Netflix kills in-app subscription option for iPhone & iPad users

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 83
    robbyx said:
    crosslad said:
    Apple should start charging companies like Netflix, that charge customers but give nothing back to Apple, for making their services available through the AppStore. 
    That’s crazy. Apple is a HARDWARE company. Services and the App Store are gravy, neither of which exist if people aren’t buying the hardware. Companies like Netflix are giving Apple customers services to enjoy. No services and those customers buy someone else’s hardware. I’d get rid of AppleTV without a second thought if Netflix wasn’t available.
    On the contrary,  the software and services are selling the hardware.  That's why Apple makes 90% of the profits with 20% of the sales.
    If the Netflix services are so great, Netflix should make their own hardware like Amazon and Roku do and see how far they get.
    Once they have their own hardware, they can have their own store too but not get very far.

    Why do you think Google pays billions to Apple to provide Apple with search services?  It's the ecosystem, not just the hardware.
    racerhomie3radarthekatwatto_cobra
  • Reply 42 of 83
    Don't bite the Apple that feeds you.

    This may be an early move is desperation due to Apples coming service.

    I hope Apples service dominates like everything else Apple does. Couldn't care if Netflix became the next Nokia.
    So you want Netflix to fail because they don’t want to give Apple 30/15% cut? How is that good for anybody?
    Totally agree with rogifan_new. There is a thing called "competition", monopoly so far only served the monopoly owner, never consumers. And though I like the enthusiasm, being an Apple fan myself, but given the recent product diversity and general market conditions I see too major issues with the movie service in particular and the charging of fees in general :

    1. The level of bugs have significantly increased for a while, Apple is losing focus on doing things right. Siri, HomePod, iOS sync between devices, and generally looking more into peoples day-to-day life and the ways they use software to remove a lot of the small little obstacles particularly iOS and macOS, are just some examples. Also it took them many years from iDIsk to iCloud Drive to get something remotely competitive to Dropbox running. It does not make me confident them approaching another line of service, as much as I would like to see it, don't get me wrong on this!

    2. Why should any company accept a 30% cut? To me iTunes becomes more and more a service like any other payment service. Yes, iTunes itself may get credit card charges which they have to path through, but I think they should just do it as for Apple Pay, i.e. a small cut of the payment fee, that seems fair and I doubt that the service providers would have a problem with that.

    So overall, greed is never a good adviser when you want to keep both suppliers AND customers stay on board, best is to find a balance everybody can live with. All the recent quality issues (e.g. the bending problem of the new iPad Pro) and excessive fees may hurt Apple badly going forward. And I am personally considering a single developer who spent days and nights on getting the result on the App Store (and already pays for the Apple Developer program); a 30% cut is just outrageous and this community might be grateful that some biggies pave the way for a change (even for solely selfish reasons ;-) ... but like I said, this is just my personal opinion.
    edited December 2018 williamlondoncropr
  • Reply 43 of 83
    hagarhagar Posts: 123member
    Don't bite the Apple that feeds you.

    This may be an early move is desperation due to Apples coming service.

    I hope Apples service dominates like everything else Apple does. Couldn't care if Netflix became the next Nokia.
    So you want Netflix to fail because they don’t want to give Apple 30/15% cut? How is that good for anybody?
    Yes I do.

    Do you think Walmart does not deserve a cut of everything they offer?

    If I were Apple I'd kick them off my platform.
    I think at this point this would hurt Apple more than it would Netflix. 
    williamlondon
  • Reply 44 of 83
    Makes sense. Especially now that Apple will become a competitior. And anyone who says Apple deserves a cut of Netflix subscriptions then must also believe Apple deserves a cut of every Uber and Lyft ride.
    Audio and Video services are not the same as Taxi services.
    Should Apple create, maintain and support iTunes and just allow third party music services to just come for the ride?
    Will Netflix allow pornographic video vendors to offer their videos on their Netflix platform?  Netflix does not create it or host it either.


    What does Netflix have to do with iTunes? Anyway I’d argue Uber and Lyft owe their success to the smartphone/mobile platforms more than Netflix does.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 45 of 83
    mylovino said:
    Don't bite the Apple that feeds you.

    This may be an early move is desperation due to Apples coming service.

    I hope Apples service dominates like everything else Apple does. Couldn't care if Netflix became the next Nokia.
    So you want Netflix to fail because they don’t want to give Apple 30/15% cut? How is that good for anybody?
    Totally agree with rogifan_new. There is a thing called "competition", monopoly so far only served the monopoly owner, never consumers. And though I like the enthusiasm, being an Apple fan myself, but given the recent product diversity and general market conditions I see too major issues with the movie service in particular and the charging of fees in general :

    1. The level of bugs have significantly increased for a while, Apple is losing focus on doing things right. Siri, HomePod, iOS sync between devices, and generally looking more into peoples day-to-day life and the ways they use software to remove a lot of the small little obstacles particularly iOS and macOS, are just some examples. Also it took them many years from iDIsk to iCloud Drive to get something remotely competitive to Dropbox running. It does not make me confident them approaching another line of service, as much as I would like to see it, don't get me wrong on this!

    2. Why should any company accept a 30% cut? To me iTunes becomes more and more a service like any other payment service. Yes, iTunes itself may get credit card charges which they have to path through, but I think they should just do it as for Apple Pay, i.e. a small cut of the payment fee, that seems fair and I doubt that the service providers would have a problem with that.

    So overall, greed is never a good adviser when you want to keep both suppliers AND customers stay on board, best is to find a balance everybody can live with. All the recent quality issues (e.g. the bending problem of the new iPad Pro) and excessive fees may hurt Apple badly going forward. And I am personally considering a single developer who spent days and nights on getting the result on the App Store (and already pays for the Apple Developer program); a 30% cut is just outrageous and this community might be grateful that some biggies pave the way for a change (even for solely selfish reasons ;-) ... but like I said, this is just my personal opinion.
    I have no issue with a “finders fee” so to speak. But in year two and beyond if someone is still subscribed to Netflix does Apple really deserve a cut of that revenue (outside of whatever the costs are for credit card transactions)? I would argue at that point Apple is no longer playing a role in customer acquisition. And the fact that Apple reduced its cut after the first year to 15% means they know it too. But even 15% is too high. And in the case of Netflix and Spotify why pay a fee to Apple when Apple is a competitior and doesn’t have to pay the same fee?
    williamlondon
  • Reply 46 of 83
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,707member
    mylovino said:
    Don't bite the Apple that feeds you.

    This may be an early move is desperation due to Apples coming service.

    I hope Apples service dominates like everything else Apple does. Couldn't care if Netflix became the next Nokia.
    So you want Netflix to fail because they don’t want to give Apple 30/15% cut? How is that good for anybody?
    Totally agree with rogifan_new. There is a thing called "competition", monopoly so far only served the monopoly owner, never consumers. And though I like the enthusiasm, being an Apple fan myself, but given the recent product diversity and general market conditions I see too major issues with the movie service in particular and the charging of fees in general :

    1. The level of bugs have significantly increased for a while, Apple is losing focus on doing things right. Siri, HomePod, iOS sync between devices, and generally looking more into peoples day-to-day life and the ways they use software to remove a lot of the small little obstacles particularly iOS and macOS, are just some examples. Also it took them many years from iDIsk to iCloud Drive to get something remotely competitive to Dropbox running. It does not make me confident them approaching another line of service, as much as I would like to see it, don't get me wrong on this!

    2. Why should any company accept a 30% cut? To me iTunes becomes more and more a service like any other payment service. Yes, iTunes itself may get credit card charges which they have to path through, but I think they should just do it as for Apple Pay, i.e. a small cut of the payment fee, that seems fair and I doubt that the service providers would have a problem with that.

    So overall, greed is never a good adviser when you want to keep both suppliers AND customers stay on board, best is to find a balance everybody can live with. All the recent quality issues (e.g. the bending problem of the new iPad Pro) and excessive fees may hurt Apple badly going forward. And I am personally considering a single developer who spent days and nights on getting the result on the App Store (and already pays for the Apple Developer program); a 30% cut is just outrageous and this community might be grateful that some biggies pave the way for a change (even for solely selfish reasons ;-) ... but like I said, this is just my personal opinion.
    I have no issue with a “finders fee” so to speak. But in year two and beyond if someone is still subscribed to Netflix does Apple really deserve a cut of that revenue (outside of whatever the costs are for credit card transactions)? I would argue at that point Apple is no longer playing a role in customer acquisition. And the fact that Apple reduced its cut after the first year to 15% means they know it too. But even 15% is too high. And in the case of Netflix and Spotify why pay a fee to Apple when Apple is a competitior and doesn’t have to pay the same fee?
    I can totally understand Netflix doing this - if you were them, would you give up 15% of your income if you didn't have to? I would do the exact same thing if I were them.

    Netflix is available on a ton of different devices (TVs, DVD players, etc.) Do they pay royalties at all on those? (Serious question) Another consideration is what percentage of the content is viewed on AppleTV vs laptops, desktops, phones, etc. Should Netflix payOn one hand Apple does have both development and ongoing support costs for AppleTV, but one can also argue that services like Netflix increase the value of AppleTV and help sales. 
  • Reply 47 of 83
    Don't bite the Apple that feeds you.

    This may be an early move is desperation due to Apples coming service.

    I hope Apples service dominates like everything else Apple does. Couldn't care if Netflix became the next Nokia.
    So you want Netflix to fail because they don’t want to give Apple 30/15% cut? How is that good for anybody?
    Yes I do.

    Do you think Walmart does not deserve a cut of everything they offer?

    If I were Apple I'd kick them off my platform.
    If you stop people watching their favourite shows on Iphones, I am sure that would make competitors like Samsung very attractive alternatives.
  • Reply 48 of 83
    emoeller said:
    I have had DVDnetflix for a couple of years and tried to subscribe to Netflix (streaming) for my AppleTV through iTunes.   It took some effort but finally got it set up earlier this year.   But apparently the two services are separate and could not be combined as I had used iTunes setup.   So I had to cancel the iTunes and set up through Netflix website then link the two accounts and now everything works perfectly.

    Throughout that process the Netflix service reps kept telling me that they were really have problems with iTunes accounts and billing.   So this announcement is not too much of a surprise.  

    As for Apple's streaming service - I'll believe it when I see it.   These are very difficult to set up due to combination of digital rights, local station and sports services, and new compelling content.   None of which Apple has much experience with as far as video goes (they obviously know the music business).  I think it's going to be a long bumpy road for Apple.

    None of which Netflix provides outside of DRM licensed from third parties and also the exact same thing will be provided by Apple as they have a huge amount of Digital Rights IP already, a large swath of new original content coming very soon, not to mention joint relationships with every major studio on the planet already via iTunes, including ESPN, FOX Sports, CBS Sports, etc., but go ahead and think it won't succeed.

    Netflix succeeds with what they have to ~$16 billion per year and they haven't the assets and infrastructure of Apple. The data centers that Apple are building out are to augment this projected added load across the US first and later regionally around the world for the streaming services, separate from iCloud present services.

    Apple is going to spend easily $20 billion in the next couple years on that alone.

    Netflix is about to see a wrath of draw down due to Disney pulling the plug on a large portion of their licensed franchises that were the main draw for large demographics signing up to use Netflix.
    edited December 2018 AppleExposedwatto_cobra
  • Reply 49 of 83
    I want all my subscriptions for apps I get through the Apple App Store to be managed through the App Store. That’s why I buy them.

    Reasons:

    1) Convenience—Just one place to check what my subscriptions are and when they are due

    2) Reliability— Apple let’s me know in advance that a subscription comes due. I can then easily go into ITunes and cancel if I desire.

    And I know if I cancel it will be cancelled. I’ve done too many cancellations BS when a company doesn’t cancel my subscription as requested on time. Means long fight with a service where I cannot talk with a human or have to let my credit card company fight it out. 

    3) Security— Trust my payment, name, address, phone, email, credit card are safe and secure with Apple. I cannot trust that with another company whose security may be minimal —too many hacks out there. Security is part of the Apple App Store service for me.

    I want all my apps —Purchases, subscriptions and updates to go through one place—the App Store. If a developer wants to go DIY, take it off the App Store, with its free advertising to Apple client base. Advertise and let me come to you if I desire your service. I’m sure Appleinsider and others will welcome DIY developer ad dollars...

    I’m not buying apps that don’t go through the App Store anymore.  Had to do this with 1 Password, had issues, only an email exchange customer service to help.  But my passwords were  at stake. So I went with their subscription offline and hate it.

    To start on Apple services then take them away is to me bait-and-switch...




    AppleExposedwatto_cobraradarthekatRayz2016
  • Reply 50 of 83
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,541member
    I don't understand the controversy.  In-app purchasing is there as an option for those that find value in customer acquisition via Apple, and others can choose to not have it if their brand / marketing $$ can drive customers to the service without that one-click ease.  Amazon has always had signup outside app store.  Netflix is quite capable of managing around this.  And Apple gets lots of value by providing free apps, provided that there is appropriate $$ from paid apps to make it viable as a whole.

    For those that argue Apple shouldn't be charging 30%/15% for paid services, have you ever asked why the competition does the same?  Why does the great Google Play store have the same values?  Why is Google Play not significantly lower?  When mobile application stores offered by the mobile operators where a (small) thing back in the 2000's, the % were the other way around - operator takes 70% and developer gets 30% (use of apps and type of apps limited prior to iPhone, so not much of a business, but something to note).  Apple was ground breaking when the introduced this model, and was quickly copied by Google.

    I do believe that with the App Store at the scale it is now, Apple should consider some reduction in fees as a way to continue to grow the business.  Meaning it is in Apple's best interest - not a statement that taking a cut of such sales is wrong.  Moving to say 25% in general, and 10% for long-term subscriptions, can help to grow the paid apps & stave off potential class actions in the future.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 51 of 83
    croprcropr Posts: 1,080member
    The main question is: how many people buy a Netflix subscription because they have an iOS device? 

    Apparently Netflix assumes that this number is very limited and that the customers of Netflix subscribe to Netflix because of the value of the service.  The device to run the service on is just a implementation detail.  So why should Netflix give a 15% cut to Apple if Apple does not bring new customers?
     
    I tend to agree with this view.  At home we have a Netflix subscription and we have 2 iPhones and 1 iPad, but none of these devices have the Netflix app installed.  My family watches Netflix on TV or on an external screen to a PC or Mac.  The value of iOS in this story is exactly 0.

    edited December 2018 Soligatorguy
  • Reply 52 of 83
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,835moderator
    MplsP said:
    I can totally understand Netflix doing this - if you were them, would you give up 15% of your income if you didn't have to? I would do the exact same thing if I were them.

    Netflix is available on a ton of different devices (TVs, DVD players, etc.) Do they pay royalties at all on those? (Serious question) Another consideration is what percentage of the content is viewed on AppleTV vs laptops, desktops, phones, etc. Should Netflix payOn one hand Apple does have both development and ongoing support costs for AppleTV, but one can also argue that services like Netflix increase the value of AppleTV and help sales. 
    This fee is about where the transaction happens. If a user signs up via iTunes, they are billed via iTunes so there's no fees on other devices. If a user signed up on Android using Google Play Billing, the fee went to Google. Netflix removed that option too. Netflix just wants to bill the customer directly.

    https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/21/17764424/netflix-feature-bypass-apples-app-store-fees

    People could take issue with any fee on a digital purchase.
    If Candy Crush allows you to buy 10 extra lives for $0.99 why should Apple get anything? What if they gave you 20 lives per month for $0.99/month? Should all app subscriptions including games and dating apps have no fee attached? If games and dating apps still have to pay a fee for their subscriptions, why do they have to pay it and not media streaming services? It's all part of the same billing process.

    The fee applies to intangible assets, not physical so doesn't cover retail stores, hotels, taxis etc. There's a few grey areas, it's hard to have simple rules to cover everything but it works well enough considering the scale of it.

    The App Store is serving 0.5 billion customers per week. That needs data centers with ongoing costs to run. The money to run those comes from the services using them so the App Store has to charge something. If only IAPs are charged and not subscriptions then it's unfair on developers who don't offer subscriptions. If a smaller percentage is charged to bigger players then it's unfair on smaller developers. If they only charge some app subscriptions and not others, again it's unfair on some developers. Apple made it the same to make it fair.

    15% is a reasonable fee. For a $7.99 Netflix bundle that's only $1.20/month. The problem with companies like Netflix and Spotify is they have shareholders to keep happy and they want their margins to be as good as they can be so anything non-zero is a problem but Apple has their own shareholders who want to see growth in services revenue. Even if the fee was 5%, Netflix would want to bypass it. In the end, all these prices and fees are fairly arbitrary. Why does Netflix settle on $7.99 and not $9.99 or $19.99? The price they charge is entirely up to them.

    Netflix choosing to remove iTunes billing as an option is perfectly fine but it's also perfectly fine for Apple to charge a reasonable fee for using iTunes billing. It's offered as an easy way for customers to avoid manually signing up and maintaining subscriptions to each and every service they use on the App Store and the App Store has vastly improved the way that developers can get their software to customers and made it more accessible for users - effectively 1-tap install and delete, no dialogs, no reboots, all sandboxed and safe. The amount for the App Store fee can't be determined by people outside Apple just as Netflix's subscription fee isn't, only the companies know what their internal expenditure roadmap looks like and what's sustainable.
    watto_cobraradarthekatbestkeptsecret
  • Reply 53 of 83
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,805unconfirmed, member
    robbyx said:
    crosslad said:
    Apple should start charging companies like Netflix, that charge customers but give nothing back to Apple, for making their services available through the AppStore. 
    That’s crazy. Apple is a HARDWARE company. Services and the App Store are gravy, neither of which exist if people aren’t buying the hardware. Companies like Netflix are giving Apple customers services to enjoy. No services and those customers buy someone else’s hardware. I’d get rid of AppleTV without a second thought if Netflix wasn’t available.
    Why is Apple a different company depending on the topic? Apple can never win with you people.

    "Apple is a music company"
    "Apple is a software company"
    Apple can'r make a car because they're a "Computer company"

    Sorry pal,  but Apple owns iTunes, App Store and other services.

    Apple is a services company. /checkmate


    macarena said:
    Google, FB, etc make money off violating customer privacy, and we think of that as bad.

    Apple engages in unfair business practices, but it’s ok?

    How different is this from Microsoft making IE the default browser on Windows? MS at least didn’t charge Netscape anything. And still got canned for it.

    Apple is attracting too much bad karma and some day this will all come back to bite Apple. Waiting for that moment.
    You're comparing data mining to Apple wanting a cut for their store?......

    macarena said:
    Apple will crib if Qualcomm wants 4% royalties that are tied to the cost of the phone - and not to the much lower cost of the chipset.

    But Apple wants a 15% cut of ONGOING subscription costs of NetFlix, even though the only service provided by Apple is hosting the app and delivering it. Which is a one time service. That too, with a policy that prevents customers from downloading from elsewhere.

    One day whatever Apple wins from Qualcomm will be lost multiple times over because of this policy.

    Apple’s policies were OK and acceptable when it was a small struggling company - not when it is the largest company in the planet. Maybe the DoJ or someone else should step in, and make it a smaller company once again.

    Apple wasn't a small struggling company when they released iTunes and the App Store. Apple owes you or its developers nothing.

    Do you think millionaires owe you money because they can afford it?

    Rightfully so. It’s time to fight this App Store monopoly.

    Or you know, you can buy a knockoff iPhone/knockoff iPad and buy from that other "monopoly".
    watto_cobraradarthekat
  • Reply 54 of 83
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,805unconfirmed, member
    pk0702 said:
    crosslad said:
    gatorguy said:
    crosslad said:
    Apple should start charging companies like Netflix, that charge customers but give nothing back to Apple, for making their services available through the AppStore. 
    They do "give back" to Apple since they offer a service that Apple users want. How is it so different from Apple hosting other "free apps" that users find valuable, stuff like Dropbox or Adobe Reader or Lastpass, that help keep Apple users happy in the ecosystem?

    Pretty sure you wouldn't want Netflix mobile as an Android exclusive. it wouldn't reflect well on the platform would it? 
    And if Netflix should be giving a cut to Apple then surely Uber and Lyft should too. Heck Eddy Cue even said Uber wouldn’t exist if not for the iPhone. I don’t think the same can be said for Netflix. I watch Netflix on my smart TV which has nothing to do with Apple.
    You’re right. Apple should be charging Uber and Lyft. 
    Apple won’t exist if it wasn’t for developers like Uber.
    Apple existed before Uber.

    One-post troll, please leave. 
    watto_cobraradarthekatigorsky
  • Reply 55 of 83
    robbyxrobbyx Posts: 479member
    robbyx said:
    crosslad said:
    Apple should start charging companies like Netflix, that charge customers but give nothing back to Apple, for making their services available through the AppStore. 
    That’s crazy. Apple is a HARDWARE company. Services and the App Store are gravy, neither of which exist if people aren’t buying the hardware. Companies like Netflix are giving Apple customers services to enjoy. No services and those customers buy someone else’s hardware. I’d get rid of AppleTV without a second thought if Netflix wasn’t available.
    On the contrary,  the software and services are selling the hardware.  That's why Apple makes 90% of the profits with 20% of the sales.
    If the Netflix services are so great, Netflix should make their own hardware like Amazon and Roku do and see how far they get.
    Once they have their own hardware, they can have their own store too but not get very far.

    Why do you think Google pays billions to Apple to provide Apple with search services?  It's the ecosystem, not just the hardware.

    Apple’s middling services don’t sell iPhones. I don’t think there’s a person out there who bought an iPhone just so he or she could use iCloud.

    When it comes to software, you have a point. A thriving App Store certainly makes the iOS platform more appealing. The number of apps available for PCs versus Macs back on the day was a key factor in the PC’s overall success.

    But, in the end, Apple is a hardware company. They make the vast majority of their revenue from hardware sales. Why should Netflix make a box?  That’s ridiculous. Should every TV channel make their own TV?  Apple needs apps and services to support its platform as much as those services need Apple, maybe more. We don’t want to return to the 90s when virtually no one supported Apple products. Apple isn’t a software or a services company. They are a hardware company. If no one buys the hardware, the App Store means nothing.

    So you’re right that a big piece of the puzzle is software, but it’s not Apple software. It’s third party software supporting Apple’s platform. Lose those apps and services and Apple is in big trouble. 

    As for Google, that’s something different. Google needs data to monetize. Paying to be the default search engine is a smart investment given their business model.
  • Reply 56 of 83
    cropr said:
    The main question is: how many people buy a Netflix subscription because they have an iOS device? 

    Apparently Netflix assumes that this number is very limited and that the customers of Netflix subscribe to Netflix because of the value of the service.  The device to run the service on is just a implementation detail.  So why should Netflix give a 15% cut to Apple if Apple does not bring new customers?
     
    I tend to agree with this view.  At home we have a Netflix subscription and we have 2 iPhones and 1 iPad, but none of these devices have the Netflix app installed.  My family watches Netflix on TV or on an external screen to a PC or Mac.  The value of iOS in this story is exactly 0.

    I don’t think Netflix is making any assumptions here. They have the data. They ran the numbers and realized that money they pay Apple is better spent elsewhere (like marketing to potential customers in developing markets where iOS isn’t popular). Existing subscribers can still use iTunes for billing too. So it’s not like they are forcing everyone to switch billing methods. My guess is, they simply aren’t seeing much subscriber growth from iOS users given the western world’s mature smartphone market.
  • Reply 57 of 83
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,805unconfirmed, member
    robbyx said:
    robbyx said:
    crosslad said:
    Apple should start charging companies like Netflix, that charge customers but give nothing back to Apple, for making their services available through the AppStore. 
    That’s crazy. Apple is a HARDWARE company. Services and the App Store are gravy, neither of which exist if people aren’t buying the hardware. Companies like Netflix are giving Apple customers services to enjoy. No services and those customers buy someone else’s hardware. I’d get rid of AppleTV without a second thought if Netflix wasn’t available.
    On the contrary,  the software and services are selling the hardware.  That's why Apple makes 90% of the profits with 20% of the sales.
    If the Netflix services are so great, Netflix should make their own hardware like Amazon and Roku do and see how far they get.
    Once they have their own hardware, they can have their own store too but not get very far.

    Why do you think Google pays billions to Apple to provide Apple with search services?  It's the ecosystem, not just the hardware.

    Apple’s middling services don’t sell iPhones. I don’t think there’s a person out there who bought an iPhone just so he or she could use iCloud.

    When it comes to software, you have a point. A thriving App Store certainly makes the iOS platform more appealing. The number of apps available for PCs versus Macs back on the day was a key factor in the PC’s overall success.

    But, in the end, Apple is a hardware company. They make the vast majority of their revenue from hardware sales. Why should Netflix make a box?  That’s ridiculous. Should every TV channel make their own TV?  Apple needs apps and services to support its platform as much as those services need Apple, maybe more. We don’t want to return to the 90s when virtually no one supported Apple products. Apple isn’t a software or a services company. They are a hardware company. If no one buys the hardware, the App Store means nothing.

    So you’re right that a big piece of the puzzle is software, but it’s not Apple software. It’s third party software supporting Apple’s platform. Lose those apps and services and Apple is in big trouble. 

    As for Google, that’s something different. Google needs data to monetize. Paying to be the default search engine is a smart investment given their business model.
    You couldn't be more wrong. Plenty of people bought iPods and then upgraded to iPhone because of iTunes. Many android switchers move to iPhone because of the App Store and Apple Music will bring in more people.

    Netflix should make a box and App Store since apparently it's so easy for Apple to do.

    "So you’re right that a big piece of the puzzle is software, but it’s not Apple software."

    Yeah not like Apple develops it's own OS and stores.

    Apple is more than a hardware company, just like they're more than a computer company.

    pk0702 said:
    pk0702 said:
    crosslad said:
    gatorguy said:
    crosslad said:
    Apple should start charging companies like Netflix, that charge customers but give nothing back to Apple, for making their services available through the AppStore. 
    They do "give back" to Apple since they offer a service that Apple users want. How is it so different from Apple hosting other "free apps" that users find valuable, stuff like Dropbox or Adobe Reader or Lastpass, that help keep Apple users happy in the ecosystem?

    Pretty sure you wouldn't want Netflix mobile as an Android exclusive. it wouldn't reflect well on the platform would it? 
    And if Netflix should be giving a cut to Apple then surely Uber and Lyft should too. Heck Eddy Cue even said Uber wouldn’t exist if not for the iPhone. I don’t think the same can be said for Netflix. I watch Netflix on my smart TV which has nothing to do with Apple.
    You’re right. Apple should be charging Uber and Lyft. 
    Apple won’t exist if it wasn’t for developers like Uber.
    Apple existed before Uber.

    One-post troll, please leave. 

    Apple won’t exist unless Microsoft bailed them out in the late 90’s.

    Here we see a troll moving the goalposts. A cliche pattern used by trolls when they're proven wrong.
    watto_cobraradarthekat
  • Reply 58 of 83
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,805unconfirmed, member
    pk0702 said:
    robbyx said:
    robbyx said:
    crosslad said:
    Apple should start charging companies like Netflix, that charge customers but give nothing back to Apple, for making their services available through the AppStore. 
    That’s crazy. Apple is a HARDWARE company. Services and the App Store are gravy, neither of which exist if people aren’t buying the hardware. Companies like Netflix are giving Apple customers services to enjoy. No services and those customers buy someone else’s hardware. I’d get rid of AppleTV without a second thought if Netflix wasn’t available.
    On the contrary,  the software and services are selling the hardware.  That's why Apple makes 90% of the profits with 20% of the sales.
    If the Netflix services are so great, Netflix should make their own hardware like Amazon and Roku do and see how far they get.
    Once they have their own hardware, they can have their own store too but not get very far.

    Why do you think Google pays billions to Apple to provide Apple with search services?  It's the ecosystem, not just the hardware.

    Apple’s middling services don’t sell iPhones. I don’t think there’s a person out there who bought an iPhone just so he or she could use iCloud.

    When it comes to software, you have a point. A thriving App Store certainly makes the iOS platform more appealing. The number of apps available for PCs versus Macs back on the day was a key factor in the PC’s overall success.

    But, in the end, Apple is a hardware company. They make the vast majority of their revenue from hardware sales. Why should Netflix make a box?  That’s ridiculous. Should every TV channel make their own TV?  Apple needs apps and services to support its platform as much as those services need Apple, maybe more. We don’t want to return to the 90s when virtually no one supported Apple products. Apple isn’t a software or a services company. They are a hardware company. If no one buys the hardware, the App Store means nothing.

    So you’re right that a big piece of the puzzle is software, but it’s not Apple software. It’s third party software supporting Apple’s platform. Lose those apps and services and Apple is in big trouble. 

    As for Google, that’s something different. Google needs data to monetize. Paying to be the default search engine is a smart investment given their business model.
    You couldn't be more wrong. Plenty of people bought iPods and then upgraded to iPhone because of iTunes. Many android switchers move to iPhone because of the App Store and Apple Music will bring in more people.

    Netflix should make a box and App Store since apparently it's so easy for Apple to do.

    "So you’re right that a big piece of the puzzle is software, but it’s not Apple software."

    Yeah not like Apple develops it's own OS and stores.

    Apple is more than a hardware company, just like they're more than a computer company.

    pk0702 said:
    pk0702 said:
    crosslad said:
    gatorguy said:
    crosslad said:
    Apple should start charging companies like Netflix, that charge customers but give nothing back to Apple, for making their services available through the AppStore. 
    They do "give back" to Apple since they offer a service that Apple users want. How is it so different from Apple hosting other "free apps" that users find valuable, stuff like Dropbox or Adobe Reader or Lastpass, that help keep Apple users happy in the ecosystem?

    Pretty sure you wouldn't want Netflix mobile as an Android exclusive. it wouldn't reflect well on the platform would it? 
    And if Netflix should be giving a cut to Apple then surely Uber and Lyft should too. Heck Eddy Cue even said Uber wouldn’t exist if not for the iPhone. I don’t think the same can be said for Netflix. I watch Netflix on my smart TV which has nothing to do with Apple.
    You’re right. Apple should be charging Uber and Lyft. 
    Apple won’t exist if it wasn’t for developers like Uber.
    Apple existed before Uber.

    One-post troll, please leave. 

    Apple won’t exist unless Microsoft bailed them out in the late 90’s.

    Here we see a troll moving the goalposts. A cliche pattern used by trolls when they're proven wrong.
    Apple’s doing everything they can to protect their one trick pony. Apple = the iPhone....and mmmm...well I guess they have the iPhone toy and over priced accessories.
    Ripped straight outta a tech article lol.
    watto_cobraradarthekat
  • Reply 59 of 83
    flydogflydog Posts: 1,094member
    > Other critics have suggested that it's unfair for Apple to claim revenue from content it doesn't produce or host.

    This line goes a long way to describe how two faced some of these execs can be. It's "unfair" for Apple to claim revenue, but they can't see that there is real costs in:
    • Hosting their app and providing editorial to keep a compelling store to drive awareness/traffic to their app
    • Keeping backups of their app, along with maintaining the servers and server security
    • Increasing server farms to allow their app to be distributed to larger audiences, and working with the various governments worldwide to provide this, including in regions where their competitors are banned.
    • Building and running green energy facilities to run said server farms
    • Make store cards and deals with retailers world wide to minimise friction into the store and provide a bricks-and-mortar presence.
    • The continual development of APIs to provide new features for the developers to monetise into their apps. (Plus other features such as allowing Siri to search their content for easier purchasing/use.)
    • Continually enhancing and reacting to threats upon iOS/macOS security so these apps won't inadvertently divulge customer data or put their users at risk.
    Yet all of that is included after paying a measly developer subscription cost - which is significantly less than any other kind of professional grade software subscription. Maybe we should go back to renting movies at Blockbuster or buying software on floppy discs in boxes?
    No one has said Apple deserves nothing.  But taking a 15% or 30% cut of all revenues from an app that grosses hundreds of millions of dollars a year is absurd and grossly disproportionate to the cost of the things you mention, most of which Apple does anyway for its own apps and services.  

    Moreover, as a developer, I can tell you that Apple is miserable to work with and provides near zero support to developers.  Often app rejections and other decisions are arbitrary and based on the subjective opinion of whoever is interpreting the rule, and appeals take weeks or months while the developer is left with no revenue while the app is in limbo. Our company pays Apple six figures a year in App Store fees, and there is no way for us to get a hold of anyone either my phone or email if we have a question or problem.  if we are lucky enough to get a response from someone at Apple it is generally some canned nonsense that has no relevance at all to the question or problem. 

    As long as Apple continues to treat developers like crap while extracting these absurd fees, developers will continue to find ways to sell content outside of the App Store. 
    edited December 2018 pk0702gatorguymacguicropr
  • Reply 60 of 83
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,805unconfirmed, member
    flydog said:
    > Other critics have suggested that it's unfair for Apple to claim revenue from content it doesn't produce or host.

    This line goes a long way to describe how two faced some of these execs can be. It's "unfair" for Apple to claim revenue, but they can't see that there is real costs in:
    • Hosting their app and providing editorial to keep a compelling store to drive awareness/traffic to their app
    • Keeping backups of their app, along with maintaining the servers and server security
    • Increasing server farms to allow their app to be distributed to larger audiences, and working with the various governments worldwide to provide this, including in regions where their competitors are banned.
    • Building and running green energy facilities to run said server farms
    • Make store cards and deals with retailers world wide to minimise friction into the store and provide a bricks-and-mortar presence.
    • The continual development of APIs to provide new features for the developers to monetise into their apps. (Plus other features such as allowing Siri to search their content for easier purchasing/use.)
    • Continually enhancing and reacting to threats upon iOS/macOS security so these apps won't inadvertently divulge customer data or put their users at risk.
    Yet all of that is included after paying a measly developer subscription cost - which is significantly less than any other kind of professional grade software subscription. Maybe we should go back to renting movies at Blockbuster or buying software on floppy discs in boxes?
    No one has said Apple deserves nothing.  But taking a 15% or 30% cut of all revenues from an app that grosses hundreds of millions of dollars a year is absurd and grossly disproportionate to the cost of the things you mention, most of which Apple does anyway for its own apps and services.  

    Moreover, as a developer, I can tell you that Apple is miserable to work with and provides near zero support to developers.  Often app rejections and other decisions are arbitrary and based on the subjective opinion of whoever is interpreting the rule, and appeals take weeks or months while the developer is left with no revenue while the app is in limbo. Our company pays Apple six figures a year in App Store fees, and there is no way for us to get a hold of anyone either my phone or email if we have a question or problem.  if we are lucky enough to get a response from someone at Apple it is generally some canned nonsense that has no relevance at all to the question or problem. 

    As long as Apple continues to treat developers like crap while extracting these absurd fees, developers will continue to find ways to sell content outside of the App Store. 
    Move to the fragmented knockoff devices and receive half the revenue if it's such a problem.

    WWDC and Apples unified systems are for the developers. They're not treating you like crap.

    pk0702 said:
    pk0702 said:
    robbyx said:
    robbyx said:
    crosslad said:
    Apple should start charging companies like Netflix, that charge customers but give nothing back to Apple, for making their services available through the AppStore. 
    That’s crazy. Apple is a HARDWARE company. Services and the App Store are gravy, neither of which exist if people aren’t buying the hardware. Companies like Netflix are giving Apple customers services to enjoy. No services and those customers buy someone else’s hardware. I’d get rid of AppleTV without a second thought if Netflix wasn’t available.
    On the contrary,  the software and services are selling the hardware.  That's why Apple makes 90% of the profits with 20% of the sales.
    If the Netflix services are so great, Netflix should make their own hardware like Amazon and Roku do and see how far they get.
    Once they have their own hardware, they can have their own store too but not get very far.

    Why do you think Google pays billions to Apple to provide Apple with search services?  It's the ecosystem, not just the hardware.

    Apple’s middling services don’t sell iPhones. I don’t think there’s a person out there who bought an iPhone just so he or she could use iCloud.

    When it comes to software, you have a point. A thriving App Store certainly makes the iOS platform more appealing. The number of apps available for PCs versus Macs back on the day was a key factor in the PC’s overall success.

    But, in the end, Apple is a hardware company. They make the vast majority of their revenue from hardware sales. Why should Netflix make a box?  That’s ridiculous. Should every TV channel make their own TV?  Apple needs apps and services to support its platform as much as those services need Apple, maybe more. We don’t want to return to the 90s when virtually no one supported Apple products. Apple isn’t a software or a services company. They are a hardware company. If no one buys the hardware, the App Store means nothing.

    So you’re right that a big piece of the puzzle is software, but it’s not Apple software. It’s third party software supporting Apple’s platform. Lose those apps and services and Apple is in big trouble. 

    As for Google, that’s something different. Google needs data to monetize. Paying to be the default search engine is a smart investment given their business model.
    You couldn't be more wrong. Plenty of people bought iPods and then upgraded to iPhone because of iTunes. Many android switchers move to iPhone because of the App Store and Apple Music will bring in more people.

    Netflix should make a box and App Store since apparently it's so easy for Apple to do.

    "So you’re right that a big piece of the puzzle is software, but it’s not Apple software."

    Yeah not like Apple develops it's own OS and stores.

    Apple is more than a hardware company, just like they're more than a computer company.

    pk0702 said:
    pk0702 said:
    crosslad said:
    gatorguy said:
    crosslad said:
    Apple should start charging companies like Netflix, that charge customers but give nothing back to Apple, for making their services available through the AppStore. 
    They do "give back" to Apple since they offer a service that Apple users want. How is it so different from Apple hosting other "free apps" that users find valuable, stuff like Dropbox or Adobe Reader or Lastpass, that help keep Apple users happy in the ecosystem?

    Pretty sure you wouldn't want Netflix mobile as an Android exclusive. it wouldn't reflect well on the platform would it? 
    And if Netflix should be giving a cut to Apple then surely Uber and Lyft should too. Heck Eddy Cue even said Uber wouldn’t exist if not for the iPhone. I don’t think the same can be said for Netflix. I watch Netflix on my smart TV which has nothing to do with Apple.
    You’re right. Apple should be charging Uber and Lyft. 
    Apple won’t exist if it wasn’t for developers like Uber.
    Apple existed before Uber.

    One-post troll, please leave. 

    Apple won’t exist unless Microsoft bailed them out in the late 90’s.

    Here we see a troll moving the goalposts. A cliche pattern used by trolls when they're proven wrong.
    Apple’s doing everything they can to protect their one trick pony. Apple = the iPhone....and mmmm...well I guess they have the iPhone toy and over priced accessories.
    Ripped straight outta a tech article lol.
    If you want the best phone money can buy it not the iPhone. The 

    http://vertu.com/


    Right, buy a knockoff iPhone since it will be better according to this troll.
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.