Amazon updates Kindle iOS app with book searches, slides by App Store purchasing rules
With the latest Kindle for iOS app, Amazon is for the first time offering in-app book searches and previews, the latter including a clever mechanism for purchasing an e-book without having to pay out a percentage to Apple.
The latest Kindle for iOS version 3.9 introduces a new feature called "Free Sample Search," which lets users look and download samples of books from Amazon's vast catalog. To avoid Apple's mandated 30 percent cut of purchases, the app kicked users out to Safari, where they would have to search for titles on Amazon's website.
With the latest update's free samples, however, the Internet sales giant found a new way to skirt Apple's restrictions. Users can now search for a popular book, download a free sample, and when they are finished, a pop-up reading "Before you go?" will appear. From here, users can either close the sample, or generate an email to themselves with a purchase link for the book.
According to Amazon, "millions" of books now have free samples for iOS, but it is unclear if and when the company plans to roll out the functionality across its entire catalog.
As for other app upgrades, Kindle for iOS now offers the ability to use previously purchased dictionaries as sources to define words in any other ebook. Purchased dictionaries are automatically recognized and become available for definition lookups in the selection list.
The app also includes new accessibility gestures for blind and visually impaired users, while the "Instant Cover Loader" displays book cover art faster than previous versions. Finally, the app comes with the usual bug fixes and performance enhancements.
Kindle for iOS is available now as a free 18MB download from the App Store.
The latest Kindle for iOS version 3.9 introduces a new feature called "Free Sample Search," which lets users look and download samples of books from Amazon's vast catalog. To avoid Apple's mandated 30 percent cut of purchases, the app kicked users out to Safari, where they would have to search for titles on Amazon's website.
With the latest update's free samples, however, the Internet sales giant found a new way to skirt Apple's restrictions. Users can now search for a popular book, download a free sample, and when they are finished, a pop-up reading "Before you go?" will appear. From here, users can either close the sample, or generate an email to themselves with a purchase link for the book.
According to Amazon, "millions" of books now have free samples for iOS, but it is unclear if and when the company plans to roll out the functionality across its entire catalog.
As for other app upgrades, Kindle for iOS now offers the ability to use previously purchased dictionaries as sources to define words in any other ebook. Purchased dictionaries are automatically recognized and become available for definition lookups in the selection list.
The app also includes new accessibility gestures for blind and visually impaired users, while the "Instant Cover Loader" displays book cover art faster than previous versions. Finally, the app comes with the usual bug fixes and performance enhancements.
Kindle for iOS is available now as a free 18MB download from the App Store.
Comments
Heads should roll at the department in charge of reviewing apps. Apple gots to be paid.
Just par for the course for the parasite called Amazon. They leech on the brick and mortar stores for free showrooming, they leech on state goverrnments and residents by avoiding sales taxes and killing employment and economic activity by local retailers, why should Apple be exempted from Amazon the parasite?
a
There should be tiered percentages, because in this instance Apple does nothing more than handle the transaction. Storage and distribution is handled by Amazon whereas with other apps it's handled by Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
This disgusts me. Why should amazon NOT pay a percentage, when they're selling to a userbase of hundreds of millions of people on the most active mobile operating system in the world? And, on top of that, when they're competing with Apple's own bookstore? Yeah, God forbid Amazon follow the rules.
Why should Amazon pay a percentage to Apple whilst the users databases significantly overlap?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy
Just par for the course for the parasite called Amazon. They leech on the brick and mortar stores for free showrooming, they leech on state goverrnments and residents by avoiding sales taxes and killing employment and economic activity by local retailers, why should Apple be exempted from Amazon the parasite?
Concerning paying taxes, Apple doesn't seem to be a good pupil either
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1
Concerning paying taxes, Apple doesn't seem to be a good pupil either
Apple collects state sales taxes - at least in Texas - for as long as I can remember. They pay US taxes as owed. The issue is whether they should pay US tax rates on sales that have nothing to do with the US other than the product being designed here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianloftus
Apple collects state sales taxes - at least in Texas - for as long as I can remember. They pay US taxes as owed. The issue is whether they should pay US tax rates on sales that have nothing to do with the US other than the product being designed here.
- Are you saying that Amazon does not pay the taxes that they owe?
- Are you saying that the design is trivial? I was under the assumption that the design is what set the Apple products from the rest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy
Just par for the course for the parasite called Amazon. They leech on the brick and mortar stores for free showrooming, they leech on state goverrnments and residents by avoiding sales taxes and killing employment and economic activity by local retailers, why should Apple be exempted from Amazon the parasite?
Retailers collect sales tax for the government but when they don't, the sales tax is suppose to be paid by individuals when we file our taxes. By lying when we file our taxes and not paying these taxes that would mean the shoppers that are not paying are the parasites.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
This disgusts me. Why should amazon NOT pay a percentage, when they're selling to a userbase of hundreds of millions of people on the most active mobile operating system in the world? And, on top of that, when they're competing with Apple's own bookstore? Yeah, God forbid Amazon follow the rules.
They are following the rules. All it does is email you a reminder to buy it later. Apple never said you couldn't do that. They haven't violated any existing terms. I guess Apple should get money from Walmart every time someone shares an item via the Walmart app and a purchase occurs? How Apple would amend their terms to affect ONLY what Amazon is doing and not impact Target, Walmart, and many other retailers that allow you to generate an email about an item?
Apple does not deserve to make money on every purchase that occurs on this planet as a result of an iPhone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
This disgusts me. Why should amazon NOT pay a percentage, when they're selling to a userbase of hundreds of millions of people on the most active mobile operating system in the world? And, on top of that, when they're competing with Apple's own bookstore? Yeah, God forbid Amazon follow the rules.
What? The app allows users to download a free copy of a book and send an email to themselves reminding them to buy it if they want later.
Apple's charge of 30% is for:
-having the App Store (Access to ecosystem)
-Use of Apple's servers and storage, etc as the post below this suggests.
While I don't think Amazon should pay 0%, I think 30% is higher than it should be for a case like this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
There should be tiered percentages, because in this instance Apple does nothing more than handle the transaction. Storage and distribution is handled by Amazon whereas with other apps it's handled by Apple.
Yeah, that would be a good idea. However, probably worse for profits at Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz1
Why should Amazon pay a percentage to Apple whilst the users databases significantly overlap?
Because Apple will die if they lose the "chump change" (relatively speaking) from one application.
-QAMF
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
This disgusts me. Why should amazon NOT pay a percentage, when they're selling to a userbase of hundreds of millions of people on the most active mobile operating system in the world? And, on top of that, when they're competing with Apple's own bookstore? Yeah, God forbid Amazon follow the rules.
Clearly they feel Apples tax rate of 30% is too high. If they can claim the sale is via the internet and not Apple's ecosystem they just found a great way not to pay the Apple tax. They benefit from Apples ecosystem and users and don't pay to support it. Leave that to the suckers in the ecosystem. Brilliant!
Apple claims much of its IP is not generated in the US, but in Ireland. Instead of paying the 35% tax rate in the US, by claiming the income is generated in Ireland rather than the US, they avoid the taxes in the US. Never mind the expensive school systems they benefit from, or the incredible amount of taxpayer resources they use in tying up the legal system. Let the suckers within the US pay for that and they can get the benefits for free. Brilliant!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood
Clearly they feel Apples tax rate of 30% is too high. If they can claim the sale is via the internet and not Apple's ecosystem they just found a great way not to pay the Apple tax. They benefit from Apples ecosystem and users and don't pay to support it. Leave that to the suckers in the ecosystem. Brilliant!
Apple claims much of its IP is not generated in the US, but in Ireland. Instead of paying the 35% tax rate in the US, by claiming the income is generated in Ireland rather than the US, they avoid the taxes in the US. Never mind the expensive school systems they benefit from, or the incredible amount of taxpayer resources they use in tying up the legal system. Let the suckers within the US pay for that and they can get the benefits for free. Brilliant!
Apple should just kick Amazon out they are competitor and parasitic one at that, nothing good will come from supporting Amazon or Google on the Apple store.
Apple also created an environment where people actually want to go to. They created hardware that people want to by, and pay more for compared to the competition. They pay for the marketing, the whole money transaction system and have set the rules for their App Store model. Companies selling apps and content on the App Store know in advance Apple takes a 30% cut. If that's considered a high percentage so be it, then don't sell on the App Store.
The App Store rules are easy to understand. Don't like it, sell your wares elsewhere.
-1
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Apple also created an environment where people actually want to go to. They created hardware that people want to by, and pay more for compared to the competition. They pay for the marketing, the whole money transaction system and have set the rules for their App Store model. Companies selling apps and content on the App Store know in advance Apple takes a 30% cut. If that's considered a high percentage so be it, then don't sell on the App Store.
The App Store rules are easy to understand. Don't like it, sell your wares elsewhere.
-1
And the vast majority of people who have the Kindle App, did not get it because of Apple.
They got it because they used Amazon, and they wanted to keep all there content from one provided.
Once more, doesn't make sense for Apple to take 30% from someone who they did not market the app for, that has their own transaction system that works just as well (on Kindle's and such)? I take it you are fine with Amazon's email approach then, because it gives people the option to buy it later from Amazon, or buy it right away through the app (or does the app redirect to safari? It was hard to tell)
As for taxes? Seriously? Apple (and most of huge American companies, probably many in other countries as well) evades paying them. Despite the fact they use goods and services that were provided by tax dollars, and hire people who learned from places that used tax dollars, Apple is unwilling to pay back into that.
Seriously? How does being truthful about that deserve a -1?
-QAMF
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood
Clearly they feel Apples tax rate of 30% is too high. If they can claim the sale is via the internet and not Apple's ecosystem they just found a great way not to pay the Apple tax. They benefit from Apples ecosystem and users and don't pay to support it. Leave that to the suckers in the ecosystem. Brilliant!
Apple claims much of its IP is not generated in the US, but in Ireland. Instead of paying the 35% tax rate in the US, by claiming the income is generated in Ireland rather than the US, they avoid the taxes in the US. Never mind the expensive school systems they benefit from, or the incredible amount of taxpayer resources they use in tying up the legal system. Let the suckers within the US pay for that and they can get the benefits for free. Brilliant!
You are entirely incorrect. You've got a lot of sentiment, but light on facts. Here you go:
1. Apple charges a 30% fee as a digital retailer for content and items sold through their online retail store. This is an incredibly good deal for almost every manufacturer placing product in Apple's storefronts. They always complain to try and get lower costs, but the reality is that this is a steal for retail space, and an incredible bargain basement discount for "premium" popular retail space/presence.
2. Apple sells products in many countries around the world, it pays all the taxes it is required. They made a deal to locate Apple's European operations in Ireland in 1980. At the time, their government was trying to encourage high tech companies to open there, to attract higher paying technical jobs and kickstart local economies. They promised Apple a certain tax rate, and Apple has been there for decades. When the EU enacted a single currency in 1993 and enacted new tax laws, Ireland's existing economic policies were preserved and part of the country's charter into the EU. The structure of the EU is such that Apple Ireland can operate in Europe as a European entity, and retains their local (Irish) tax structure. If you think that's a problem, then basically you're saying the entire EU is dumb, but it has nothing to do with Apple. Any companies that took the risk of developing a high tech industry (including infrastructure financing) in the rural agrarian 1980's Ireland, deserve whatever tax break they are getting. It worked out very well for the country of Ireland, and now its an asset for the entire EU.
3. Apple creates IP in the US, and pays corporate taxes for any business operating expenses regarding that here (materials, employees, etc). It is then licensed to their international operations, which is the standard behavior for every international company on the planet and protected/expected by a wide variety of international treaties.
4. Expensive school systems have nothing to do with Apple, people pay for their own educations, Apple pays them for their work. Where's the relationship? I believe Apple even pays tuition for some employees who they wish to pursue additional degrees and education.
5. Apple pays for every second they are in US courts, you should read up on "legal fees" and "court costs". There is no taxpayer expense, unless the government is using it's resources to try and prosecute them. The Obama administration has directed the DOJ to pursue anti-trust litigation over ebooks against Apple. Until there is a final judgment, and if they are found guilty, and if Apple's penalties (including legal fees) cover the governments costs over this current trial, then no taxpayer "resources" will have been utilized. If Apple wins the case, or the penalties don't cover the governments costs for pursuing this trial, then taxpayer "resources" aka taxes will have been used. However that is the Obama administration's decision and responsibility to account/justify this, it's entirely their action.