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.
Apple Rejects 'Readability' iOS App, 'Software as a Service' Offerings Jeopardized
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't know if there is anything to this but...
To me the logical way of getting content on my phone would be to install the app first and then subscribe to whatever content, not the other way around. It just seems natural for me to make sure the app is working and that there aren't any forseeable issues before I shell out money on a subscription. That being said, It surely would be easier to then subscribe from within the app rather than going from installing the app on my iphone back to the internet to subscribe. However, my point is a lot of times the internet is what brings me to the app not the appstore. Take MLB at bat for example... its advertised all over mlb.com or any teams website. That's how I learned of the app. I would still be likely to want to subscribe to say mlbtv from within the app just because of my natural order of doing things. So even though it wasn't Apple that brought me to the app (which many of you are arguing as a reason for apple to charge), apple would still be getting the 30% subscription because it just makes sense rather than me going from internet to appstore to app back to internet to sign up for subscription then back to app to link subscription or whatever you'd have to do. It just seems like manipulation on apples part. whether its legally wrong or not, i don't know, but it seems unfair and manipulative to block out developers websites from their own apps.
I for one will now go out of my way to sign up for any subscriptions directly from the developers, but I think the majority of people aren't really educated on this matter.
To me the logical way of getting content on my phone would be to install the app first and then subscribe to whatever content, not the other way around. It just seems natural for me to make sure the app is working and that there aren't any forseeable issues before I shell out money on a subscription. That being said, It surely would be easier to then subscribe from within the app rather than going from installing the app on my iphone back to the internet to subscribe. However, my point is a lot of times the internet is what brings me to the app not the appstore. Take MLB at bat for example... its advertised all over mlb.com or any teams website. That's how I learned of the app. I would still be likely to want to subscribe to say mlbtv from within the app just because of my natural order of doing things. So even though it wasn't Apple that brought me to the app (which many of you are arguing as a reason for apple to charge), apple would still be getting the 30% subscription because it just makes sense rather than me going from internet to appstore to app back to internet to sign up for subscription then back to app to link subscription or whatever you'd have to do. It just seems like manipulation on apples part. whether its legally wrong or not, i don't know, but it seems unfair and manipulative to block out developers websites from their own apps.
I for one will now go out of my way to sign up for any subscriptions directly from the developers, but I think the majority of people aren't really educated on this matter.
Right so what if I want to pay the Readibility "licence fee" for what they offer me on the Web channel, from that are funded many blogs and so on, and also with that money they fund their iOS development to let me get the same thing?
problem is Amazon started a new market so it was gamble and when it dropped the price for what publishers more publishers jumped on board but prices did go up.
In this case Apple is basic jacks up the price by 30%-43% over night. That is not going to fly very well. Apple is shooting itself in the foot.
Come on. I post responses to rabid anti-apple people all the time. But this is ridiculous. The regulators need to look into this now and clear it up. Get it over with. If it turns out they take no action against Apple, so much the better. Issue resolved.
But to sit here and say no amount of inquiry is needed is absurd. If Apple has a complaint about another business, they have the right to bring it up and have it considered by these agencies. So do the other companies.
You bring up some other companies and their problems, but I'm talking about this issue.
Do you have a thing for buttons or something? If so, I suggest you maybe lay off the bold button as it just comes across as overcompensating. Let your words, not your typeface speak for you.
Sigh, you really have no clue what Readability is trying to accomplish, do you? Arguing the technology of it doesn't change the reasoning. You might as well argue how iTunes uses HTML and that makes it need Flash or something.
The point is that Readability is trying to switch the industry over from the page-view centric reader as a product mindset to reader as the customer and content as the product. If you don't care about that then yeah, Readability isn't for you. Just go install an adblocker because it is technologically superior at removing ads than Readability.
Yes, we are all very aware of your stance on not wanting to pay for anything. Your fixation on money and screwing people over is kind of sad. You deserve everything you're entitled to, no?
Thank you for pointing out my spelling error. I'm sure it makes you that much smarter than me. I hope that lets you sleep better at night.
See, the problem is that according to the terms (as far as I remember) the iOS price must be the same or lower compared to the price outside of iOS.
But, for now, you can have a subscription and a "premium" subscription which give you access to iOS devices
I've never heard of this app so don't care about it as I don't use it but I DID vote negative as this entire new policy of Apple just stinks of sheer greed and nothing else!!!!
It's not like Apple needs the friggin money!!
It's not like Apple needs the friggin money!!
Yeah, I really don't think Apple is going to stick with 30% term with subscriptions, but Apple is clearly abusing their market position to push the terms in their favor.
In your opinion.
We all know how secretive Apple is. Not only Apple but other companies too.
The issue is being brought forth by more than one other company. They have a right to bring it up. And if the regulatory agencies see fit, they have the right to demand more information to resolve the issue.
It doesn't require that the outcome of this be known before it begins. It is isn't a show trial.
Are you kidding me!? That's insane!
No thanks, Apple. I'll take my app elsewhere. Get your terms out of my business.
Well run businesses evaluate engagements based on the potential to grow revenues and generate profits. If they can do those things through the iOS store, they will participate. If they can't they won't. In some cases, there may be negotiations where Apple is willing to accept a smaller comission. If Netflix can make money in Apple's store, they won't leave just because they make a bit more on the Android store. They will partner with both. You seem to think that businesses pick sales and distribution channels the way you buy a microwave oven. They don't.
Move along is EXACTLY what they will do, and that is EXACTLY the problem for users. Netflix, Hulu, all these other premium apps may move along. Don't forget, SteveCo is saying developers are NOT ALLOWED to charge less for subscriptions outside the app. Do you really think Netflix is going to turn a $8 fee into 5.60 just for Apple? Lose 30% of their fee? Nope. They may all, MOVE ALONG. And then iPhones will kind of suck, and people will have more incentive to use other platforms there they CAN get their Netflix, Hulu, Readability, Pandora, etc. fix.
TOS does not apply to something that's not available in the app store.
The lower priced subscription content is not accessible from iOS, so Apple has no say in it.
Uh.....what photo gear doesn't have a 45% markup? The $80 cameras?
You think that's likely?
Wow. It's been mentioned before, but....WOW. Obviously you are not a business owner located in a mall. Hell, our nursing homes pay percentage rent. I don't know if the analogy about malls works here or not, but at least know something before typing blithely away.
To follow....Many iOS devs seem to misunderstand. A few apps have hit it big and it's basically like winning the lottery due to the empty nature of the distribution channel for selling apps for phones. But this industry is in its infancy. The "lottery winner" days are coming to an end, just as the tech IPO windfall days are over. This industry will become more similar to others. Call it the Walmart effect. The retailers are starting to have an impact on the producers. Apple is taking bold steps, which may create the industry or may blow up in their face a bit short term. As a consumer, it's time to pay attention and react accordingly. Even more so as a dev.
Of course if Apple released user data to the companies, this would not even be an issue. But then again that might piss off some consumers. In the end Devs will bow down to this, because frankly the App Store is the most profitable and largest mobile OS app store there is. I expect Apple to start to release some type of data to devs around iOS 5.
The problem is I only have Netflix and Pandora because of my iPad. If Netflix removes their app, I am not getting rid of my iPad, I am canceling my $8.00 a month subscription to Netflix. Even though I wouldn't blame them at all, they still will lose my money.
That's not what Apple thinks and has stated. And to clarify, he meant Dev App Store Policy (or whatever it's actually called) not the TOS.
They will just start charging you $11/month for the privilege of watching Netflix on your ipad, whereas every other platform will pay $8. You won't be able to buy it from the netflix site for $8 and then use it on ios, it won't work, so Apple TOS won't be violated.