Apple rebuts House antitrust report, says developers 'primary beneficiaries' of App Store

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 33
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Can't help but note the fact that Apple, Google, Facebook, and Amazon, all with leadership that could fairly be described as being left-of-center, are being hoisted by questionable, possibly even even vacuous, charges brought by their own.

    Ah, the irony...
    I see these threats a little differently. I see them as evidence Apple has failed to spend sufficiently in their lobbying. Some view lobbying as bribery, but a business big enough to be considered a threat to Washington in power and influence must spend to protect their interests or submit to the will of stupid, power hungry politicians or competitors.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 33
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,944member
    j2fusion said:
    wizard69 said:
    Honestly Apple needs to be screwed over royally.   A different management team could have taken the company in a less controversial direction and made more money.   Instead the drove the company with anti consumer policies, a massive amount of corporate double speak and frankly a lot of crappy  products that didn’t live up to Apple’s legacy (Mac).  
     What is the longest an Android product gets updates...
    For now it would be 5 years and counting but that's just one particular device, the Nvidia Shield. The Fairphone is very close behind but there were a whole buncha hoops to be jumped thru just to get Android 5 it shipped with updated to Android 9 roughly 5 years later

    That it isn't so across the board has less to do with Google and more to do with Qualcomm who only supports updates for their chipsets for 3 years with some rare exceptions. That's perhaps one of the drivers behind Google crafting their own CPU ala' Apple, presumably for use in upcoming Pixels or Pixel products.
    edited October 2020 FileMakerFeller
  • Reply 23 of 33
    Can't help but note the fact that Apple, Google, Facebook, and Amazon, all with leadership that could fairly be described as being left-of-center, are being hoisted by questionable, possibly even even vacuous, charges brought by their own.

    Ah, the irony...
    I see these threats a little differently. I see them as evidence Apple has failed to spend sufficiently in their lobbying. Some view lobbying as bribery, but a business big enough to be considered a threat to Washington in power and influence must spend to protect their interests or submit to the will of stupid, power hungry politicians or competitors.
    I agree, Spam. Lobbying is just directed advertising, which at its best educates. Of course, at its worst, it’s propaganda....
    SpamSandwichwatto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 33
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,496member
    johnbear said:
    30%? Come on Apple! 
    What markup above costs is legal and moral in your opinion?

    Did you know physical retail stores have typically got a 100% markup? Have you ever complained about that? Of course retail stores have costs too, and so their true markup is probably closer to 30% when you take that into account. Apple's profit after expense is also only a fraction of 30%.

    SpamSandwichBeatswatto_cobraDetnator
  • Reply 25 of 33
    sacto joe said:


    But I can understand how you could make the mistake. 
    You understand nothing.
  • Reply 26 of 33
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    gatorguy said:
    j2fusion said:
    wizard69 said:
    Honestly Apple needs to be screwed over royally.   A different management team could have taken the company in a less controversial direction and made more money.   Instead the drove the company with anti consumer policies, a massive amount of corporate double speak and frankly a lot of crappy  products that didn’t live up to Apple’s legacy (Mac).  
     What is the longest an Android product gets updates...
    For now it would be 5 years and counting but that's just one particular device, the Nvidia Shield. The Fairphone is very close behind but there were a whole buncha hoops to be jumped thru just to get Android 5 it shipped with updated to Android 9 roughly 5 years later

    That it isn't so across the board has less to do with Google and more to do with Qualcomm who only supports updates for their chipsets for 3 years with some rare exceptions. That's perhaps one of the drivers behind Google crafting their own CPU ala' Apple, presumably for use in upcoming Pixels or Pixel products.

    That's fucking sad.
  • Reply 27 of 33
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    johnbear said:
    30%? Come on Apple! 
    What markup above costs is legal and moral in your opinion?

    Did you know physical retail stores have typically got a 100% markup? Have you ever complained about that? Of course retail stores have costs too, and so their true markup is probably closer to 30% when you take that into account. Apple's profit after expense is also only a fraction of 30%.

    I run a company and we markup everything 30-100%. Anything less than 30% and it's hard to stay in business. Only time I go under 30% is to stick it to our competitor or to test a new market. But again, we lose a little. Even 30% can run the business into the ground. It's easy to criticize Apple from the comfort of your couch with ZERO responsibility.
    anantksundaramDetnator
  • Reply 28 of 33
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,944member
    Beats said:
    gatorguy said:
    j2fusion said:
    wizard69 said:
    Honestly Apple needs to be screwed over royally.   A different management team could have taken the company in a less controversial direction and made more money.   Instead the drove the company with anti consumer policies, a massive amount of corporate double speak and frankly a lot of crappy  products that didn’t live up to Apple’s legacy (Mac).  
     What is the longest an Android product gets updates...
    For now it would be 5 years and counting but that's just one particular device, the Nvidia Shield. The Fairphone is very close behind but there were a whole buncha hoops to be jumped thru just to get Android 5 it shipped with updated to Android 9 roughly 5 years later

    That it isn't so across the board has less to do with Google and more to do with Qualcomm who only supports updates for their chipsets for 3 years with some rare exceptions. That's perhaps one of the drivers behind Google crafting their own CPU ala' Apple, presumably for use in upcoming Pixels or Pixel products.

    That's fucking sad.
    ROTFL!
    Not just sad. F-ing sad. Gosh a whole level sadder than sad. 
    edited October 2020 Detnator
  • Reply 29 of 33
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,496member
    Beats said:
    johnbear said:
    30%? Come on Apple! 
    What markup above costs is legal and moral in your opinion?

    Did you know physical retail stores have typically got a 100% markup? Have you ever complained about that? Of course retail stores have costs too, and so their true markup is probably closer to 30% when you take that into account. Apple's profit after expense is also only a fraction of 30%.

    I run a company and we markup everything 30-100%. Anything less than 30% and it's hard to stay in business. Only time I go under 30% is to stick it to our competitor or to test a new market. But again, we lose a little. Even 30% can run the business into the ground. It's easy to criticize Apple from the comfort of your couch with ZERO responsibility.
    Thanks for offering that confirming information. I don't need to know what kind of business you have, but does it deliver a physical product and does it have a storefront and employees? No doubt you are an employee too and you need to be paid for all your time. I've politely asked several people in these threads what level of PROFIT a company should be allowed and not a SINGLE person has offered a number. 

    I'd like to point out that 30% profit is the approximate amount of profit on the physical devices Apple sells, like iPhones, after all costs are accounted for. The App Store probably has costs, which I'm guessing is about 10%, so Apple's resulting 20% profit on that line of business is 33% less than their profits on their hardware. People should be praising Apple for lowering their profit rates, not condemning it.
    Detnator
  • Reply 30 of 33

    I've politely asked several people in these threads what level of PROFIT a company should be allowed and not a SINGLE person has offered a number. 
    That is the one of the silliest question I've ever seen on this forum. Are you aware of how the US economy works?

    I think AI commenters are actually being polite in not responding to your question.
  • Reply 31 of 33
    mknelsonmknelson Posts: 1,094member
    Beats said:
    I run a company and we markup everything 30-100%. Anything less than 30% and it's hard to stay in business. Only time I go under 30% is to stick it to our competitor or to test a new market. But again, we lose a little. Even 30% can run the business into the ground. It's easy to criticize Apple from the comfort of your couch with ZERO responsibility.
    Thanks for offering that confirming information. I don't need to know what kind of business you have, but does it deliver a physical product and does it have a storefront and employees? No doubt you are an employee too and you need to be paid for all your time. I've politely asked several people in these threads what level of PROFIT a company should be allowed and not a SINGLE person has offered a number. 

    I'd like to point out that 30% profit is the approximate amount of profit on the physical devices Apple sells, like iPhones, after all costs are accounted for. The App Store probably has costs, which I'm guessing is about 10%, so Apple's resulting 20% profit on that line of business is 33% less than their profits on their hardware. People should be praising Apple for lowering their profit rates, not condemning it.
    That's Apple's Margin. Apple's reseller partners make much, much, much less!

    Most traditional retailers aim for a 40% gross margin allowing for clearance items, etc. That is sufficient to pay rent (in a mall), staff, taxes, utilities, etc, etc.

    After all that, maybe they'll have a 10% profit to take home.
    gatorguy
  • Reply 32 of 33
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,496member

    I've politely asked several people in these threads what level of PROFIT a company should be allowed and not a SINGLE person has offered a number. 
    That is the one of the silliest question I've ever seen on this forum. Are you aware of how the US economy works?

    I think AI commenters are actually being polite in not responding to your question.
    Your response is one of the silliest responses I've ever seen on this website, and that includes your other 20,000 posts.
    Detnator
  • Reply 33 of 33
    I concur with Apple on this one. On the App Store, the developers win because it lets them make money fairly easily compared to the way it used to work (finding a publisher and paying them 50% or marketing it yourself, ugh!). Apple is also a big winner because they get 30% of every sale which is a really big chunk of change for basically pushing some buttons. The losers are the users who have absolutely no idea how many cool things their iPhone could do if Apple was not standing on the necks of developers.
Sign In or Register to comment.