Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:05 PM   #251
paul4339
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaldiMac View Post
Why do you keep asking what they "deserve"? ....

Apple charges what they want. Developers have a choice as to whether to accept Apple's terms. That's how business works in a free market.
I agree... I think there's confusion on people's opinion of what 'fairness is' and 'how business works' between two parties.

.
paul4339 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:05 PM   #252
Nickerbocker
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul4339 View Post
I guess as long as the iTunes billing service is being used it's 30/70 split, otherwise if MS wants 100%, they'd have to use their own billing service.

.
Exactly. Apple is handling billing, handling the customer data, and handling the responsibility of keeping that data secure. Why should being on iOS matter? Their % cut comes from the billing services.
Nickerbocker is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:05 PM   #253
tbrinkma
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by gotluck View Post
except the person can always use someone else's turf next door to sell goodies

there is no choice here, there is only one 'turf'
No, there's plenty of 'turf' out there. But the only way you'll get access to the people 'shopping' on Apple's 'turf' is to *sell* on their 'turf'.
__________________
17" MBP (unibody), 2.66GHz i7, 8GB RAM, 750 GB HDD; iPhone 4s 64GB/Black
tbrinkma is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:06 PM   #254
viacavour
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by gotluck View Post
However, we're only talking about an app here.
An app is just the delivery mechanism. MS will still need to stick with the rules regardless of how they hope it can be done their ways. Just like DropBox and others who are leading the market now.

Apple recently expanded iTunes into markets that XBL are not in. So there is value add there too.

In the future, Google will impose their own store policies more strictly. MS will need to figure out a way to handle this issue anyway, but breaking the rule is a silly start. They are paying for the problem now.
viacavour is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:06 PM   #255
BaldiMac
macrumors 604
 
BaldiMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas1 View Post
You got the cut because you yourself got a promotion for stocking an item that people wanted, and got more customers in the door. See, a mutually beneficial agreement. The subscription costs you nothing, and you didn't contribute to it. And you don't deserve a cut.
I don't think you read what I wrote. How did I get a cut of "free"?

Again, service providers willingly came to me asking me to sell their services in exchange for a commission. Often a big percentage. I hardly ever even needed to negotiate. It costed me nothing other than a few minutes and the transaction fees. I didn't even put up any advertising for 90% of them.
BaldiMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:08 PM   #256
tbrinkma
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by mw360 View Post
Jeez, we know they submitted an update. It included the subs button and the important bugfix. It got rejected. We know that, and we know why it got rejected - the subs button. Its a clear breach of the rules.

What all the articles are now fumbling is the issue of whether MS RESUBMITTED the app with the subs button removed. The article writers wish us to believe yes, and that Apple scandalously rejected it, but they're not saying it. All they have said is that MS have offered to remove the button. Offered.

The most sensible interpretation is that MS are trying to get the original update approved, despite the subs button, because it fixes the bug. They are offering to remove the subs button on the next update in the hope that appeases Apple. It has not. Apple have refused to pass the update, and require MS to resubmit it with the subs button removed.

Yes, it's a bit of reading between the lines, but it makes a hell of a lot more sense than what the article writers are trying to coax us towards believing.

Wait and see. MS will resubmit within a day or two. Crisis over.
Yep. This. Reading comprehension, people.
__________________
17" MBP (unibody), 2.66GHz i7, 8GB RAM, 750 GB HDD; iPhone 4s 64GB/Black
tbrinkma is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:09 PM   #257
Judas1
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul4339 View Post
I agree... I think there's confusion on people's opinion of what fairness is and how business works between two parties.

.
They're not confused. Businesses can deal with each other however they like. But when it affects the consumers (we want the ability to subscribe built into the app), then we should be able to complain about fairness on a web forum. Where else if not here.
Judas1 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:09 PM   #258
Tigger92
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: North Carolina
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulsalter View Post
It reads to me like MS has already offered to do this
That, I think is the point. They have only offered, not actually done it. So of course, by the App Store rules, it isn't getting approved.

Personally, the article leaves way too much to speculation imho.
Tigger92 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:09 PM   #259
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: PremiÓ de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul4339 View Post
I guess as long as the iTunes billing service is being used it's 30/70 split, otherwise if MS wants 100%, they'd have to use their own billing service.

.
They can't use it
Oletros is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:10 PM   #260
BaldiMac
macrumors 604
 
BaldiMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
They can't use it
They can and do. They just can't use it or link to it within the app.
BaldiMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:12 PM   #261
viacavour
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
That's a very rough guesstimation pulled completely out of my ass without absolutely nothing to back it up. I just thought it sounded nice. :P

...but it doesn't change the fact that there are companies that give away far, far more and ask for far, far less in comparison to what Apple is demanding without going under. Dropbox and Netflix probably use up at least as much as Apple on bandwidth per month and charge considerably less for their services.

One month of Netflix is $8. I can watch 10 movies during that month. That's about the cost of one or two rentals on iTunes, delivered to me at about the same quality. I pay considerably more for Apple's service. I've had months where I've thrown $40-$50 at them, and only downloaded roughly 3GB of data. Netflix? I eat up that much data watching an hours worth of movie.

...so if giving away even a single app for free nets Apple a huge loss despite making more money elsewhere while using less bandwidth overall, why hasn't Netflix gone under?
It is not an estimate if you pull the number out of your ass. You don't know 30% is too much or too little costwise anyway. And value has increased since Apple launched the service. There are more countries and users to serve today. It is more secure. And there are more value adds the devs can do today.

For your NetFlix example, Apple work closely with NetFlix to enable it on iOS when NetFlix is small. They continue to work very closely for the few years my friend is there. Apple has a very good media team. Maximize your relationship with Apple is the way to go. But you have to be good first.
viacavour is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:15 PM   #262
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaldiMac View Post
Why do you keep asking what they "deserve"? Do you participate in some sort of economy where prices are base on what some random third-party deems fair?

Apple charges what they want. Developers have a choice as to whether to accept Apple's terms. That's how business works in a free market.
Apple has rigged the game so third parties have no other choice.

"You want your app on our platform? You run a subscription service? Well, guess what? We're slowly ebbing away at your ability to charge your customers directly. You have to...HAVE TO...go through us, and we'll take one-third of what you make.

What's it costing us? Practically nothing. What's it costing you? 30% flat rate. Don't call it extortion. Call it an agreement between two individuals. We've got a popular platform you want to take advantage of, so we're going to take advantage of you".

Quote:
That's a distinction without a point. Are we supposed to pretend that there is some sort of law that says Apple must not consider services offered by the app in deciding whether or not to carry it?
Why should they consider anything they're not directly involved with? As long as it doesn't directly harm the platform or isn't illegal in some way, Apple has no business charging Microsoft, or Dropbox, or Netflix to run their service on Apple's platform. Nothing beyond the cost of hosting and advertising the app itself.

That is the simple, most basic fact of all this.
Renzatic is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:16 PM   #263
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: PremiÓ de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaldiMac View Post
They can and do. They just can't use it or link to it within the app.
Thanks for agree with me. Microsoft CAN'T use its payment system because Apple rules don't allow it.
Oletros is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:16 PM   #264
Judas1
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaldiMac View Post
I don't think you read what I wrote. How did I get a cut of "free"?

Again, service providers willingly came to me asking me to sell their services in exchange for a commission. Often a big percentage. I hardly ever even needed to negotiate. It costed me nothing other than a few minutes and the transaction fees. I didn't even put up any advertising for 90% of them.
See, they didn't come to you begging. They have their own store. They would like to sell it at their store but can't. And again even with your fee, it was mutually beneficial. That's the key word. Here, it is not mutually beneficial. They have their own infrastructure, payment system, ways of promotion, and they don't need apple's store, but they have no choice.
Judas1 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:16 PM   #265
mshepherd
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Both Dropbox and google drive sell additional storage as in app purchase. It is not a reoccurring charge, just a one time fee for more storage for a year. Seems to make sense.
mshepherd is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:17 PM   #266
paul4339
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas1 View Post
They're not confused. Businesses can deal with each other however they like. But when it affects the consumers (we want the ability to subscribe built into the app), then we should be able to complain about fairness on a web forum. Where else if not here.

you are absolutely correct, we are allowed to complain.
paul4339 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:17 PM   #267
VulchR
macrumors 68000
 
VulchR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Scotland
Can't be bothered to read 11 pages of responses, so apologies if this has been said before. Why doesn't MS simply charge their usual fee + 30%? It won't bother most Apple iOS users.....

I just hope that Apple and MS won't throw their toys out of their pram and endanger the rumored Office for iOS app.
__________________
My first was a Mac+. Now I own an iPhone with 3.5x the pixels, a colour display, WiFi, 512x the RAM, >1500x the data storage, and 100x the speed. And it fits in the palm of my hand.

Last edited by VulchR; Dec 11, 2012 at 01:35 PM.
VulchR is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:20 PM   #268
gotluck
macrumors 68040
 
gotluck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: East Central Florida
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbrinkma View Post
No, there's plenty of 'turf' out there. But the only way you'll get access to the people 'shopping' on Apple's 'turf' is to *sell* on their 'turf'.
I hope you own shares in Apple, because your perspective is only good for an investor.

Why users would fight for system that enables only one store to install applications is simply beyond my comprehension. I see this one OS, one Store garbage is gaining traction in multiple camps, but the old ways of "I can install whatever software I want, from wherever I want.." are BETTER for the user. Use the store if you want, go directly to the developer if you want.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by viacavour View Post
In the future, Google will impose their own store policies more strictly. MS will need to figure out a way to handle this issue anyway, but breaking the rule is a silly start. They are paying for the problem now.
I don't think google will ever remove the checkbox in android that allows users to install apps from 3rd party sources. Developers will always be able to avoid Google Play, I'd bet on it. This also allows useful apps adhering to GNU GPL (programs like VLC) to be released.
__________________
iPad Air LTE 7.1.2 JB (T-Mobile) - GS 4 Google Edition 4.4.4 ART (AT&T) - Windows 7 PC's - iPhone 4 6.1 JB
gotluck is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:21 PM   #269
paul4339
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by VulchR View Post
... Why doesn't MS simply charge their usual fee + 30%? It won't bother most Apple iOS users.....
...
good point.

My guess is that MS is benefiting by getting access to the vast iOS user base and not just the billing service.

.
paul4339 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:24 PM   #270
viacavour
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by gotluck View Post
I hope you own shares in Apple, because your perspective is only good for an investor.

Why users would fight for system that enables only one store to install applications is simply beyond my comprehension. I see this one OS, one Store garbage is gaining traction in multiple camps, but the old ways of "I can install whatever software I want, from wherever I want.." is BETTER for the user. Use the store if you want, go directly to the developer if you want.

----------



I don't think google will ever remove the checkbox in android that allows users to install apps from 3rd party sources. Developers will always be able to avoid Google Play, I'd bet on it.
I don't think the Windows way is better. I spent 6 hours helping 3 people to get rid of malware but failed. The developers have gotten so good that they have managed to dodge all the standard tools. You have to download specialized tool to hit them, but the tools themselves are dodgy too.

One store is easier to manage. And easier to change should Apple wants to evolve the system in the future.


As for other installation mechanism... Welp, I don't think MS is after those users. For practical purposes, GooglePlay will target most of the users. That's where MS want to play too. It is also an entry point for malware. With a common experience and entry point, the developers can focus on other things.
viacavour is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:24 PM   #271
donrsd
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South Florida
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryDJP View Post
Thank you, the people on this forum who are bashing Apple about the 30% are nothing more than armchair CEO's.

Firstly, in app purchases allow the 3rd parties to make money by way of using Apple's vehicle. So for example, any developer could install a free app in the App Store and then make money only through in-app sales. That way they could escape paying Apple anything but then they get to use Apple's vehicle to do it. That's the stupid mentality of some these armchair CEO's here. That's basically stealing.

Secondly, Microsoft has more money than Apple so I find it hilarious that these armchair CEO's are siding with MS's tactics of making money through Apple without paying one red cent to Apple.
Truth, MS can't make any real money from their own dead Windows Phone 7/8 system so they try and make money through Apple underhandedly and the armchair CEO's here support it. Microsoft has never been an angel and their Steve Ballmer will never have a halo over his head.

The armchair CEO's here aren't Apple enthusiasts, they are on the team of "I hate Apple and Always Will".
Fantastic post!!!
__________________
PSN: DonVCorleone
The U - NY Mets - NY Giants - Miami Heat

Quote Me So I Am Notified
donrsd is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:26 PM   #272
BaldiMac
macrumors 604
 
BaldiMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
Apple has rigged the game so third parties have no other choice.
Of course they have a choice. Don't sell through the App Store.

Quote:
"You want your app on our platform? You run a subscription service? Well, guess what? We're slowly ebbing away at your ability to charge your customers directly. You have to...HAVE TO...go through us, and we'll take one-third of what you make.
Yep. It's called negotiating from a position of strength.

Quote:
What's it costing us? Practically nothing. What's it costing you? 30% flat rate. Don't call it extortion. Call it an agreement between two individuals. We've got a popular platform you want to take advantage of, so we're going to take advantage of you".
That's just FUD. According to Apple, the App Store runs a bit over break even.

Quote:
Why should they consider anything they're not directly involved with? As long as it doesn't directly harm the platform or isn't illegal in some way, Apple has no business charging Microsoft, or Dropbox, or Netflix to run their service on Apple's platform. Nothing beyond the cost of hosting and advertising the app itself.
Because they need to support the App Store platform. Paid apps and subscription support all the free ones.

And as someone pointed out earlier, if Apple were not going to take a cut for subscriptions, why wouldn't every app move to a subscription model? Leaving Apple no money to support the App Store platform.

"This app requires a one day subscription for the same amount that it used to cost, but continues to function normally after the subscription expires."

And then there's the issue of security. By standardizing the payment method within the App Store and IAPs, Apple has increased the security of the iOS platform tremendously.

Quote:
That is the simple, most basic fact of all this.
Not a fact. A naive opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
Thanks for agree with me. Microsoft CAN'T use its payment system because Apple rules don't allow it.
I didn't agree with you. You left out important qualifications in your statement. As written, your statement was wrong.
BaldiMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:26 PM   #273
gotluck
macrumors 68040
 
gotluck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: East Central Florida
Quote:
Originally Posted by viacavour View Post
I don't think the Windows way is better. I spent 6 hours helping 3 people to get rid of malware but failed. The developers have gotten so good that they have managed to dodge all the standard tools. You have to download specialized tool to hit them, but the tools themselves are dodgy too.

One store is easier to manage. And easier to change should Apple wants to evolve the system in the future.
So give me the checkbox and keep using the store yourself.

Giving people the option doesn't mean everyone has to take it.

Don't restrict my freedom because someone else can't handle it.
__________________
iPad Air LTE 7.1.2 JB (T-Mobile) - GS 4 Google Edition 4.4.4 ART (AT&T) - Windows 7 PC's - iPhone 4 6.1 JB
gotluck is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:30 PM   #274
peterdevries
macrumors 68000
 
peterdevries's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stella View Post
Apple wanting a 30% cut for services that never touch their (Apple's ) servers is taking the p!ss.
Microsoft uses Apple's platform to sell services. Apple is entitled to a share of the proceedings
__________________
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
peterdevries is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 01:31 PM   #275
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by viacavour View Post
For your NetFlix example, Apple work closely with NetFlix to enable it on iOS when NetFlix is small. They continue to work very closely for the few years my friend is there. Apple has a very good media team. Maximize your relationship with Apple is the way to go. But you have to be good first.
Netflix accounts for 1/3rd of peak data usage in the United States, and it's not even the iDevices that's the most popular platform it's run on. Weirdly enough, it's the consoles. The Wii, the PS3, and the Xbox. I guess because they're directly connected to a TV.

So with that in mind, why should they pay 1/3rd of their gross to Apple? They don't have to do it elsewhere. They just offer up the app. Sony and Nintendo aren't complaining about the cost of hosting it, so why should Apple, who's already making roughly 30,000x the amount of money off their platforms than those two aforementioned companies combined.

It's plain and simply Apple being greedy. They're not covering their ass, not making up lost costs elsewhere. They're just making more money at the expense of anyone who offers a paid subscription service.

There is no justifying it. Whatsoever. All it will lead to is iOS users having to pay more for the exact same service people can get elsewhere. Do we really want that? We already pay a premium on the hardware...
Renzatic is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Microsoft Paying Apple 30-Percent Cut on In-App Office 365 Subscription Purchases MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 293 Apr 5, 2014 04:21 AM
Microsoft Releases SkyDrive Pro App for Office 365 Subscribers MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 8 Jan 7, 2014 03:44 PM
Microsoft loses suit, must change name of 'SkyDrive' Candlelight Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion 10 Aug 2, 2013 12:53 AM
SkyDrive 3.0 Appears in App Store Following Apple-Microsoft Conflict Over Subscription Options MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 77 Apr 9, 2013 08:06 AM
Microsoft and Apple Facing Off Over Office for iOS Subscription Revenues, Not SkyDrive MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 357 Dec 27, 2012 06:49 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:18 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC