Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Microsoft and Apple Facing Off Over Office for iOS Subscription Revenues, Not SkyDrive
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
As I've pointed out to you before, actually, as of iOS 6, that is no longer true. IAP does allow content to be hosted via Apple and downloaded from them:
https://developer.apple.com/technologies/ios6/
Yes, Apple needs to update that documentation you linked to.
Last edited:
The sales of the iPad only are passing the 100million unit count soonish. It seems that the sales answer the question: Does apple need microsoft office? With a resounding no.
It's not in Apple's interest to give Microsoft a discount, in fact Microsoft need to count themselves lucky to gain access to the iOS ecosystem.
There are far more iPad's and iPhones in use than computers today. Office has ceased to be enough of a differentiator for a lot of the population. It's just that microsoft don't seem to have noticed.
It's not in Apple's interest to give Microsoft a discount, in fact Microsoft need to count themselves lucky to gain access to the iOS ecosystem.
There are far more iPad's and iPhones in use than computers today. Office has ceased to be enough of a differentiator for a lot of the population. It's just that microsoft don't seem to have noticed.
If they don't want to queue in line like all the other developers, Micro$$$hod can go shove it.
Imagine, M$$$ getting a break? Why do they think they're so special??? That dinosaur they call Powerpoint is coming to iOS? God forbid!
Imagine, M$$$ getting a break? Why do they think they're so special??? That dinosaur they call Powerpoint is coming to iOS? God forbid!
This is simply resolved. Microsoft figures out what they want to get from a license of iOS Office. They figure in the 30% uplift/cut to Apple. They price it accordingly. People will buy it. I don't see what the problem is. There are two companies here that both stand to make a lot of money because a LOT of people are going to buy this. It doesn't make sense for Apple to have a different split with Microsoft than other developers unless there is some major mutual agreement that other developers would never be able to do. That's possible, but would seem simpler and more consistent to maintain one program thats the same for everyone. I don't see what Microsoft is complaining about. This will end up pricing iOS Office more expensive than the Windows version, which probably benefits Microsoft anyways.
Getting 70% cut seems reasonable for access to iOS users and their hardware, considering there are over 100 million devices. What percent of the final cost does MS get when I buy a copy of Office at Bestbuy? I would guess it is similar, but I certainly don't know.
Turnabout
Once long ago in a techworld faraway, Apple desperately needed Microsoft's app on its hardware. In today's alternate universe, Microsoft desperately needs to be on Apple hardware. Especially now, with the Surface sinking fast and software now a dime a dozen, thanks to Apple's Mac store and iOS store.
Once long ago in a techworld faraway, Apple desperately needed Microsoft's app on its hardware. In today's alternate universe, Microsoft desperately needs to be on Apple hardware. Especially now, with the Surface sinking fast and software now a dime a dozen, thanks to Apple's Mac store and iOS store.
I don't remember you pointing it out and I will take note of it in the future (of course, been a while since we actually discussed this topic). But that's also an optional service. In-app purchase is still a forced payment processor which takes larger than industry rates for the service. If anything, I think even the payment part should be optional, as is the hosting part. And if you're using the hosting part, then yes, Apple should be entitled to take a big cut and force you to use its payment system to get access to the hosting system, that's a given, I have no qualms with that.
Considering the fact that the iPhone and iPad have sold extremely well without Office, I highly doubt still not having Office on their device will make a difference.
It's not just Microsoft. Amazon pulled book purchases from the Kindle app for the same reasons, Dropbox pulled signing up and purchasing storage from the app for the same reasons.
This policy is just making iOS apps less useful and more convulted to use for us consumers and users and harder to work with for developers.
That's a subjective benefit to some. Not everyone desires that.
Again, that subjective. Not everyone shares your opinion.
That might be all most people need, after all it's just a note-taking application. It's not a source for world peace.
Not a port, designed from the ground up.
Yep and all of that works with Microsoft's OS and software with an extension to iOS.
Just because you like One Note on Windows doesn't mean it will be just as good of an experience on the Mac. As history shows, Microsoft hasn't been too keen on creating the best software on Mac.
Don't worry, it's not you. This angry bird myth has been passed around Android fans as a rallying cry. Maybe Google search don't work so good on android.
Rovio released the original Angry Birds and rio on android for free and kept the paid versions up on iOS. Subsequent launches features a locked down free version on Android where you got the first batch of levels for free and paid to unlock the rest. iOS still retained the pay up front model. After Angry Birds in Space Rovio started releasing the limited versions on iOS alongside the paid version. So up until recently you had to pay on iOS where Android got the full games for free then newer releases came with half the content and pay for the rest. Also in iOS you pay an additional 2 dollars for a tablet "HD" version where in Android the normal version upscales and has the tablet version built in already.
TL: DR thread.
So, maybe I missed a discussion already. But:
Why is this an issue at all?
Microsoft makes most of its money through business accounts, they do not sell all that much to individual users. And the companies don't want to have all 50000 employees buying their own software of any kind. So, why don't they simply leave payment in the hands of IT>>Accounting like usual and make the app just require a validated sign-in? With no purchasing method. Seems to be working for the Kindle app, and many others.
Should I call MS? Do they need a financial consultant to help out with this simple decision?
So, maybe I missed a discussion already. But:
Why is this an issue at all?
Microsoft makes most of its money through business accounts, they do not sell all that much to individual users. And the companies don't want to have all 50000 employees buying their own software of any kind. So, why don't they simply leave payment in the hands of IT>>Accounting like usual and make the app just require a validated sign-in? With no purchasing method. Seems to be working for the Kindle app, and many others.
Should I call MS? Do they need a financial consultant to help out with this simple decision?
What a Crock
Does AllThingsD really believe that Microsoft would be lumped into the general dev license agreement? Microsoft has it own path to licensing and "commission" (in quotes because who the heck calls revenue shares a commission) agreements/contracts that is completely separate from the standard agreement. Wow, how naive.
Does AllThingsD really believe that Microsoft would be lumped into the general dev license agreement? Microsoft has it own path to licensing and "commission" (in quotes because who the heck calls revenue shares a commission) agreements/contracts that is completely separate from the standard agreement. Wow, how naive.
It's an entirely different story in the enterprise. Companies buy Microsoft Office and people need to use it. On the other hand, they bring in their own iPhones and iPads into the work environment, and then you have the discrepancy between hardware and software.
I work for a major enterprise software company and believe me, 99% of companies use at least one Microsoft product. Microsoft may not be cool to the consumer, but for the enterprise they are gold.
----------
Office for iPad is a pretty big deal. Maybe not for iPhone or iPod Touch, but iPad definitely.
And Office is the staple of the enterprise. Even though Apple has had some success breaking into the enterprise, Microsoft is still king.
First of all, laptops are not dying and will never. And secondly apple dont got there first, tablets existed before iPad! And thirdly apple should really be scared of the new tablets powered by Windows 8(Intel Atom) and Windows 8 Pro(i7), because this is what i am gonna buy instead of iPAD iOS crap!
Last edited:
Ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Funniest thing I've read in a while. This is fine as long as Microsoft doesn't actually need to cover their costs for developing Office mobile. How many people are going to switch to Microsoft phones because it's the only one that'll let them run Excel?
They don't cover it through Office mobile, Office 365, or whatever they are calling it. The product is basically the same thing as Microsoft Office Web Apps for SharePoint. Web Apps is designed for enterprise so that businesses can offer basic functionality of Office apps through a SharePoint web page. Many businesses are using SharePoint and Office Web Apps is included in the price of Office Professional volume license agreements. The development costs were already there regardless of Office 365 or a "mobile" version. And since the core functionality of the Office Web Apps is the same as the full Office apps, there is little development cost involved, in contrast to the full products by themselves.
does it? isnt MS is free to think about the markup and charge whatever they like for their iOS clients? if its cheaper on another platform, does that make a diff to the apple T&C?
Last edited:
When Apple and Google change their business strategies to make software a primary market, I'll believe this. Right now
MS = profits off software... how good Office is, Windows penetration correlates directly to their bottomline
Apple = profits off hardware, software is just an asset they devalue to sell hardware
Google = profits off ads, software is something they make free to get more ad penetration
Only one of these is vested in preserving the pricepoint and quality of software. The others see software as a tool to leverage sales in their primary market
Yeah they don't. Apple's strategy is just to sync data between 2 separate ecosystems, one that they can control (iOS) and one that they can't (OS X). A good question to ask is does the mobile software ecosystem have any faults? Because if it does, some other company can come in and exploit those faults to get a competitive advantage.
what youre not grasping -- apple doesnt want a million apps w/ a million differnt payment gateways. while certainly technically feasible, it adds complexity to the iOS user experience. my senior father would find that much more complicated than simply tapping "BUY" on ANY app in the store and have it auto-magically charge the card he set up *once*.
thats apple's vision for their devices & ecosystem. its entirely possible that strategy is why theyve generated more app wealth than any other.
Apparently you've never heard of one of the most sweeping trends in the industry, known as BYOD. Which is a perfect example of (a) why RIM is sucking air, and (b) why Windows Phone 8 isn't likely to impact this, at least until they suddenly start taking significant market share from both Apple and Android.
I'm sorry, the web says you lie. We already have a million different ecommerce sites with a million different payment systems and the world still works and people order more and more stuff online everyday.
Apple introduced IAP as a reaction to more and more developers implementing IAP and seeing a possible source of revenue. Don't think this has anything to do with user experience, it's all about generating more money for Apple.