+1
the 'price cannot be lower outside of App store' term is the most blatant price fixing seen (EU side) for a long time. NO chance that can stay as a legal term this side of the pond.
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
+1
the 'price cannot be lower outside of App store' term is the most blatant price fixing seen (EU side) for a long time. NO chance that can stay as a legal term this side of the pond.
I agree- but here is the thing- the arguments (most of them anyway) are centering on the ethics of Apple's decision to implement the policies of in-app purchasing as a requirement. I can understand business centered arguements against it, and I can understand well-concieved anti-trust arguments. I just cannot understand the "moral" arguments against Apple's business practices. Readability's letter states that Apple's policy "smacks of greed." I hate to break it to them, but if they are making any profit on their business venture, all of their decisions "smack of greed" as well.
I can understand pleading with Apple in a letter, arguing that these policies will hurt low-budget development that is bringing up innovation in the app store, and I can understand arguing that if Apple continues on these policies, innovative apps will go somewhere else... but making the moral arguments about Apple being too greedy don't make sense to me. It's greed that has gotten any software developers in to the app store who make a profit on their services in the first place...
And don't think I am an apple fanboy. I held off on the iPhone 4 and am very close to getting a Verizon "nuclear" or whatever that killer htc handset is that is coming out. I love apple products in so much as they are advantageous over the alternatives. And for the most part, in my opinion, they are. But it is greed that drives this entire industry and this entire economy. Even Android is born of greed- advertising revenues Google picks up have made them profits over their investment and that was their goal.
i don't know... personally I wish that Apple would just implement this policy for magazine publications with recurring publications and recurring subscription revenues, put it in a separate app called "Newstand" So I could just subscribe to regular magazines on my iPad and stop dicking around with some of this "We have a new concept for a magazine just for the ipad" stuff all together. An electronic copy of a magazine in essentially basic pdf with turning pages is fine with me...
Maybe give the companies some sort of grace period of a year to get their app together knowing the app store subscription plan will go in to effect for them later.
Meh. The analogy is not perfect to be sure, but I could compare the dev fee to say the cost of raw materials. Suppose I am selling craft candles. I have to pay for the wax whether I set up at a mall or at a swap meet. Granted, I wouldn't be buying the wax from the mall owner. Analogies don't work well here because these app stores are a unique business situation which will evolve their own set of practices and standards over time.
To try and stick to the thread, Readability doesn't seem to have a business model that will work out on iOS. Maybe they can find a way to survive, but really their entire premise seems flawed to me. They modify someone else's content to strip off the part that generates revenue. There are lot's of ways to eliminate adds on the internet and this is a real challenge to the add-based model of publishing. If I want the content without adds, shouldn't I subscribe to a service from the content provider rather than a middle man? Maybe they can find a financial model that works. I wish them luck.
No, it isn't totally different. Apple themselves has said before that the App store isn't highly profitable and they haven't intended it to be. Don't believe me? Read this: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20008540-37.html If you really think Apple wants to be content providers, then you have no clue. There isn't a content provider in the world that wouldn't swap places with Apple right now. Media giants are struggling to find ways to make a buck, meanwhile Apple is racking in billions in profits selling well integrated media consumption devices. The App store was created first and foremost to sell iPhones, not content. If they are changing their business strategy with policies like this to try and squeeze as much profit as they can out of the App store, they are going to cost themselves way more in iPhone/iPad sales than they will make with these new stupid subscription policies. It's like a thief pick-pocketing the security guard's wallet at Fort Knox.
Last edited:
Same. I was contemplating buying an iMac for my next machine, splurge on the high-end 27". Now I'm not so sure, if Apple's policies tighten around OSX then I'm gone. Back to the land of powerful-but-roaringly-loud PC home builds
.I actually like this statement a bit more now that I think about it. If Apple continues to push things- say denying the netflix app or the Dropbox app because they do not have in-app purchasing (they do have subscriptions outside of the app store) **** will hit the fan. And by "****," "will," "hit," the," and "fan," I mean the market will go somewhere else.
If I can't get dropbox, I will go to android. If I can't get netflix, I will go to android...
Conceeded. Not my best post. I was in a mood I guess.
So Readability's business in irrelevant to a thread about Reability's business?
Last edited by a moderator:
What if Apple simply changed the cost to be a developer?
For example:
Option 1 - Ability to sell Apps, including in-App Purchases with existing 70-30 split
Cost $99
Option 2 - As Option 1, but with included ability to offer subscriptions
Cost $99 plus $50 per year for repeated credit / debit card handling
Obviously these prices are made up, I have no idea how much it really costs to be a developer.
For example:
Option 1 - Ability to sell Apps, including in-App Purchases with existing 70-30 split
Cost $99
Option 2 - As Option 1, but with included ability to offer subscriptions
Cost $99 plus $50 per year for repeated credit / debit card handling
Obviously these prices are made up, I have no idea how much it really costs to be a developer.
iPad 2
In order to implement this policy, Apple has to know that people will still be supporting the iTunes store. I bet new iPads, iPhones, iPods, AppleTV and other iOS devices will completely blow our minds with excellent new features and hardware specs.
They know it and they can afford to make a few developers angry. In the long run developers will have to adapt to Apple´s guidelines in order to continue selling their software to the hundreds of millions of iOS users.
In order to implement this policy, Apple has to know that people will still be supporting the iTunes store. I bet new iPads, iPhones, iPods, AppleTV and other iOS devices will completely blow our minds with excellent new features and hardware specs.
They know it and they can afford to make a few developers angry. In the long run developers will have to adapt to Apple´s guidelines in order to continue selling their software to the hundreds of millions of iOS users.
Last edited:
Yep, and if they leave, good luck getting those developers back once they inevitably relax the rules...
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C134 Safari/6533.18.5)
Let's be real here. When was the last time Apple released a product that "blew people's minds?" I can think of the first iPhone. Certainly not the iPad. They make great, quality products that do what they're intended, but certainly nothing they make blows people away.
Let's be real here. When was the last time Apple released a product that "blew people's minds?" I can think of the first iPhone. Certainly not the iPad. They make great, quality products that do what they're intended, but certainly nothing they make blows people away.
The fact is not every content creator has the know-how or the will to produce these distribution networks like Netflix, Hulu, Kindle, Readability, Spotify, etc..
And yes, all these entities do bring value to the iOS ecosystem. Would it be as easy to sell iPhones and iPads without the "There's an app for that" slogan ? Would the ecosystem have as much value as it does with 2000 apps vs the current 350,000+ ?
The reality is Apple needs its developers as much as the developers need Apple. Both bring value to each other and in the end, create great value for the consumer. This is all one big symbiotic relationship and right now, the forced IAP payment processing is creating a bad vibe and threatening the ecosystem.
My God Man!! It is a Different World!! New rules, new Eco Systems, new Consumers looking for different products.
NOTHING is the same.
Oh shut up. [enough MR stooges have been heard from already.] And that especially goes for all the (supposed) Apple "haters" too... posturing here, posting words of doom, and pushing 'droids. Despite the pretense, you all must really really care about Apple... else you would have better things to do..
You're forgetting one simple thing: Apple is way smarter than you. They put more thought into stuff like this than you are (presumably) capable of. There are some seriously good posts in this thread.
Last edited by a moderator:
Just admit it: Apple has you by the nads.
And that especially goes for all the (supposed) Apple "haters" too... posturing here, posting words of doom, and pushing 'droids. Despite the pretense, you all must really really care about Apple... else you would have better things to do than hang around here, posting half-cocked twaddle.
You're forgetting one simple thing: Apple is way smarter than you. They put more thought into stuff like this than you are (presumably) capable of. There are some seriously good posts in this thread. Try doing more reading (and thinking and learning), and less reacting.
I don't know, I'd be more willing to admit that SJ is CRAZIER than me than that he is SMARTER than me. I have the facts, I can make my own opinions and decisions on the matter, and I think this whole policy sucks.
Why doesn't readability just pop an iAd at the bottom of their App to reclaim some of the money they lose to Apple??*
*Sarcasm.
*Sarcasm.
This is the problem with a lot of the contrarians on Apple fansites.
Anyway, I think John Gruber of Daring Fireball makes a good point:
-----------------------------------------------
http://daringfireball.net/
Readability iOS App Rejected for Violating New Subscription Content Guidelines ★
Richard Ziade of Readability, in an Open Letter to Apple regarding their apps rejectiong:
Were obviously disappointed by this decision, and surprised by the broad language. By including functionality, or services, its clear that you intend to pursue any subscription-based apps, not merely those of services serving up content. Readabilitys model is unique in that 70% of our service fees go directly to writers and publishers. If we implemented In App purchasing, your 30% cut drastically undermines a key premise of how Readability works.
I can see how many people, including content providers like Readability, wish that Apple had not instituted these new rules. But, given these rules, how can anyone be surprised by this rejection? Readabilitys business model is to charge a subscription fee, keep 30 percent, and pass 70 percent along to the writers/publishers of the articles being read by Readability users. Sound familiar?
Maybe Im missing something, but these guys claiming to be surprised and disappointed by Apples insistence on a 30 percent cut of subscriptions when their own business model is to take a 30 percent cut of subscriptions strikes me as rich. And how can they claim that Readability isnt serving up content? Thats exactly what Readability does. What theyre pissed about is that Apple has the stronger hand. Readability needs Apple to publish an app in the App Store. Apple doesnt need Readability.
---------------------------------------------
This remains to be seen. Myself and others I know are afraid our favorite apps will disappear from iOS.
Last edited:
I don't recall reading any of your posts. On what do you base this "it sucks" opinion? Have you also quoted and responded to the many excellent posts here that do effectively back up their (positive) opinions, with clear examples and reasoning? Perhaps you can successfully counter their perspectives.
[i wasn't a business major (were you?), so i'll leave that part of the discussion to them. i just dropped in briefly to quell some silly noises.]
Leaving Apple's ecosystem? Not a good idea when you're interested in mindshare, money, and appealing to the most well-heeled segment of the market. No one wants to be left off the iPad.
For those that do stay don't be surprised to see some price increases to cover the new charges.
Exactly. Developers want a piece of the pie at the money party too.
Greed? I don't think Apple has the "monopoly" on that. It's called business.
You've seen how Android is eating the iPhone's marketshare at a rapid pace. Yes, the iPhone is holding it's own against a zillion of phones, but the fact remains.
The tablet market is *very* new - a majority of people has only recently became interested in the idea of owning a tablet. The market is new and very malleable. It remains to be seen whether the iPad will weather the Android onslaught, along with the PlayBook and the TouchPad, as well as the iPhone did.
Frankly, as stated above, if Apple remains with this policy, and Netflix, Kindle, even Dropbox, drops off the App Store, I will follow.
Apple is not invincible. They need the developers as much as the developers need Apple as much as the customers need developers. It's a circle. If Apple breaks one point in the circle, all falls away.