neoncat

mikethemartian said:

If Apple wants to find opportunities for growth they should take advantage of all the animosity that users of Adobe software have with their subscription models and compete with the full suite of applications in the Creative Cloud.

Funny that Serif, with the most credible set of Adobe alternatives yet produced, even making sure they were perfectly cross-platform and capable of working directly with Adobe native files, quite famously ended up underperforming and unable to pay their bills, resulting in a bargain basement sale to Canva, the McDonald's of design SaaS. Guess this "opportunity" for alternatives isn't actually as big as some people think. 

charles1 said:

I had to laugh at the "controversy" about the Wallet Ad. Gruber said your real wallet is sacrosanct and he never sees advertising in his wallet. He obviously never looked. I examined one credit card in my wallet, it displays four corporate logos advertising their companies. Some cards are one big advertisement. Even the minimalist titanium Apple Card has three logos on it. I have a receipt in my wallet, oh no it has advertising printed on the back! [facepalm]

don't hurt your back knocking over that strawman there. 

tht said:

Yup. Not a surprise.

A lot of sturm and drang among the investorati and mediarati for AI turning over the market

Apple itself has both presented AI as the reason to upgrade to an iPhone 16-class iPhone (through the now infamous Apple Intelligence marketing campaigns), and continues to argue that the success the 16's sales are due to AI, or rather Apple's take on AI. Cook himself seems to claim the opposite to the data presented in this story. 

It's almost as if Apple is full of all kinds of truth-light narratives, whether it be AI, the App Store, or any one of a number of things tied to their desire to increase churn. I mean, you don't even need to look to the hyperventilated status of AI among the markets and startups when it's happening right here at home (and I say this as someone who uses various AI models as part of my day job and is reasonably bullish that AI is both an epochal new tool and here to stay in one form or another).

The purpose of this statement wasn't to suggest winners or losers, just speculation on how much impact the move will have. That 50% still use IAP is a sign that Apple has a chance to make the courts happy and still make money

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I just meant that we already have some data (however limited) that shows,interestingly, it's not as simple as everyone prefers Apple's system or everyone can't wait to be free of it. The choice seems to be giving people options that meet their individual needs and in the end that's s net-win. I'd rather Apple pivot to selling and promoting the benefits of its system (compete on merit) than working so hard and spending so much goodwill and PR trying to keep it locked down.

AppleInsider said:

Apple's services revenue could take a hit, but it remains to be seen how many users will actually take advantage of the external links when in-app purchase is still an option. Customers could become confused by being pulled out of an app or game and suddenly asked to fill out a payment form.

It's not that big of a mystery, at least in the case of Fortnite. Sweeney indicated the split of purchases since its return to the App Store is about 60/40, in favor of Apple's in-app payment system, although it continues to trend toward 50/50. Seems some people like having a choice, and some people like sticking with what they know. Everyone wins?