail
or
Google updates Chrome
Edited by Gatorguy - 12/29/13 at 4:32pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #181 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Let's look at another content maker, say Beyoncé. Do you believe Apple made her money or she made money on the strength of her talent? Had she decided to release her album on Amazon, would her fans flocked to Amazon to purchase her album? Of course they would have. She chose iTunes and in doing so made Apple a nice amount of money but she would have done the same for Amazon had she gone with them.

OK, I think this is getting into semantics here. Yes, Beyoncé made herself money by being talented (which includes hiring talented people to help her make money). In this case she essentially hired Apple to sell her album exclusively because it was a means to an end for her to make more money. But she's still choosing Apple over Amazon or Target or Walmart to maximize her profits.

"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 #182 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

So why do they use Apple's "walled garden" for the Mac App Store? It's still the same 30% cut and there is a much richer selection of titles with some developers no longer maintaining their own website, downloads, licensing service since MAS started. I never tell techtarded friends and family to buy apps outside the MAS if it's available there.

And let's remember that free apps that are popular cost nothing to be hosted or advertised or anything else the iOS or Mac App Store does. Those having 30% taken are paying for these other apps but I don't see that as a problem, especially when you consider how much vendors like BB and MS charged before Apple released the App Store in 2008.

I don't have a problem with the walled garden. It's the best way to ensure that the techtards don't screw up their computer. My point was that even without the walled garden devs would still be able to make money without little reliance on Apple. Apple helps them earn but it doesn't earn for them.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #183 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

My point was that even without the walled garden devs would still be able to make money without little reliance on Apple.

To an extent I agree but it seems to me that there are a lot more independent developers being able to make popular apps that before. I'll peruse the Mac App Store or read about an app and if it happened to be on MAS and at a reasonable price I'll buy it without thinking twice. I can't say I ever did that before MAS.

I wonder how the iPhone would have fared if there had there just been an SDK with side loaded apps. I can't imagine it wouldn't have been as successful for Apple or developers, and I doubt Xcode would have gotten the attention it gets now.

"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 #184 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

OK, I think this is getting into semantics here. Yes, Beyoncé made herself money by being talented (which includes hiring talented people to help her make money). In this case she essentially hired Apple to sell her album exclusively because it was a means to an end for her to make more money. But she's still choosing Apple over Amazon or Target or Walmart to maximize her profits.

Then you understand my point, "for her to make money, not for Apple to make her money like many here would suggest happened.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #185 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Then you understand my point, "for her to make money, not for Apple to make her money like many here would suggest happened.

But that's only looking at it from one view. Apple sets up their model a to entice content owners to sell their products through them so Apple can make money. It's a symbiotic relationship.

"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 #186 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Now you are clutching at straws.  Possible...could... if... theoretically....  So, if the developers could sell their apps elsewhere, would that ensure that the app makes money?  Or is that another completely irrelevant distraction to the discussion?

No but neither does being in the app store ensure them money. My whole point is that these devs could make money without Apple but Apple could not get their cut if it weren't for devs making apps. Apple doesn't make money for them it makes money from them.

 

OK - I see what you are saying. It's predicated on an incorrect assumption - namely that the developers are a single entity providing the software for Apple's platform, which permits the argument that Apple needs the developers but the developers don't need Apple because they could develop for a different platform.  This ignores the market forces that define iOS as the most profitable platform by far, and renders the individual developers powerless to affect that domination.  Even Google, as a developer for iOS and owner of an alternative platform, has been unable to change it.

 

It's clearly a partnership.  As many have pointed out, Apple supplies the devices, the operating system, the APIs and developer tools, the app store and the sales infrastructure to get the software efficiently to the customers. The developers, who vote with their time and effort that this is the most profitable use of their resources, provide the apps.  In theory, Apple could ditch the developers and write their own apps, and the developers could ditch Apple and subsist on other platforms.  Pointless observation. Neither is happening, because neither would be as good for Apple or for the developers.  Your entire argument is bogus.

post #187 of 257

The points made in this article are certainly valid.  However, it should be noted that in the fiscal year ended September 2013, Apple's earnings per share decreased for the first time in more than a decade, falling 10% year on year.  This contrasts with EPS growth of 67%, 83% an 60% in each of the three preceding years.  While it is true that analysts and journalists of all kinds in this wired era seem to have discovered that trashing Apple is a surefire way to increase page views, it cannot be denied that a large part of the the past year's flight from Apple stock is attributable to the fact that Apple's profit growth had not just stalled, but gone into reverse.  The question now is whether Apple can restore profit growth in the year ahead.  Personally, I believe that they will do that.  When that happens the price of the stock will almost surely rise.

post #188 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

To an extent I agree but it seems to me that there are a lot more independent developers being able to make popular apps that before. I'll peruse the Mac App Store or read about an app and if it happened to be on MAS and at a reasonable price I'll buy it without thinking twice. I can't say I ever did that before MAS.

I wonder how the iPhone would have fared if there had there just been an SDK with side loaded apps. I can't imagine it wouldn't have been as successful for Apple or developers, and I doubt Xcode would have gotten the attention it gets now.

I'm in no way discounting the benefits the app store offers. It's the absolute ideal way for a dev to earn money. I see it this way; Apple build a strong and solid foundation that devs have build a beautiful tower on.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #189 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Then you understand my point, "for her to make money, not for Apple to make her money like many here would suggest happened.

But that's only looking at it from one view. Apple sets up their model a to entice content owners to sell their products through them so Apple can make money. It's a symbiotic relationship.

 

And this example is actually far less symbiotic than the subject of the discussion, since an artist of international renown has multiple options to reach the consumer.  In the case of developers and iOS, Apple provides something that is not available elsewhere - effectively a large element of the content itself - the leading platform on which to run ones apps.

post #190 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Well that's hardly true now is it? It's not difficult to find numerous examples of recent updates and new features added to existing Google services. I bet you could find examples for yourself if you actually wanted to even using the less-capable Bing for your search. 1rolleyes.gif

Try these search phrases if you can't figure out what to ask for:

Google updates Maps
or
Google updates Search
or
Google updates GMail
or
Google updates Chrome

As obtuse as ever.

Please show where typing in a search term today somehow finds me information that it didn't one year ago. Or two years ago. Google search is actually worse now that the first set of hits are sponsored and don't accurately reflect what a person is looking for.

And adding new features to their services doesn't increase their operating costs. Or are you going to claim that tweaking their algorithms suddenly doubles the server workload? Or that it costs a fortune for Google developers to add some features to Gmail?

Chrome? You actually brought that POS up as a bullet point?

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #191 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

And this example is actually far less symbiotic than the subject of the discussion, since an artist of international renown has multiple options to reach the consumer.

Having other options doesn't mean it's not an dvantage of both, bit I see your point and do think complementary or reciprocal would have been a better word choice.

"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 #192 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

OK - I see what you are saying. It's predicated on an incorrect assumption - namely that the developers are a single entity providing the software for Apple's platform, which permits the argument that Apple needs the developers but the developers don't need Apple because they could develop for a different platform.  This ignores the market forces that define iOS as the most profitable platform by far, and renders the individual developers powerless to affect that domination.  Even Google, as a developer for iOS and owner of an alternative platform, has been unable to change it.

It's clearly a partnership.  As many have pointed out, Apple supplies the devices, the operating system, the APIs and developer tools, the app store and the sales infrastructure to get the software efficiently to the customers. The developers, who vote with their time and effort that this is the most profitable use of their resources, provide the apps.  In theory, Apple could ditch the developers and write their own apps, and the developers could ditch Apple and subsist on other platforms.  Pointless observation. Neither is happening, because neither would be as good for Apple or for the developers.  Your entire argument is bogus.

I disagree, I think developers and their apps have greatly influenced the popularity of iOS devices. I've read several posters on here who toyed with the idea of going to Android because they wanted a bigger phone but decided against it because their favorite apps were only on iOS. In that case it was the strength of the developer that kept the user and not Apple.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #193 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

And this example is actually far less symbiotic than the subject of the discussion, since an artist of international renown has multiple options to reach the consumer.  In the case of developers and iOS, Apple provides something that is not available elsewhere - effectively a large element of the content itself - the leading platform on which to run ones apps.

The discussion started when EricTheHalfBee wrote this. "Apple made money for content providers, musicians, App developers, accessory makers, advertisers, oh, and lots of component suppliers.

Apple also made money for Google and Microsoft."

And my argument was that content providers earn money for themselves with Apple earning a cut. Yes Apple provides the means for someone to earn but it surely doesn’t earn for them. How much they earn is entirely up to them whether it be a musician or a dev.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #194 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

As obtuse as ever. etc etc

Ah insult time again. That must mean you're running out of logical counter-arguments and I'm winning. 1biggrin.gif

You claimed what "pisses you off" is that Google doesn't do anything to make their existing services better. That's easily proven to be false. Personally I think the only thing that "pisses you off" about Google is that they're competing with Apple in some of the same market spaces and vice-versa, Apple is entering some of the same markets as Google. Seeing a few ads is hardly hate-worthy so folks gotta make something up so they don't sound so silly I suppose. This particular reason you've cited doesn't hold water IMO.
Edited by Gatorguy - 12/29/13 at 5:32pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #195 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

 Compare that with Apple which is up a paltry 5% year-to-date even though the S&P 500 is up 29% and the Nasdaq is up 38%. How is it that Google and Microsoft stock is up double digits if they had such a bad year?

 

Google and Microsoft both made more profits in 2013 than they did in 2012.  A company that makes more money is valued higher.   So their stock price (valuation) went up.   Apple made less money in 2013 than it did in 2012, but investors gave it the benefit of the doubt on future outlook and drove the price up anyway.

 

Even though Apples profits are in decline, they are still higher than Google's or Microsoft's and so they are still valued with a substantially higher market cap than the prior two companies.

post #196 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


I don't have a problem with the walled garden. It's the best way to ensure that the techtards don't screw up their computer. My point was that even without the walled garden devs would still be able to make money without little reliance on Apple. Apple helps them earn but it doesn't earn for them.

BTW, they aren't ''techtards", they're consumers. They've purchased an appliance, not bought into a new career.

 

If you really are a dev, you might want to remember that when you're creating an app for them.

post #197 of 257
Subject: A comment concerning analytical and factual errors in the presented editorial.

First off, I believe that the bulk of the article is well presented. However, several errors mar the editorial and confer a sense of bias. Most of this begins in the latter sections concerning the ugly year shared by Google, Microsoft and Samsung.

"crisis they had invented surrounding Apple's own bundled Maps offering"

Switching from Google powered Maps to Apple Maps with ios 6 came with a number of feature losses. While it was certainly not a "crisis" it not exactly something to tout as irrelevant.

64-bit chips:

64 bit chips will do nothing for CPU performance in the short term, period. In the long term, they will facilitate use of more than 4 GBs of memory (RAM). This will be important in the future, but is mostly irrelevant now.

"Google doesn't even have an articulated 64-bit strategy for Android because Android isn't moving forward as a cutting edge mobile platform"

Unless you count Motorola, Google doesn't make chips. It supplies an OS. Furthermore, Android is a modified version of linux, an operating system that has been 64-bit compliant before Apple (even before OSX). Other than driver development, (which is usually handled by the phone manufacturer as part of the phone development process) there is not much that changes. 32-bit applications will run on a 64-bit machine, and unless you want to run physics simulations on your phone, this is pretty much irrelevant to app developers as well.

"Windows Phone 8 last winter with little success apart from whittling Nokia down into an acquirable size through the sheer destruction of its smartphone sales. "

I'm quite certain that Nokia experienced year over year smartphone growth. No one can confuse them with any of the big players right now, but its market share tripled from Q2 to Q3. Nokia's market share was "destroyed" years ago. If we're discussing 2013, the truth is that they experienced growth (even though it was relatively small).

" Windows 8.1, which managed to further damage a major market that was actually wildly successful at one point: the Windows PC"

I don't really see how 8.1 damaged anything in particular. Maybe Windows 8 did but 8.1 is just a service pack. It wasn't panned and it wasn't the greatest thing since sliced bread. it just was.

"Samsung was hailed as the heir apparent of Apple: innovative, expanding and profitable."

What are you smoking? I've never heard this from anyone ever. ( Personal Opinion: I do think samsung innovates from a technology, circuit, and manufacturing point of view, I've just never heard it from anyone in the tech media.)


I could go on but much of the article is just factual distortion and biased supposition. There is a lot of truth in the article, but it's being bathed in crude oil.
Edited by rapatel0 - 12/29/13 at 6:31pm
post #198 of 257
Originally Posted by rapatel0 View Post
64-Bit chips - 64 bit chips will do nothing for CPU performance in the short term, period. In the long term, they will facilitate use of more than 4 GBs of memory (RAM). This will be important in the future, but is mostly irrelevant now.

 

Yeah, that’s totally wrong.

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 #199 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmay View Post

BTW, they aren't ''techtards", they're consumers. They've purchased an appliance, not bought into a new career.

If you really are a dev, you might want to remember that when you're creating an app for them.

Ugh. So why didn't you blast SolipsismX for using that term first?
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #200 of 257

Just to clarify. I'm not saying that the 64-bit A7 is slower. I'm saying that the fact that it is 64-bit is irrelevant to performance in the near term, i.e, if it were a 32-bit A7, it would probably have nearly identical performance. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Editorial: 2013 was a terrible year for both Apple's competitors and its media critics