i absolutely hate Apple Maps. Always use Google Maps
My interpretation of what Cue said: "We do maps on the Cheap" so don't be surprised by their problems. Atlas they can pull up Google Maps to fix apple. The missed the chance to by Here Maps. Cue should be gone. That's the biggest sign that Cook doesn't know what he's doing. The have finally admitted that releasing MAPS was a problem be cause they were just starting out and should have called it a public Beta. Instead Cook used it to push Forestall out - the only really threat to his sitting in his office for years - and then let Maps and Siri languish for years.
i absolutely hate Apple Maps. Always use Google Maps
I have used both. And, when I really need to get there on time, I use both and verify by satellite view. Why? Both have failed me. Both have gotten me there. Frankly I find the error rate for both low, and about equal. But it brings back the famous "trust but verify" line. The most annoying thing to me is they don't give real life driving time estimates. I have driven the speed limit, with both maps, and fallen slowly behind. Sometimes only speeding will keep me on schedule (rental cars, so not a broken speedometer). Anyway, point being, I like and hate both. Unless I use both. Then I catch their errors before they are errors for me.
i absolutely hate Apple Maps. Always use Google Maps
I have used both. And, when I really need to get there on time, I use both and verify by satellite view. Why? Both have failed me. Both have gotten me there. Frankly I find the error rate for both low, and about equal. But it brings back the famous "trust but verify" line. The most annoying thing to me is they don't give real life driving time estimates. I have driven the speed limit, with both maps, and fallen slowly behind. Sometimes only speeding will keep me on schedule (rental cars, so not a broken speedometer). Anyway, point being, I like and hate both. Unless I use both. Then I catch their errors before they are errors for me.
I use Waze every time I get in the car - even if I'm going places I'm totally familiar with. Love it and that is another one Apple should have bought. Pains me that it is Google owned.
Problem is most companies don't have $200 billion lying around doing nothing.
Apple's weakness in Social, Cloud, and Search is really bad. They don't have to be giants like Yahoo or Twitter. Just buy smaller social platforms and run with it. For Search just buy DuckDuckGo and improve on it. For Cloud, I don't know.
Like it or not Apple has to be a conglomerate to grow for the next decade.
No it does not. Apple expanding into the Auto industry alone is plenty. Social Networking is mature. Apple working with mature Social Networking giants is being intelligent.
And what does Twitter, Facebook, ect pay to Apple? $0
Twitter, Facebook, ect are making BILLIONS off of iOS users and Apple gets $0
Its flatout ridiculous. Apple should be getting royalties on every single iOS user on Facebook and Twitter. Facebook, Instgram, Twitter, ect should all be paying Apple BILLIONS each.
Its crazy that a small time developer needs to pay 30% to Apple while Twitter/Facebook makes BILLIONS and don't need to pay a cent.
That is why Apple needs to get into Social. When they have competing platforms with Twitter/Facebook they can charge royalties. Its only fair. Facebook should be paying for the right to feed ads to iOS users.
Again, you fail to understand Facebook and Twitter and the like all make money off advertising and selling people personal habits. The only way this business works is to monetizes user personally information to advertise to them. Apple has already said that they are not going to monetize your personal information and guess what they make more money they social companies make. As consumer become more resistance to this business model they run the risk of their business declining. Consumers are starting to retaliated.
" I think it’s awesome that Travis and his team have done Uber on our platform. It would not exist without our platform, let’s be clear." Eddy Cue
This is 100% right. Does Apple get any $ from Uber for people using the Uber App on iOS? If not they should.
Without iOS clients Uber would lose 75% of their sales.
You do not know anything about fair trade laws in this country. Apple already ran afoul of the FTC and others with their business practices of how they charge people for using an App or service. Apple has already change how this is done o and can not stop you from going to the App's own website and pay your monthly/yearly fees. Apple can not force consumer to buy through Apple. Their are lots of legal issue they have to be careful about. It would be like a new paper charging a company a fee for every consumer who saw an ad and call the company to use their services. Or better yet Ford wanting to collect a fee for every cab ride because a cab companies uses a crown vic car.
" I think it’s awesome that Travis and his team have done Uber on our platform. It would not exist without our platform, let’s be clear." Eddy Cue
This is 100% right. Does Apple get any $ from Uber for people using the Uber App on iOS? If not they should.
Without iOS clients Uber would lose 75% of their sales.
You do not know anything about fair trade laws in this country. Apple already ran afoul of the FTC and others with their business practices of how they charge people for using an App or service. Apple has already change how this is done o and can not stop you from going to the App's own website and pay your monthly/yearly fees. Apple can not force consumer to buy through Apple. Their are lots of legal issue they have to be careful about. It would be like a new paper charging a company a fee for every consumer who saw an ad and call the company to use their services. Or better yet Ford wanting to collect a fee for every cab ride because a cab companies uses a crown vic car.
I dunno... If Uber is using the iOS platform to facilitate sales using their app, there's an excellent argument that Apple should be receiving a part of that. Maybe it's not 30% of every ride, but for in-app purchases using other apps, there's a payment made to Apple. Maybe 1% or as little as .5% of every transaction wouldn't be out of line?
I dunno... If Uber is using the iOS platform to facilitate sales using their app, there's an excellent argument that Apple should be receiving a part of that. Maybe it's not 30% of every ride, but for in-app purchases using other apps, there's a payment made to Apple. Maybe 1% or as little as .5% of every transaction wouldn't be out of line?
And 1% of every plane ticket I purchase through Kayak? What about every PayPal transaction I make, and every Postmates dinner delivery, every AirBnb booking, and well shit, I just used Safari to pay my electric bill, so maybe 1% of that too?
" I think it’s awesome that Travis and his team have done Uber on our platform. It would not exist without our platform, let’s be clear." Eddy Cue
This is 100% right. Does Apple get any $ from Uber for people using the Uber App on iOS? If not they should.
Without iOS clients Uber would lose 75% of their sales.
You do not know anything about fair trade laws in this country. Apple already ran afoul of the FTC and others with their business practices of how they charge people for using an App or service. Apple has already change how this is done o and can not stop you from going to the App's own website and pay your monthly/yearly fees. Apple can not force consumer to buy through Apple. Their are lots of legal issue they have to be careful about. It would be like a new paper charging a company a fee for every consumer who saw an ad and call the company to use their services. Or better yet Ford wanting to collect a fee for every cab ride because a cab companies uses a crown vic car.
No. Your comparisions are wrong.
Its like Walmart not getting a cut for selling product from Nike. The App Store is where Apps are sold. Apple runs the store. It is only fair that whoever profits from Apps sold on the App store should pay a cut.
This would be a negotiated deal. Apple can say they need to pay 2-5% of revenue or they will disallow the App from being on the App store. Its Apple's Appstore. They can control what they want to be sold. Just like Walmart can control what they want to sell in their store. Uber has no right to force Apple to 'sell' their App in their App store.
Uber is getting a clear benefit from being able to sell their App in Apple's App store. They should compensate Apple for that benefit. If not then lets remove the Uber App from the App store and see what a happens. LOL. You can't have it both ways. You can't say Uber does not get a major benefit from the App Store, and then cry foul when the App is removed.
You really need to take a few course on free trade and what legally can and can not be done. Apple can not bar companies from selling on the App store, again if they did there would be a number of laws they would subject to. They set guideline that everyone must follow, but that is no baring them from the market place.
Just a small correction for you, Uber does not sell their app on Apple store, they give it away and Apple makes $0 since 30% of $0 is $0. But this backs your argument since Apple is incurring costs to host the Uber app and make nothing in return. All other apps developers are somehow revenue sharing with Apple unless they give the product away and we have 100 of thousands of free apps on Apple's store and make not money on. But that is the cost of doing business.
By the way, Walmat buys products from Nike and "resale" it, thus they are free to sell it at what ever price they like and make what ever profits they like. But Walmat can not get a cut of any sales between the consumer and Nike if the consumer choose to sign up with Nike for services.
My comparison is still valid, Once Apple sells a phone/app to a consumer/business and the consumer or business is free to use that product how they like if they generate revenue from that Apple product Apple is not allow to collect a fee for the revenue you generate using their product. To your point Apple could have negotiate a deal with Uber to extract a cut of their revenue for any Uber hailed from an iOS device. But obviously they did not, why, because they run the risk that Android would not and Uber would promote Android over iOS.
I know enough to know what you suggesting is not legal and I can guarantee you Apple has an army of people who knows the specific laws and rules and if they could they would have. If they could there is the flip side of does it make business sense. Apple is walking a fine of line of not being seen as monopoly, we have people like yourself who use the term wall garden which implies a monopoly and this idea was used against Apple in the ebook case.
Comments
The missed the chance to by Here Maps. Cue should be gone. That's the biggest sign that Cook doesn't know what he's doing. The have finally
admitted that releasing MAPS was a problem be cause they were just starting out and should have called it a public Beta. Instead Cook used it to
push Forestall out - the only really threat to his sitting in his office for years - and then let Maps and Siri languish for years.
No, they've continually improved on both platforms for years.
RTFA next time.
Again, you fail to understand Facebook and Twitter and the like all make money off advertising and selling people personal habits. The only way this business works is to monetizes user personally information to advertise to them. Apple has already said that they are not going to monetize your personal information and guess what they make more money they social companies make. As consumer become more resistance to this business model they run the risk of their business declining. Consumers are starting to retaliated.
You do not know anything about fair trade laws in this country. Apple already ran afoul of the FTC and others with their business practices of how they charge people for using an App or service. Apple has already change how this is done o and can not stop you from going to the App's own website and pay your monthly/yearly fees. Apple can not force consumer to buy through Apple. Their are lots of legal issue they have to be careful about. It would be like a new paper charging a company a fee for every consumer who saw an ad and call the company to use their services. Or better yet Ford wanting to collect a fee for every cab ride because a cab companies uses a crown vic car.
How about NO.
You really need to take a few course on free trade and what legally can and can not be done. Apple can not bar companies from selling on the App store, again if they did there would be a number of laws they would subject to. They set guideline that everyone must follow, but that is no baring them from the market place.
Just a small correction for you, Uber does not sell their app on Apple store, they give it away and Apple makes $0 since 30% of $0 is $0. But this backs your argument since Apple is incurring costs to host the Uber app and make nothing in return. All other apps developers are somehow revenue sharing with Apple unless they give the product away and we have 100 of thousands of free apps on Apple's store and make not money on. But that is the cost of doing business.
By the way, Walmat buys products from Nike and "resale" it, thus they are free to sell it at what ever price they like and make what ever profits they like. But Walmat can not get a cut of any sales between the consumer and Nike if the consumer choose to sign up with Nike for services.
My comparison is still valid, Once Apple sells a phone/app to a consumer/business and the consumer or business is free to use that product how they like if they generate revenue from that Apple product Apple is not allow to collect a fee for the revenue you generate using their product. To your point Apple could have negotiate a deal with Uber to extract a cut of their revenue for any Uber hailed from an iOS device. But obviously they did not, why, because they run the risk that Android would not and Uber would promote Android over iOS.
I know enough to know what you suggesting is not legal and I can guarantee you Apple has an army of people who knows the specific laws and rules and if they could they would have. If they could there is the flip side of does it make business sense. Apple is walking a fine of line of not being seen as monopoly, we have people like yourself who use the term wall garden which implies a monopoly and this idea was used against Apple in the ebook case.