jmgregory1

jonl said:

michael scrip said:

Very true.  And Apple provides those services for all apps in the App Store.

If I buy a $10 app... Apple gets $3.  End of transaction.  Apple never asks for any more money because that $3 is supposed to cover the costs of the above services.

But $3 every month?

Other than the monthly swipe of the credit card (which is automated BTW)... what are they doing different than any other app in the App Store?

It's really very simple. Spotify, like Netflix and others, has its own billing department. It doesn't need Apple to facilitate charging for subscriptions. Their app should be able to send people to their web site to sign up just like when trying to use the app on a TV, BD player, etc.


The problem is, many users aren't aware of the rules. As I wrote earlier, Spotify has put out a sort of PSA, and I hope it educated a lot of people who Apple might otherwise have tricked into paying an exorbitant recurring tax to Apple. In fact, it did educate CNBC anchor Brian Sullivan, who stated at 2:44 EDT today that "he was one of the idiots who subscribed to Spotify through iTunes, and he's got to go back and fix that." Good for him!

The clapping seals supporting Apple in these threads are certainly concentrated here but few in number in the real world. Real people who hear about this are outraged and feel like idiots for paying Apple 30% more for nothing. They feel like Apple tricked them. Like Brian Sullivan, they're going to fix the problem.

You're trying to attribute Spotify's rule breaking (Apple's rules) of charging more for the same service thru the App Store than they do on their website. The problem is Spotify. Not Apple.  Like any consumer product, Spotify should have built retailer profit into their pricing scenario, or they should not have ever put an app on the App Store.  But apparently they didn't or they need to make more because competition is eroding their profit or customer base. Blaming Apple is just click bait to get some free advertising for Spotify. 

And for those that complain that Apple shouldn't get a cut of monthly subscription payments, it's another red herring argument. Apple's rules are what they are and have been this way since Spotify submitted their app. It's not really any different than when you buy a monthly prescription for some drug, where you are paying Walgreen's profit margin month after month.

techguy911 said:

Looking forward to the future when instead of all wired headphones having the same standardized jack that works in all audio devices, we now have segregated wired headphones that have different connectors that only work in their respective ecosystems /s

I think the future you want is coming, but it won't be wired at all - it's going to be wireless.  Frankly, the fact that we're not already there yet is surprising, especially considering how many wireless speakers are on the market.  It's like manufacturers just dropped the ball on pushing through problems (battery life, size, connectivity, price and sound quality) with but a handful of options to really chose from in BT headphones.

thewhitefalcon said:

They want to learn how to better annoy people with Win 10 upgrade notices?

But seriously...this acquisition makes little sense. 

Of course it makes sense.  MS needs the social connectivity, specifically of business people, to attempt to get back what they used to own - the minds and pocketbooks of business.  It's been slipping through their hands since IT departments began to allow employees to use their own devices.  

I've always felt that although Will.i.am was creative, the products he's coming up with are not game changers. As an example, when I read that these headphones used Bluetooth 2.0, I thought it was a misprint. So I go to Apple's site and sure enough, it's 2.0. Because 2.0 is "better" than 4.1 / LE?  

These se things are clearly a play for money, given how the over designed Beats have shown that people buy headphones for their looks over how they actually sound, and I imagine these headphones are not going to be high on any audiophiles list. 

Buffett generally takes a long-term view on business and his stock buys reflect that.  For anyone to see Apple as a long-term risk is idiotic.  The rest of Wall Street simply manipulates Apple stock in order to make short terms gains, because so many investors today can't think beyond the next reporting, or in some cases what they perceive to be issues on a day to day basis.