Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Funny.... Apple rejects one App for reasons that are only speculated, and everyone wants to jump to the worst conclusion so quickly based on some writers news hype.

It makes no sense that Apple would limit outside content or outside apps. They limit certain things for security reasons, but not to prohibit use or content.

Think about it people... Apple would have nothing to gain with this sort of speculated lock down... especially if they want to gain users like the person above and I'm sure they do.

Not one app. There is a newspaper over here in The Netherlands that provides a free digital version with a 'paper' subscription. This goes through their app which is rejected. It must go through the new future appstore subscription system with a 30% share for Apple. Result: no more free digital version. Who's the winner here? :confused:
 
In Amazon's defense - if you can buy a book with the iBooks app and you are confused on how to buy a book with the Kindle app - it might be you.

And by that - I mean you are either so much in Apple's "camp" - or clicking on the buy now button is such a hard concept to grasp for you.

I'm not trying to insult you... I just find this line of argument silly and almost laughable.

No insult taken. I was just pointing out the purchasing experience is better on iBooks, however, Kindle has many other points that are more valuable, for example the book selection.

I'm saying that Kindle will be more user friendly with an in-app system whether is Apple controlled or not.
 
i guess apple is trying to catch the business of internet that anybody forgot at the beginning of this era. and actually they have good cards...

apple want to make me pay for the device they build, now they want a commision with my purchases i do aswell. and the keyfeature is "ecosystem". sure, cool and simple.

ok apple, i don't need this kind of platform. i don't want it. if apple's big idea to make my life easier is just to programm and build a hole ecosystem only with the goal to buy only apple related products and having problems if i don't want it 100% standard, then forget it. this **** is surely nice to have and looks cool, but is really not necesary... devices ok, design are killerfeature and apple stuff ist really nice to have... but for data handling? no way.

i asked me many times how could our online lifes be if the web wherenot a public network... i'm sure we where paying for sending emails today.

what's coming next? paying apple or google for online purchases with safari or chrome? or paying adobe commission for designs you do with the creative suite?

Wow... what overreacting babble. :rolleyes:
 
I do feel that the idea of in app purchases need to be revisited.. I was a bit put off when I learned that you can't sync in app purchases with other iOS devices.. not sure if this would fix that. As for books.. I have gotten from Amazon and thought their system worked pretty well.
 
Anyone know if the browser works to read e-books on amazon? I had heard they were coming out with one...might be the solution if they do take the kindle app off it
iBooks will read Classic (free) books from Amazon -- I suppose books you buy from Amazon are wrapped in a DRM that can't be, but I can't check because I've never bought a paid from Amazon.

-----

My take on this whole thing is this: Apple only needs the BEST STORE available for the moment (and that's Amazon). There are probably short-term exclusivity contracts that some publishers have with Amazon that Apple is riding out. Those contracts (I imagine) prohibit Apple from getting the same content as Amazon has. This is temporary. So -- no -- right now Apple will not kick out Amazon Kindle app, but will continue to require Amazon's customers to buy the books via the web and sync back to the app (making it more of a chore for those who absolutely want only Amazon). Apple knows that people generally choose the path of least resistance. Eventually, Apple's iBookstore will just as big AND easier to browse and buy from and people will definitely choose to buy from Apple if the prices are the same (and they will be). Even though, I HIGHLY doubt that Apple would ban the Kindle App. They know how many people are using it and wouldn't want to break that up.

Also -- AND THIS IS BIG -- Apple will never stop the Kindle app for the simple reason that millions of Apple's items are sold on Amazon.com. Apple doesn't need to burn that bridge and have Amazon retaliate buy kicking Apple to the curb by removing them from amazon.com. These two companies actually have a relationship and need one another.

What Apple doesn't need is Sony. They aren't the best book store so there's nothing there that Apple needs. Apple doesn't sell stuff at Sony stores, so there is no risk in making them mad.

Also, we don't know if there is personally bad blood between these two companies. This could also be because of the Blu-ray licensing thing that hasn't happened and likely won't. I don't ever get that Apple and Sony really like one another.

-----

If Apple bans the Kindle software App then I'm buying a Kindle
Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya!
 
Last edited:
You are joking, right?
What I said was that unless you have a monopoly, "anti competitive practices" such as locking competitors out of your infrastructure are likely legal.

Nop, at least in Europe is not necessary to be a monopoly to be fined by anti competitive practices.
 
For those who defend Apple's position, explain why it's different than if Microsost said that you cannot ever buy a movie that will run in Windows 7 and / or Media Player without buying it through Microsoft so that Microsoft gets a % of the profit.

How outraged would you fanboys be if THAT happened?

Tony
 
Once again, this is not true. Read my post above and the update to the original story.

tony

Yeah, but the original story has issues. First, it is based on hearsay (Sony stating what Apple said to them), which is inherently unreliable and colored by Sony's interest. Second, the NYT doesn't seem to quite grasp the difference between "in-app purchase" and purchase initiated by clicking a button in an app that then kicks you out to the web to actually execute the purchase.

I think what is more likely here is that Sony wants to have their cake and eat it--that is, do the purchase directly in-app but not pay Apple the 30%.
 
I didn't have an opinion one way or another on Flash. But Apple had a reason for doing it which was performance/battery life as well as the fact that most Flash content can be developed on other platforms. In any case, I never felt the affect of not having Flash.

This is entirely different. This is simply negative to customers, there is no positive or logical reasoning here other than greed.

It's not entirely different. It's actually almost the same as Flash would bring games outside the app store. Just like the ebook readers are bringing books outside ibook store.

And those reasons for banning Flash? That was so lame that hardly Eclipse fans would believe they have any technical validity.
 
Yeah, but the original story has issues. First, it is based on hearsay (Sony stating what Apple said to them), which is inherently unreliable and colored by Sony's interest. Second, the NYT doesn't seem to quite grasp the difference between "in-app purchase" and purchase initiated by clicking a button in an app that then kicks you out to the web to actually execute the purchase.

I think what is more likely here is that Sony wants to have their cake and eat it--that is, do the purchase directly in-app but not pay Apple the 30%.

Yeah right. :rolleyes:

Apple would automatically take 30% for in-ap purchases. I think it's maybe YOU that don't understand. Sony doesn't have any reason to actually LIE so directly.

Tony
 
For those who defend Apple's position, explain why it's different than if Microsost said that you cannot ever buy a movie that will run in Windows 7 and / or Media Player without buying it through Microsoft so that Microsoft gets a % of the profit.

How outraged would you fanboys be if THAT happened?

Tony

Tony... the point is THERES NOTHING TO DEFNED!

Apple has not DONE ANYTHING but rejected Sony's app for breaking the rules. Sony will fix it and it will be back.

I hate these sky's are falling articles... they just stir up junk.
 
Tony... the point is THERES NOTHING TO DEFNED!

Apple has not DONE ANYTHING but rejected Sony's app for breaking the rules. Sony will fix it and it will be back.

I hate these sky's are falling articles... they just stir up junk.

What rules did they break? It's already been clarified that the app does exactly what the Kindle app does - redirects to a browser for purchase.

Tony
 
Yes there is a security issue. This is why they don't allow for direct app purchases and why Sony was removed and why Kindle is not. You have to allow for an open exchange of data and this opens a hole for someone to exploit.

Again... nothing to gain. Apple is selling apps and content just fine on it's own and I'm sure they are counting on the ease of use to attract more sales. Banning outside content just makes no sense.

I'd recommend stop looking for the conspiracy here... it does not exist so why think there is? When Apple officially comes out and cuts off outside content, then we can freak out. But I don't think we'll see that happen.

Look, I totally understand that Apple won't allow Sony to directly sell content from within its iPhone app. Cool. But that is not all the article says. It says:

"The company has told some applications developers, including Sony, that they can no longer sell content, like e-books, within their apps, or let customers have access to purchases they have made outside the App Store."

I bolded some of the quote for your benefit. I think this is what people are having issues with.

As for Apple having nothing to gain. I'm going to make this really, really simple. The #1 book on NYTs best-seller list is a book called "Shadowfever". Suppose I want to buy this ebook. I can buy it either from Sony ebook store or from iBookstore (if they even have it). The ebook costs $10. If I buy it from Sony, Apple makes $0. OIf I buy it from the iBookstore, Apple stands to make $3.00. If Apple blocks my ability to use the Sony ebook on my iPad, I'm more likely will buy the iBookstore one. Apple makes $3.00 from me.

And don't try to argue that Apple doesn't care about getting more of my money because they already make enough money selling apps. That argument is laughable. They are one of the greediest corporations in America. They want every penny they can get their hands on.

Tony... the point is THERES NOTHING TO DEFNED!

Apple has not DONE ANYTHING but rejected Sony's app for breaking the rules. Sony will fix it and it will be back.

I hate these sky's are falling articles... they just stir up junk.

The article says that Apple rejected it because it lets "customers have access to purchases they have made outside the App Store". How is this breaking the rules?
 
Yeah right. :rolleyes:

Apple would automatically take 30% for in-ap purchases. I think it's maybe YOU that don't understand. Sony doesn't have any reason to actually LIE so directly.

Tony

Sure they do, to put public pressure on Apple. I don't think anyone knows exactly what happened here, but we can be sure that Sony's version is not the whole story.

Time will tell. If this does represent a new Apple policy, Barnes and Noble and Amazon's readers should both be removed in the near future. If that doesn't happen, I think we can presume that there is something hanky about Sony's statement.
 
Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya!

Why do you think purchasing a Kindle and owning/buying other Apple products is mutually exclusive. If they guy wants to spend a measly $139 on a Kindle, so what? Why would you imply he has to leave? And leave what?
 
What rules did they break? It's already been clarified that the app does exactly what the Kindle app does - redirects to a browser for purchase.

Tony

Does it remove you from the app entirely and open Safari, like the Kindle app, or does it open a browser window within the app? I know it sounds like a small technical point, but I can see Apple objecting to the latter because it would provide a convenience similar to in-app purchase without the 30% charge to Apple.

Could this whole argument revolve around something so small? Just asking.
 
I don't wish to get locked in any further into Apple's money machine.

Was thinking about buying an iPad and iPhone, because I thought there would be some common sense within Apple Corp. There is none.
Other than the recent release of Beatles Music to the iTunes music store, what does Apple Corp have to do with the iPhone at all?

Yeah another rare app in my collection among with vlc and idos

iDos is back. Just need iPhone Explorer to load new stuff on it.

Why does Apple keep changing the rules on the customer? :confused:
So far they have not changed any rules on the customer with this.
eBooks are already overpriced, being more expensive on average than a mass-market paperback. Often they're about as expensive as a discounted hardback, but without the pleasure and permanency of owning a real, physical book. This move is likely to make them even more expensive, and even less desirable, not exactly the way to get me to switch to buying them.
Yeah, only place I buy eBooks from generally is Baen - they charge as much or less than the MMP version per ebook. And it's even DRM-FREE.
 
Big friggan deal.

So it's not in the app store.

Go download it from the eReader site.

What's the problem?
 
Sure they do, to put public pressure on Apple. I don't think anyone knows exactly what happened here, but we can be sure that Sony's version is not the whole story.

Sony has no incentive to put public pressure on Apple. They just want their app approved and there is NO WAY that they would overtly LIE about the actual FACTS of what they submitted, because they know the truth of this would eventually come out. So we have to believe what they are saying, especially in light of the fact that this is exactly how their Android app works.

Read the "update" section here:

http://technologizer.com/2011/01/31/sony-reader-iphone/

Tony
 
Big friggan deal.

So it's not in the app store.

Go download it from the eReader site.

What's the problem?

Before you comment, RTFA.

This is the problem:

"The company has told some applications developers, including Sony, that they can no longer sell content, like e-books, within their apps, or let customers have access to purchases they have made outside the App Store."
 
Does it remove you from the app entirely and open Safari, like the Kindle app, or does it open a browser window within the app? I know it sounds like a small technical point, but I can see Apple objecting to the latter because it would provide a convenience similar to in-app purchase without the 30% charge to Apple.

Could this whole argument revolve around something so small? Just asking.

That's actually a good question......

Tony
 
How is in-app purchasing in the Kindle/Nook app any different than purchasing from the Amazon/Ebay/AT&T app that lets you purchase items???

I just bought something through the Amazon app. Isn't that considered in-app purchasing?

No,

Apple Dev rules state than an in-app purchase can never give you a real, tangible product. Software, eBooks, digital music - all fine, but you cannot use in-app purchasing to buy a physical product
 
At first I thought this was a competitive move, but after reading it it's pretty obvious this is all about Apple not getting their 30% cut of the app sale - and perhaps competitive at the same time.

Last I checked, more people who own iPhone's/iPads still buy their books through Kindle than Apple's iBooks. By forcing other apps to use their payment methods Apple will either get a cut of their sales (that really high 30%) OR the other app developers will raise their prices to compensate, which I imagine will upset users and guess who's prices remain unchanged: Apple's iBooks.

I don't like the move, as it's ultimately bad for the consumer because that's who loses. You're either going to have to use Apple's inferior iBooks (and who knows what apps are next) or deal with slightly more expensive books in other apps because I doubt many of those other companies will be willing to lose 30% just because Apple says so.

It's moves like this that make it hard to support Apple. There's no denying they make great products, but at the same time, you hate giving your money to a company that you feel sort of strongarms you. Not to mention the stigma that comes with Apple products that you're a deuche, fanboy and/or idiot.

iBooks sucks compared to Kindle. iBooks needs to change quickly or go away,
 
Wow. I have an iPhone (and a MBP and iPad) and I love it. But I'm shocked at how far people will go to defend Apple. They could commit genocide and some of you would still find ways to defend them. It's ridiculous.

This policy is bad for consumers, especially iOS owners, which I'm assuming most of you are. Pretty simple IMO.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.