rogifan_new

nunzy said:

racerhomie3 said:

rogifan_new said:

Soli said:

I'm all for the free app trials, but the cut Apple gets seems fair and is much better than what existed before the iPhone and its App Store hit the market.

That said, the 30% cut may not be ideal today as it was back in 2008 now that the platform is mature. That isn't to say that is should be lower than 30%, but that the optimal cut could be higher or lower than 30%. Whatever can strengthen the platform is likely what is best for Apple and their customers.

Why do you think the optimal cut might need to be greater than 30%? IMO a big issue with the AppStore is most of the money going to a small number of developers.

We don’t know that .Only Apple does.

Apple knows exactly how much to charge in order to maximize their profits. They've been doing this for a long time.

Their pricing structure is not intended to be a gift to developers. It is intended to seize as much profit as possible.

StrangeDays said:

rogifan_new said:

nunzy said:

Just remember that if the app is free, then YOU are the product. Google can't be trusted.

Then why does Apple allow their apps on the AppStore?

Are you serious? Apple doesn’t have a ban on advertising based apps. Dumb question. 

nunzy said:

radarthekat said:

“...we also know that that Cook's No. 1 spot can be attributed to the ubiquity of Apple products and services, as well as owning the lion's share of the market when he stepped in," the report said.

The lion’s share of exactly which market?  Even when praising the company these analysts can’t pull their heads out of their asses.  Incredible.

Apple makes all the profit. That's what matters most.

"My passion has been to build an enduring company where people were motivated to make great products," Jobs told Isaacson. "[T]he products, not the profits, were the motivation. Sculley flipped these priorities to where the goal was to make money. It's a subtle difference, but it ends up meaning everything."

Jobs... hoped he would leave behind, "a company that will still stand for something a generation or two from now." 
"That's what Walt Disney did," said Jobs, "and Hewlett and Packard, and the people who built Intel. They created a company to last, not just to make money. That's what I want Apple to be."

macxpress said:

entropys said:

macxpress said:

Oh boy...here we go! Continuous bitching about the Mac mini. I doubt most here are gonna buy one anyways. 

Of course not. To be frank, you would have to be a brainless idiot to buy the current insult of a Mac mini.

I get that most of the money comes from the iPhone, so it’s the priority.  But the most stupid thing about the neglect and/or gimping of pretty all Mac lines over an extended period is that it is mistreating Mac buyers, who are the most loyal long term buyers of all things Apple, and have always been the greatest evangelists for its platforms and ecosystems. Neglecting and deliberately crippling functionality and utility of macs by design, and then failing to at the least keep them up to date is beyond the pale.

Divorce is ugly. And just like a neglected and spourned spouse, lovers can be turned into passionate haters.

Even if Apple updated them today with modern specs...how many are gonna actually go buy one? Its just like the Mac Pro. Everyone wants to complain about it, but very little here are actually gonna go buy one.