Apple also provides exposure to a upscale market THEY CREATED;, that's also why people pay the 30%. Same reason why Stores take a cut... Its not just about providing billing. Don't get why people think that should be free!
Because it's disproportionate rent-seeking. Apple do not host the content for recurring subscriptions, they just provide the payment mechanism, and visibility on the app store. Payments processing does not justify 30%. Visibility does not either, since Apple benefit from a developer community just as much as the developer community benefits from Apple.
So what if Apple charge third parties 30% Apple don't have a smartphone market share majority, they can charge whatever they like and if the third parties don't want to pay they can go elsewhere. No reason for the EU to be sticking its nose in.
But they are lot closer to a paid-mobile app majority.
These are questions that I cannot answer for you. And whatever restrictions there are not mine, but Apple's. You must discuss those issues and your own app/content/licensing model with your developer support folks.
Yeah it makes a lot of sense for Apple to change its App Store policy just to satisfy handful of developers and then start case by case talks with tens of thousands of other developers to see if their business model is acceptable to the App Store new policy. /s
With regard to your question about Spotify, I can see how they would argue that the same rate should apply to their content (licensed from third parties, etc) as is the case for the Apple TV streaming content. I don't know whether or not they'll be successful but I do believe that they have a good case to be treated the same. YMMV.
Maybe they will be treated the same if Apple appraoch them and asked them to develop an Apple TV app. Just keep in mind that those same Apple TV content providers offering their subscriptions through iOS App Store still pay 30% for for sign ups done on iOS devices. So even if spotify got the same deal as HBO they will still be paying 30% if a user signup on an iPhone or iPad. I don't know what was your point bring that up.
If that is the case, then spotify is in a much different position then I though just a few months ago. If we learned anything from the Apple maps fiasco is that, as bad as that launch was, it was bad. Some 2+ years later, over 75% of iOS users are using Apple maps over the much better Google provided maps apps. This is happening for one simple reason, "power of the default." If this can happen to a much better product (Google maps), I can confidently say Apple will be able to convert a lot of spotify paying users on their platform.
I think the default is part of it but I think most of it was due to the fact that Apple maps got to the point that it was good enough and people did not see value in Google maps and all its advertising.
Most people could care less about all the things Google maps does most people just want to see where they are and what is around them. I know there was and still is that Apple maps does not have transit maps. Honestly how many people use that on a daily bases. If you are new to a city I see the value, you been living there a while most everyone know the scheduled since they never change. I go to NYC a few times a year and use the subways and know what train to catch and when they arrive not a problem, never need a transit map. Anyone who lives in city and uses mass transits all time and needs a maps or app to help them should have their heads examined if you get watch I mean.
To put it in perspective, I also spent time in Japan and they have one of the most complicated train system I've ever seen and I was able to easily navigate it. Go into the station look at the map and within a fee minutes you have it figured out and you are on your eat and I did not read Japanese.
I do not think Apple music will win because it will be default, but if most people think it is good enough they will not bother with something else. My point above its people are lazy and they rather deal with something that is simple and does the thinking for them thus the reason people like the iPhone.
I think the question might eventually become - can apple own the store and then sell its own products in the store in competition with third party products and charge them. Maybe apple will be asked to separate the apps business and that separate entity should be charged like everybody else?
There is an issue of fairness here I believe, but it is a complicated issue.
I think the question might eventually become - can apple own the store and then sell its own products in the store in competition with third party products and charge them. Maybe apple will be asked to separate the apps business and that separate entity should be charged like everybody else?
There is an issue of fairness here I believe, but it is a complicated issue.
It's unfortunate that the Snowden revelations have turned the European regulators/governments against American tech companies. They're all in the cross-hairs now, viewed with suspicion in nearly everything they do. Some might call Snowden a hero. I don't know what to call him, but he sure has damaged American companies goodwill overseas.
It's beyond weird that you're always obsessesivy hoping and fantasizing for every system to collapse, and seem to find joy in the idea.
I don’t, though, so you’ll want to keep your delusions to yourself.
I don’t hope for these things; they’re happening. I find joy in the idea of terrible, psychotic systems being destroyed and replaced with something that works.
Originally Posted by plovell
…the colonies, newly become States, dealt with one another in ways similar to that of the EU.
I urge you to read this for then you'll recognize that most of the EU countries are now where the ex-colonies were in 1783.
I reject this nonsense, categorically, because it’s not even remotely close to being true. The EU countries don’t share history, language, culture, background, or anything other than physical closeness. The US’ states had literally just fought a unified–and unifying–war, had centuries of peaceful unity prior, and had language and customs to bind them. The EU is the marxist bastard child of fascists, bolsheviks, and the western “Allies” who through their entire history previously couldn’t stop warring with one another for more than a decade or two. Cut up Europe in any way and you’ll see the mammoth differences. West and East. North and South. Britain and the Continent. And the individual countries.
?When the EU collapses, the psychopaths that created it will scream that it only failed because it wasn’t federalized and demand immediate federalization. If there is any sanity left in the human race–and there should be if the EU has previously collapsed in this scenario–this will be rejected.
The EU is the marxist bastard child of fascists, bolsheviks, and the western “Allies” who through their entire history previously couldn’t stop warring with one another for more than a decade or two.
And the EU put a stop to that. There has been no war between EU member nations. 60 years of peace between countries that couldn’t stop warring with one another for more than a decade or two. Hardly seems like the creation of psychopaths.
Indeed those cheerleading for the end of that and the return of the cycle of war would seem to be far more psychopathic.
And the EU put a stop to that. There has been no war between EU member nations. 60 years of peace between countries that couldn’t stop warring with one another for more than a decade or two. Hardly seems like the creation of psychopaths.
Indeed those cheerleading for the end of that and the return of the cycle of war would seem to be far more psychopathic.
TS was not cheerleading for the end of the EU. Their system is unworkable. Unworkable systems fail on their own.
Sounds like he's cheering it on to me. How do you interpret that post?
And unworkable systems can be changed so that they work. Complete collapse is not necessary, and there are precious few examples of complete collapse leading to something demonstrably better emerging in the immediate aftermath. Chaos normally ensues, and then equally but differently flawed systems emerge.
Cheering for the collapse of an institution of peace and coopoeration (a flawed institution no doubt) while railing against that institution's founders as "psychopaths" is just the kind of predictably attention-seekingly incendiary and poorly thought out, ignorant rhetoric that we've come to expect of TS.
Apple also provides exposure to a upscale market THEY CREATED;, that's also why people pay the 30%. Same reason why Stores take a cut... Its not just about providing billing. Don't get why people think that should be free!
You don't go to best buy and buy a TiVo and then best buy takes a 30% cut off your monthly subscription forever!!!. Best Buy also doesn't force people to get their TiVo subscription through best buy and they don't stop TiVo from advertising that you can subscribe directly and save money. This is what Apple is doing.
Credit catm card transaction fees are in the 1-3% range. I'm sure Apple is on the low end. It's all handles by computer's. I don't have a problem charging 30% the first month, but after that it should drop down to at least 15%. That's still a decent profit for doing very little forever, well as long as the person is subscribed. 30% every month forever for doing almost nothing is crazy.
There's many apps that are 100% free and so Apple gets nothing for doing the same thing. I wouldn't have a problem with the 30% if Apple allowed the app developer to link to their site to sign up as another option in the app.
Actually that only applies to a new users who has no other experiences. Keep in mind when some one upgrades all their old apps get installed. Why would someone look at something new because what they are using is either causing them problems or does not meet their expectations.
We have to ask why in two years has 75% of Google map users went to Apple maps. Especially when they were already using Google maps and claimed it was better. My personal belief is Apple maps is good enough without the issueas you get with dealing with Google. That has been my experiences, but I do not use Apple maps for navigation it still sucks. I use waze, it does a much better job, but it sucks just trying to find where I'm at and what is around me, Apple maps is better at that.
I can not make that comparison for music apps. However, I suspect the same things exist for Spotify and Pandora as compared to Apple music. The few people I have spoken to who tried Apple music and liked it looked because they were not happy with things their current apps was doing.
You don't go to best buy and buy a TiVo and then best buy takes a 30% cut off your monthly subscription forever!!!. Best Buy also doesn't force people to get their TiVo subscription through best buy and they don't stop TiVo from advertising that you can subscribe directly and save money. This is what Apple is doing.
Credit catm card transaction fees are in the 1-3% range. I'm sure Apple is on the low end. It's all handles by computer's. I don't have a problem charging 30% the first month, but after that it should drop down to at least 15%. That's still a decent profit for doing very little forever, well as long as the person is subscribed. 30% every month forever for doing almost nothing is crazy.
There's many apps that are 100% free and so Apple gets nothing for doing the same thing. I wouldn't have a problem with the 30% if Apple allowed the app developer to link to their site to sign up as another option in the app.
Believe it or not when best buy and others sell a cell phone and contract they sometimes actually get a cut of the total contract fees. To your point, Apple only gets their 30% when the order is process through them no different than any retailer. The only restiction Apple puts on apps is not to process purchases within the app which does not use Apple system this is to protect you from bad app developers. As Spotify did, you can still go to their website and pay your fee. You know the Amazon app allows you to buy things through their app and not go through Apple why because they have your payment method already on file. Other apps can do the same thing they just have not thought of it.
Apple should just jetison any significant apps that compete with their own products. I say ban Google Maps and Spotify from the app-store.
To be honest they should ban any ad networks other than iAd too.
It's Apple's app store and they should be able to do what they want with it and make all the rules for it.
Buying an iPhone does not automatically entitle someone to have a native app for a competing service on that iPhone, let them have a crappy web app experience instead.
Indeed those cheerleading for the end of that and the return of the cycle of war would seem to be far more psychopathic.
As expected of a federalist.
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
TS was not cheerleading for the end of the EU. Their system is unworkable. Unworkable systems fail on their own.
Well, I am, but for the reason you stated. I’ll be glad to see it end, and nothing has to be done to destroy it, but ending it before it destroys itself would save a lot of hardship.
Originally Posted by basjhj
Everything in the quote above is blatant nonsense.
Apple doesn't have to change a damn thing about their App Store policies regarding subscriptions. The solution is extremely simple.
Companies like Spotify can drop In-App Purchases (IAP) altogether. They can require that ALL customers requiring a subscription to sign up at their website instead. Nobody is forcing companies to use the IAP model. Others already avoid IAPs by doing exactly this.
Problem solved. At least the IAP problem. The other problem of having to spend your own money to market your service to customers is something Spotify can deal with on their own.
Comments
Apple also provides exposure to a upscale market THEY CREATED;, that's also why people pay the 30%. Same reason why Stores take a cut... Its not just about providing billing. Don't get why people think that should be free!
Because it's disproportionate rent-seeking. Apple do not host the content for recurring subscriptions, they just provide the payment mechanism, and visibility on the app store. Payments processing does not justify 30%. Visibility does not either, since Apple benefit from a developer community just as much as the developer community benefits from Apple.
So what if Apple charge third parties 30% Apple don't have a smartphone market share majority, they can charge whatever they like and if the third parties don't want to pay they can go elsewhere. No reason for the EU to be sticking its nose in.
But they are lot closer to a paid-mobile app majority.
Yeah it makes a lot of sense for Apple to change its App Store policy just to satisfy handful of developers and then start case by case talks with tens of thousands of other developers to see if their business model is acceptable to the App Store new policy. /s
Maybe they will be treated the same if Apple appraoch them and asked them to develop an Apple TV app. Just keep in mind that those same Apple TV content providers offering their subscriptions through iOS App Store still pay 30% for for sign ups done on iOS devices. So even if spotify got the same deal as HBO they will still be paying 30% if a user signup on an iPhone or iPad. I don't know what was your point bring that up.
I think the default is part of it but I think most of it was due to the fact that Apple maps got to the point that it was good enough and people did not see value in Google maps and all its advertising.
Most people could care less about all the things Google maps does most people just want to see where they are and what is around them. I know there was and still is that Apple maps does not have transit maps. Honestly how many people use that on a daily bases. If you are new to a city I see the value, you been living there a while most everyone know the scheduled since they never change. I go to NYC a few times a year and use the subways and know what train to catch and when they arrive not a problem, never need a transit map. Anyone who lives in city and uses mass transits all time and needs a maps or app to help them should have their heads examined if you get watch I mean.
To put it in perspective, I also spent time in Japan and they have one of the most complicated train system I've ever seen and I was able to easily navigate it. Go into the station look at the map and within a fee minutes you have it figured out and you are on your eat and I did not read Japanese.
I do not think Apple music will win because it will be default, but if most people think it is good enough they will not bother with something else. My point above its people are lazy and they rather deal with something that is simple and does the thinking for them thus the reason people like the iPhone.
There is an issue of fairness here I believe, but it is a complicated issue.
I don’t, though, so you’ll want to keep your delusions to yourself.
I don’t hope for these things; they’re happening. I find joy in the idea of terrible, psychotic systems being destroyed and replaced with something that works.
…the colonies, newly become States, dealt with one another in ways similar to that of the EU.
I urge you to read this for then you'll recognize that most of the EU countries are now where the ex-colonies were in 1783.
I reject this nonsense, categorically, because it’s not even remotely close to being true. The EU countries don’t share history, language, culture, background, or anything other than physical closeness. The US’ states had literally just fought a unified–and unifying–war, had centuries of peaceful unity prior, and had language and customs to bind them. The EU is the marxist bastard child of fascists, bolsheviks, and the western “Allies” who through their entire history previously couldn’t stop warring with one another for more than a decade or two. Cut up Europe in any way and you’ll see the mammoth differences. West and East. North and South. Britain and the Continent. And the individual countries.
?When the EU collapses, the psychopaths that created it will scream that it only failed because it wasn’t federalized and demand immediate federalization. If there is any sanity left in the human race–and there should be if the EU has previously collapsed in this scenario–this will be rejected.
Indeed those cheerleading for the end of that and the return of the cycle of war would seem to be far more psychopathic.
TS was not cheerleading for the end of the EU. Their system is unworkable. Unworkable systems fail on their own.
And unworkable systems can be changed so that they work. Complete collapse is not necessary, and there are precious few examples of complete collapse leading to something demonstrably better emerging in the immediate aftermath. Chaos normally ensues, and then equally but differently flawed systems emerge.
Cheering for the collapse of an institution of peace and coopoeration (a flawed institution no doubt) while railing against that institution's founders as "psychopaths" is just the kind of predictably attention-seekingly incendiary and poorly thought out, ignorant rhetoric that we've come to expect of TS.
You don't go to best buy and buy a TiVo and then best buy takes a 30% cut off your monthly subscription forever!!!. Best Buy also doesn't force people to get their TiVo subscription through best buy and they don't stop TiVo from advertising that you can subscribe directly and save money. This is what Apple is doing.
Credit catm card transaction fees are in the 1-3% range. I'm sure Apple is on the low end. It's all handles by computer's. I don't have a problem charging 30% the first month, but after that it should drop down to at least 15%. That's still a decent profit for doing very little forever, well as long as the person is subscribed. 30% every month forever for doing almost nothing is crazy.
There's many apps that are 100% free and so Apple gets nothing for doing the same thing. I wouldn't have a problem with the 30% if Apple allowed the app developer to link to their site to sign up as another option in the app.
Actually that only applies to a new users who has no other experiences. Keep in mind when some one upgrades all their old apps get installed. Why would someone look at something new because what they are using is either causing them problems or does not meet their expectations.
We have to ask why in two years has 75% of Google map users went to Apple maps. Especially when they were already using Google maps and claimed it was better. My personal belief is Apple maps is good enough without the issueas you get with dealing with Google. That has been my experiences, but I do not use Apple maps for navigation it still sucks. I use waze, it does a much better job, but it sucks just trying to find where I'm at and what is around me, Apple maps is better at that.
I can not make that comparison for music apps. However, I suspect the same things exist for Spotify and Pandora as compared to Apple music. The few people I have spoken to who tried Apple music and liked it looked because they were not happy with things their current apps was doing.
Believe it or not when best buy and others sell a cell phone and contract they sometimes actually get a cut of the total contract fees. To your point, Apple only gets their 30% when the order is process through them no different than any retailer. The only restiction Apple puts on apps is not to process purchases within the app which does not use Apple system this is to protect you from bad app developers. As Spotify did, you can still go to their website and pay your fee. You know the Amazon app allows you to buy things through their app and not go through Apple why because they have your payment method already on file. Other apps can do the same thing they just have not thought of it.
[...] The EU countries don’t share history, language, culture, background, or anything other than physical closeness [...]
Everything in the quote above is blatant nonsense.
To be honest they should ban any ad networks other than iAd too.
It's Apple's app store and they should be able to do what they want with it and make all the rules for it.
Buying an iPhone does not automatically entitle someone to have a native app for a competing service on that iPhone, let them have a crappy web app experience instead.
As expected of a federalist.
Well, I am, but for the reason you stated. I’ll be glad to see it end, and nothing has to be done to destroy it, but ending it before it destroys itself would save a lot of hardship.
Thanks for all the refutations!
Apple doesn't have to change a damn thing about their App Store policies regarding subscriptions. The solution is extremely simple.
Companies like Spotify can drop In-App Purchases (IAP) altogether. They can require that ALL customers requiring a subscription to sign up at their website instead. Nobody is forcing companies to use the IAP model. Others already avoid IAPs by doing exactly this.
Problem solved. At least the IAP problem. The other problem of having to spend your own money to market your service to customers is something Spotify can deal with on their own.