Any news on the fate of Kindle in iOS?

Discussion in 'iPad' started by caubeck, Apr 13, 2011.

  1. caubeck macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    #1
    There were rumors of it being withdrawn by the summer because of the new Apple sales tax.
     
  2. thelookingglass macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    #2
    Good question. I know there was an app update that was released after Apple made their announcement. Would seem strange to continue to develop an app if you're going to remove yourself from the ecosystem soon.
     
  3. lionqueen macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    #3
    I really hope this doesn't happen. I love Kindle for iPhone - I never use iBooks.
     
  4. Kastang macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2011
    #4
    I would imagine that the big name companies (Amazon, Netflix, etc) will get free passes by Apples 'sales tax'. I don't think apple would take the risk of losing big name companies for the iPhone.
     
  5. ReallyBigFeet macrumors 68030

    ReallyBigFeet

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    #5
    Apple will continue to let the Kindle app live on the iPhone until one of two events happens:

    1) Critical mass for availability of books is achieved in iBooks. Thats still a ways off.

    2) Amazon music and app sales represent any kind of threat to iTunes. It doesn't yet and won't for some time likely.

    Until then, Kindle on iOS is safe.
     
  6. JD92, Apr 13, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  7. jb1280 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    #7
    On what grounds?
     
  8. Satori macrumors 6502a

    Satori

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #8

    I think that they get round the tax because there is no in app purchase. If you want to buy, then you are directed to the kindle store via the browser.
     
  9. seajay96 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    #9
    IIRC, this is exactly what is prohibited by Apple's new policy. In recognition of Apple bringing a customer to a service and access to that service is paid for, it must be offered as an in app purchase for the same or better price and Apple gets 30%.

    That said, software as a service sites like Dropbox were exempted and I believe Netflix and Amazon were exempted also, probably because Apple recognizes that their services brought/bring as many (or more) people to the iPad as the iPad brings to Amazon and Netflix.

    Basically what it comes down to, I think, is games and magazine subscriptions.
     
  10. andiwm2003 macrumors 601

    andiwm2003

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #10
    not sure what the exact legal situation is but traditionally the EU has always madated open platforms that allow competitors to run their software. Microsoft and web browsers is the best example. Unlocked phones is another. Flash of course is a counter example but then Adobe has not sued Apple in the EU yet.

    In this case the EU could say that iOS is the platform and it needs to allow others to run their programs on it without too many restrictions.
     
  11. elan123 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    #11
    pretty good point
     
  12. JD92, Apr 13, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2013
  13. OlgaJ macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Location:
    Florida
    #13
    Most of my Kindle book purchases recently have included sales taxes.
     
  14. blevins321 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2010
    Location:
    Winnipeg, MB
    #14
    Oh, the OP didn't mean 'actual' sales tax. The nickname for the piece of the pie that Apple wants to take for in-app sales is nicknamed "Apple Tax." Basically Apple wants 30% of anything that is purchased inside an iOS app.
     
  15. poloponies macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    #15
    Bad, bad Apple. Create a 150 million user market and then ask for a share of profits. Shameful, really.
     
  16. Krevnik macrumors 68040

    Krevnik

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2003
    #16
    Still, in a way it's possible to get Apple to pay your distribution costs by posting the app for free and then taking payment through websites. I think part of it is to get a cut for distribution in the case of ad-supported (iAd) and 'free download, pay service' apps.
     
  17. dmaul1114 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    #17
    I've not seen anything new on it. The new rules start in June I think.

    Rumor was Amazon was working on a web based Kindle app that would just work totally in a web browser. Then it wouldn't be an app in the app store and thus not susceptible to the 30% fee.

    Policies like that are what really make me dislike Apple. I can get them wanting a cut of apps sold in their app store as they run the store. But they have no entitlement to taking a percentage of things like e-books sold within apps. If they don't want competition to iBooks and other services they provide, then just outright disallow competing apps rather than doing this.

    But really they should just wise up and realize that having so many options is what makes the iPad appealing. Rather than buying a Kindle and being locked into the Amazon store, one can get an iPad and buy books from the Kindle store, iBooks, B&N/Nook, Kobo, the various stores Stanza hooks up with etc. That gives them a leg up on the competition. Run off apps like Kindle and they lose that. And iBooks will never be the best book store as the Kindle is dominate in the e-book scene and probably always will be, just like iTunes has the music market cornered.

    The iPad's a slick piece of hardware, and is easily the best tablet out right now, so I own one. But I hope something else comes out that's better for my needs down the road so I can have a tablet and not give money to Apple and thus indirectly support their practices I dislike. The iPad does about 50% of what I want an tablet to do, and I don't see apple expanding functionality in the directions I want anyway (more work functionality) so I'll probably be moving on to some MS tablet in a couple of years anyway.
     
  18. jb1280 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    #18
    I really don't want to rehash the 30% argument, but I find it flawed to argue that a self described closed platform should be mandated to host an application that sells ebooks in a closed, proprietary format.
     
  19. BaldiMac macrumors 604

    BaldiMac

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    #19
    Kindle is more of a closed platform than iOS, isn't it?
     
  20. poloponies macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    #20
    Apple is running a business. It's neither a religion nor a charity. If it assists a company in introducing a new customer to its services then charging a fee is not out of line. It's up to the app developer to determine whether its price point is appropriate to both appeal to customers while providing an adequate profit to the developer.

    Apple is an enormous player in the market now, with well over 100 million iPhones and 22+ million iPads sold. People can get very rich selling to Apple i-device customers and it's not unreasonable for Apple to share in that.
     
  21. dmaul1114 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    #21
    I don't think it's illegal or anything. I just don't like it, and it's one of many reasons I probably won't buy another iPad and will switch to another platform down the road.

    So just agree to disagree.

    I will add that the problem is it's not providing adequate profit in the case of e-books. Most Kindle books Amazon is getting 30% or less of the sale price with the rest going to the publisher. So Apple wanting 30% pretty much means no profit to Amazon or the other e-book stores on most titles they're selling.

    But again, agree to disagree. I don't like Apple and feel a bit dirty having bought an iPad and will happily wash my hands of it down the road. I personally hope Amazon just tells them to shove it and leaves the iOS platfrom. They Kindle sales like hot cakes and they have apps on Windows, Android, Blackberry etc. They can do just fine without the iOS line up.
     
  22. Kupp macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    #22
    Since Kindle is it's own separate entity, your are externally buying files which you can also view on your computer, kindle, or any kindle device. The Kindle App is just a reader for those files.

    To even enforce this, apple would have to require people to buy kindle files separately for each viewer, I don't see that realistically happening.

    The Kindle app is just a file reader. I don't think the in app purchase argument really applies. Apple would have to enforce some time of iOS different kindle format for this to even fly.
     
  23. poloponies macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    #23
    Apple's not demanding a piece of every book Amazon sells, the agreement is that if Amazon offers in-app purchases then it must charge the same price it does elsewhere. There are 2 reasons for this, but Apple's primary concern is that if Amazon charges $9.99 normally and then charges $15 in-app, then it's forcing out-of-app sales. So customers can still buy the books through the online option but if someone wants to buy in-app for convenience then they should not be forced to pay a higher price or go the other route. Amazon is simply not being penalized.

    And it does seem a little inconsistent that you're being protective of Amazon's profit when it's the ultimate beneficiary of the practice (larger reader base = more sales; you and I and the rest of the world can continue buying books through Amazon directly).
     
  24. dmaul1114 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    #24
    That's not correct. The rule change in June is making is so Apps like Kindle can no longer jump out to the web browser and buy the books without ALSO having them for sale in the app where Apple gets a 30% cut. It's not "IF" they offer in app purchases they have to be the same price as in the store. It's that they "MUST" start offing in app purchases if they're going to have the option to buy books in the web browser and send to the Kindle app, and they must be the same price in app.

    Amazon won't go for that as most people are lazy and will just buy it in app for convenience, and thus Amazon doesn't get much, if any profit on books sold on the iOS platform. So they are being penalized.

    I don't think hardware companies should have that kind of control over app developers, nor should be taking a cut of profits for in app sales. Period.

    So it's just agree to disagree if you think such practices are fine.
     
  25. dtlee1974 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    #25
    Apple has every right to negotiate with content providers for a cut of their sales. I don't have a problem with this.

    Apple looks at it this way: We provided this great platform with millions of users and Amazon is selling content for it on their website and we don't get a single penny of it.

    Amazon says: We set up this great e-book ecosystem and we add value to the iPad by providing this great app for it that enables it to work with our e-book system and Apple doesn't pay a dime for it.

    The thing is, they're both right. The relationship is synergistic and the sooner they both cop to that fact the better.

    That said, the Kindle app is one of the main reasons I bought an iPad and if it goes away I just became an Android user.
     

Share This Page