Publishers eye Apple's tablet; Schmidt on board resignation
Google CEO Eric Schmidt denied that a federal investigation prompted his resignation from the Apple Board of directors; and a consortium of magazine publishers hope to create their own store to sell content on devices like Apple's rumored tablet.
Publishers planning for Apple's tablet
Magazine publishers are preparing for devices like Apple's long-rumored tablet as a possible new revenue opportunity, as the print business continues to struggle.
A group led by Time Inc. looks to create a digital store for magazines and other publications to sell their content in a digital format, according to the Financial Times. According to the report, "Apple's forthcoming tablet device" is one of the devices publishers are targeting, along with Amazon's Kindle. The report notes that Time and others have had talks with Apple about putting their magazines on the tablet.
However, the report alleges that Apple is reluctant about the approach the publishers are looking to take. One source with the Cupertino, Calif., company reportedly said the proposals are "their business model," not Apple's.
"The publishers are intent on remaining masters of their own destiny, while Apple does not want to change the percentage it takes from content sellers every time something new comes along," the report said.
The story supports rumors from earlier this week that Apple had contacted print publications, including a meeting with numerous magazines, about its anticipated tablet device. That report said that representatives from The New York Times also spoke with Apple about the tablet, and textbook publishers McGraw Hill and Oberlin Press have been working to put their content on iTunes in a DRMed format that would allow use for a period of time.
Schmidt denies pressure to resign
When Schmidt resigned from the Apple board in August, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs cited Google's further encroachment on Apple's core businesses with Android and Chrome OS. However, both companies were the subject of a Federal Trade Commission investigation for potential antitrust ties.
Despite that investigation, Schmidt said he was not pressured to resign from the Apple Board of Directors, according to Dow Jones Newswires. Schmidt went further and said that Arthur Levinson, who currently serves on the board of both companies, should not resign his position.
Following Schmidt's resignation, the FTC stated it was continuing its investigation due to Levinson's presence on both boards.
Schmidt also denied tension between Google and Apple, saying outright: "We love the iPhone."
Publishers planning for Apple's tablet
Magazine publishers are preparing for devices like Apple's long-rumored tablet as a possible new revenue opportunity, as the print business continues to struggle.
A group led by Time Inc. looks to create a digital store for magazines and other publications to sell their content in a digital format, according to the Financial Times. According to the report, "Apple's forthcoming tablet device" is one of the devices publishers are targeting, along with Amazon's Kindle. The report notes that Time and others have had talks with Apple about putting their magazines on the tablet.
However, the report alleges that Apple is reluctant about the approach the publishers are looking to take. One source with the Cupertino, Calif., company reportedly said the proposals are "their business model," not Apple's.
"The publishers are intent on remaining masters of their own destiny, while Apple does not want to change the percentage it takes from content sellers every time something new comes along," the report said.
The story supports rumors from earlier this week that Apple had contacted print publications, including a meeting with numerous magazines, about its anticipated tablet device. That report said that representatives from The New York Times also spoke with Apple about the tablet, and textbook publishers McGraw Hill and Oberlin Press have been working to put their content on iTunes in a DRMed format that would allow use for a period of time.
Schmidt denies pressure to resign
When Schmidt resigned from the Apple board in August, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs cited Google's further encroachment on Apple's core businesses with Android and Chrome OS. However, both companies were the subject of a Federal Trade Commission investigation for potential antitrust ties.
Despite that investigation, Schmidt said he was not pressured to resign from the Apple Board of Directors, according to Dow Jones Newswires. Schmidt went further and said that Arthur Levinson, who currently serves on the board of both companies, should not resign his position.
Following Schmidt's resignation, the FTC stated it was continuing its investigation due to Levinson's presence on both boards.
Schmidt also denied tension between Google and Apple, saying outright: "We love the iPhone."
Comments
Schmidt also denied tension between Google and Apple, saying outright: "We love the iPhone."
Of course Google loves the iPhone: Google is the default search and map source. Google is pretty much the gateway through which iPhone users access the Internet, all without Google having to lift a finger on their end. Apple does the work for them.
No wonder Google Voice was rejected.
Schmidt also denied tension between Google and Apple, saying outright: "We love the iPhone."
I wonder how much love the iPhone will have for Google Wave once it is released. I have been working with HTML5 code and found Safari is very problematic with anything drag and drop related which is one of the hallmarks of Wave and HTML5. Understandably the basic usage method of touch interfaces is If you hold and drag that is considered a scroll/pan not an object drag. I don't personally have Android so I'm not certain how Cupcake handles HTML5 drag and drop but Apple needs to address this in an upcoming release of iPhone OS or Google is going to eat their lunch.
I wonder how much love the iPhone will have for Google Wave once it is released. I have been working with HTML5 code and found Safari is very problematic with anything drag and drop related which is one of the hallmarks of Wave and HTML5. Understandably the basic usage method of touch interfaces is If you hold and drag that is considered a scroll/pan not an object drag. I don't personally have Android so I'm not certain how Cupcake handles HTML5 drag and drop but Apple needs to address this in an upcoming release of iPhone OS or Google is going to eat their lunch.
Given Apples behavior as of late I would never expect to see Google Wave working on any device Apple has dictatorship control over... or to put it another way, unless Google can do it entirely in confines of a web app you can forget it ever working.
and textbook publishers McGraw Hill and Oberlin Press have been working to put their content on iTunes in a DRMed format that would allow use for a period of time.
Sound to me like they are going to... what start rigging their books with a time limit and if you want it again you gotta re-purchase it?
Dave
Given Apples behavior as of late I would never expect to see Google Wave working on any device Apple has dictatorship control over... or to put it another way, unless Google can do it entirely in confines of a web app you can forget it ever working.
I was under the impression Wave is entirely used within a browser by a client and Safari already works fine with it. IE may well have issues but Safari and Firefox work now.
I find this comment a little odd...
Sound to me like they are going to... what start rigging their books with a time limit and if you want it again you gotta re-purchase it?
Dave
That is a whole new take on 'Having to get the book back to the Library by tomorrow!'
I was under the impression Wave is entirely used within a browser by a client and Safari already works fine with it. IE may well have issues but Safari and Firefox work now.
True, I apologize to hijacking the thread but before it gets totally of track, I meant MOBILE Safari is where the issue is not the desktop version of Safari
Of course Google loves the iPhone: Google is the default search and map source.
given the recent buy of Placebase(?) Google might be losing some of that default.
as for the board stuff. I can buy that the FTC didn't come to them and demand he resign, but the thought that it could come eventually and be very nasty might have led to a 'quit before fired' sitch.
Sound to me like they are going to... what start rigging their books with a time limit and if you want it again you gotta re-purchase it?
more like how videos are on itunes. only the 'authorized' buyer can use the file. prevents copying it and giving it to someone else for free.
and considering how huge a business textbooks are, it makes sense.
I find this comment a little odd...
Sound to me like they are going to... what start rigging their books with a time limit and if you want it again you gotta re-purchase it?
Dave
When will they learn? First movie companies, then the music industry, now publishers try the same fools errand. Pay-per-use models don't work for things consumers are used to owning, even if they will only use them once.
DRM is bad in all forms, but time-sensitive restrictions make the jump to useless.
...as if it isn't bad enough locking it to a single device.
(Ironically, I won't buy my mom a kindle because she loves the library. She needs one, but it destroys a critical element of literature for her when you have to buy everything...)
textbook publishers McGraw Hill and Oberlin Press have been working to put their content on iTunes in a DRMed format that would allow use for a period of time.
I'll stick to buying hardbound Textbooks. I know I own it and won't be dealing with a rental.
Right now students typically pay outrageous prices for dirty, beat-up, used textbooks. Then, a few months later, they sell those textbooks back at a substantially reduced price. Wouldn't it be far better to pay a smaller price and rent a digital copy for those few months? And imagine using those textbooks on a really pleasant device--a device that does for reading and note-taking what the iPhone did for pocket-computing.
Makes me a little sad I don't have any reason to buy textbooks. When I was in school, buying the filthy used ones for $100/each always felt like a scam.
I'll stick to buying hardbound Textbooks. I know I own it and won't be dealing with a rental.
Totally in agreement there. I can buy a physical book, use it and then sell it to make 20-60 percent of the price back (depending on how long I use it and how pristine I keep it). Or I can keep it forever if I like it. Renting books, even with a 20% discount would be stupid at best. Maybe if they were 10% of market cost there could be some applications for this type of ownership. But from what I read it would be $80 for $100 dollar book for a year. Really now what I am looking for.
Google's further encroachment on Apple's core businesses with Android and Chrome OS.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
Agreed about the encroachment and copying of the features, but I look at it this way. Apple maintains the high end of the market with the cool new features, great user interface, making both hardware and software for their phone. Google fights Microsoft on the low end devices bringing similar features to iPhone, but on worse looking hardware and no itunes integration. Seems like a clear separation of markets, but maybe its more complex then that.
textbook publishers McGraw Hill and Oberlin Press have been working to put their content on iTunes in a DRMed format that would allow use for a period of time.
That's probably just so the biased history found in some McGraw Hill books and obscene poetry disguised as art in some Oberlin Press works can't be changed by outraged parents...
http://www.foxnews.com/topics/us/textbook-bias.htm
Sound to me like they are going to... what start rigging their books with a time limit and if you want it again you gotta re-purchase it?
Dave
It does sound like there going ahead with it. The only thing that might make it work is if the books are really cheap (compared to a book purchased and resold). It's still kind of a bad deal though especially for someone who specifically wanted to own a digital copy, because it makes for an easy reference without the bulk. I thought text books specifically were meant for reference.
Would this model also imply that you can't own a digital copy in any way? I'd rather rent a crappy novel for my vacation at the beach than a text book.
I kept all of my books from school, but is that just me? Because I think the popular assumption is "everyone" resells their books. We are talking about mass market after-all and most importantly capitalism and corporate America. Too bad it would really be an impaired use of the technology.
But I love Apple and I abhor greedy labels. I'm glad it happened.
If the sources in this article are accurate, then we may see something similar in the printed world. The publishers think they know their customers best and will attempt to create something that they think their customers want. And if it fails, they may turn to Apple who will appear like a savior; a savior who will basically feed them enough rope to hang themselves.
I think Apple's management is absolutely genius. Time and time again, they have ended up on the winning side of their deals. People love their iPhones and they love Apple for it, but they despise the carrier partner AT&T. Cisco Systems was happy to come to an agreement with Apple on the use of the "iPhone" trademark, a settlement which clearly benefitted Apple and had virtually no benefit of any kind to Cisco. And of course, the music labels that capitulated to Apple's iTunes model which in turn propelled sales of iPods and iPhones, but limited sales of full albums due to single song availability. Given what we've seen it's no wonder that the print publishers are reluctant to jump onboard Apple's bandwagon; it probably benefits Apple disproportionately.
Ultimately, it will be the consumers that ultimately dictate which model succeeds whether pay to own or subscription based. We vote with our wallets and only the business models that bring in the big bucks tend to survive. The others
just die. Good luck to all parties involved.
Posted from my iPhone
That's probably just so the biased history found in some McGraw Hill books and obscene poetry disguised as art in some Oberlin Press works can't be changed by outraged parents...
http://www.foxnews.com/topics/us/textbook-bias.htm
i used to work at Pearson Education publishing. The "editing" of history to appease our customers, especially our biggest one, the state of Texas was appalling! And our director just used to shrug and say, we have to SELL books!
nice to see our kids growing up with a distorted sense of history - if they're paying attention at all! LOL
I sense some interesting parallels to the music industry in the early days of digital music before the iTunes store began selling DRM music.
Another parallel is that, like with musicians, writers could possibly bypass the middlemen and deal directly with Apple. When media are delivered digitally over the internet, what purpose do music labels and print publishers serve?
I wonder how much love the iPhone will have for Google Wave once it is released. I have been working with HTML5 code and found Safari is very problematic with anything drag and drop related which is one of the hallmarks of Wave and HTML5. Understandably the basic usage method of touch interfaces is If you hold and drag that is considered a scroll/pan not an object drag. I don't personally have Android so I'm not certain how Cupcake handles HTML5 drag and drop but Apple needs to address this in an upcoming release of iPhone OS or Google is going to eat their lunch.
Drag and drop in the web browser makes very little sense on a device with a screen that is only 320 x 480. This is great resolution for a phone, but there is very little you could do in that space which would be dramatically more efficient with drag and drop. There are certain uses, to be sure... but it isn't the show-stopper you imagine it to be I suspect.