How is this a free ride?
Content providers (like Sony, Amazon, Barnes & Noble etc. in this field) aren't getting ANYTHING from Apple when they sell a book on their devices. If anything it benefits Apple to have these strong brands on their devices.
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 'Sony Reader' From App Store, 'Kindle' Removal Next?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How is this a free ride?
Content providers (like Sony, Amazon, Barnes & Noble etc. in this field) aren't getting ANYTHING from Apple when they sell a book on their devices. If anything it benefits Apple to have these strong brands on their devices.
There are two sides (if not more) fighting over bag of money in the middle. All sides are grey, there are no black or white ones here.
Thats not because Apple deliberate limit content elsewhere in the world it's because they haven't the permission to provide it. If apple could have the same store everywhere in the world they would.... the fact is they can't.
This is especially bad news outside USA. In many non-english speaking countries Apple have had no interest to bring local content to iBooks (except some old & free stuff). For example in my country, iBooks only have some old & free content, while local bookstore chains have released reader apps to AppStore and are selling new & current books in those apps. If Apple removes those, there's no legal way to buy any ebook content to iPad.
Žalgiris;11823291 said:
Free ride on what? What cost does Apple incur from a service like Netflix? The bandwidth cost of the 6.9 MB app? Isn't 30% of the subscription charge a little excessive?
Netflix is paying for the bandwidth to stream the movie. You're paying your ISP (or 3G provider) for the bandwidth receive the movie. You're also paying Netflix to cover their share of the bandwidth. What does Apple deserve to be paid for? Developing the iPad? I already paid them $600 for the iPad. It sounds like Apple, not the content provider, is asking for free money here. Sure they're legally entitled to do that - their platform their rules - but why would the content providers put up with being bled dry? As someone who likes the iPad and wants to continue using it, I'm worried that Apple is alienating content providers.
Also, saying "what if Apple wanted to sell iBooks on Kindle" is a moot argument. The Sony reader and Kindle are marketed as single-function devices, not software platforms. iPad is clearly trying to be a software platform, more akin to Windows or OSX (although obviously less open). Comparing the iPad to the Kindle this way is apples-to-oranges.
Last edited:
Agreed. Even though, from Amazon, I have downloaded many books for my kindle app , I have only downloaded 1 book from the iBookstore; quite frankly, the app and store suck.
I don't understand how this quote fits in to the main story. Who said it? It seems to be a strong case against Apple taking this line.
It's obviously not a great move for consumers.
End of the day iPhone and iPad are selling well and Apple feels confident they have enough power to dictate all the terms. But it's still early days for these markets. If Apple goes too far and their products start losing the 'cool' factor then sales could easily start drying up for the company. That's always the danger when your products are seen as fashion statements as much as useful technology devices.
We should also remember that, while Apple has been riding on quite a wave of success and popularity for sometime now, their history also demonstrates they are quite capable of screwing up very badly too. Apple is unafraid of making enemies today but this could comeback to bite them further down the road.
End of the day iPhone and iPad are selling well and Apple feels confident they have enough power to dictate all the terms. But it's still early days for these markets. If Apple goes too far and their products start losing the 'cool' factor then sales could easily start drying up for the company. That's always the danger when your products are seen as fashion statements as much as useful technology devices.
We should also remember that, while Apple has been riding on quite a wave of success and popularity for sometime now, their history also demonstrates they are quite capable of screwing up very badly too. Apple is unafraid of making enemies today but this could comeback to bite them further down the road.
You might want to think about that one. You'll get there in the end.
What a ridiculous opinion.
Last edited:
That is a completely incompatible comparison. The point is people are unlikely to posses more than one tablet/phone at a time, whilst you can eat at Burger King today and McDonalds tomorrow. Your comparison might be valid if at the beginning of every second year (average lifespan of a tablet/phone) you were allowed to choose either McDonalds or Burger King and then you were locked in. In which case I would demand a burger king cart at the back of a McDonalds, why, well maybe because I like the Milkshakes I get at Burger King a lot more than the McDonalds ones and don't want to have to stick to the McDonalds milkshake for the next two years to come. If Apple lent us their devices, in which case i could easily swap it in for a Kindle tomorrow (just like I can eat at Burger King tomorrow) it would be understandable that they were stickt on only allowing their apps.
A better example would be if I bought an Audi and one day decide i want to put a tomtom in my car, but then the audi BigBrother comes along and says "uh uh, you can't do that, if you want a navigation system you have to buy the one that we provide or at least give us a share what that tomtom costs because we built the car". Sure if i go to an audi dealership and buy a tomtom there or have some guy (the internet) come and install a tomtom, then of course they should get some of the money. But just because I DRIVE to the local electronics store to buy a navigation system, doesn't mean audi should profit anything from that.
No in app purchases fine, but once apple limits what websites I willingly allow apps to forward me to, I don't see how they are any better than the chinese goverment (obviously the difference being financial vs political power, but both limiting freedom)...
Last edited:
Enlighten us? Do you mean they developed the device? Then why isn't Microsoft entitled to a cut when I buy a song from iTunes on my PC? Or when I watch a netflix video?
Why isn't my TV manufacturer entitled to a cut of my cable bill? Why doesn't whoever made the DVD player get a cut of the DVD sale? Or the same for CDs?
What is it about the iPad that somehow makes this idea perfectly normal?
Well, the French people disagreed with that back in 1789 and decapitated their king. And what did one of the unauthorized biographers of Steve Jobs say in an interview? "Steve Jobs would make a good king of France..."
Anyway. This whole development is yet another reason to distrust Apple and no longer support them with my money. Apple's business practices are worse than Microsoft's ever were. The beauty of Apple's products is only skin deep; underneath lies unacceptable ugly, greedy American corporate evil.
Kindle vs iPad is not a fair comparison
If we just go by numbers alone, the iPad has destroyed the 3 generation old Kindle. The comparison is unfair though. The Kindle is an e-reader, and that's about it (anything else it does is tacked on and is limited to the Kindles capabilities). Amazon has vague numbers "millions sold" while Apple says 14 million in less than a year.
Non-tech people think iBooks is just fine. I do hear more people talk about having the Kindle app though, so maybe you have a point. And as far as the Kindle app vs iBooks, I think the iBooks interface is a lot better.
If we just go by numbers alone, the iPad has destroyed the 3 generation old Kindle. The comparison is unfair though. The Kindle is an e-reader, and that's about it (anything else it does is tacked on and is limited to the Kindles capabilities). Amazon has vague numbers "millions sold" while Apple says 14 million in less than a year.
Non-tech people think iBooks is just fine. I do hear more people talk about having the Kindle app though, so maybe you have a point. And as far as the Kindle app vs iBooks, I think the iBooks interface is a lot better.
The only way to obtain applications for iOS devices.
By selling iOS devices and a small amount from the sales of content for those devices.
How is this a comparison? Apple actually hosts content on the app store, so the cuts make sense there. Apple doesn't host content from IAP so they're trying to get a cut for doing nothing.
It's the mindset of the stereotype Apple customer: Their brand loyalty reaches the level of religious insanity.
Others have called it a variation of the Stockholm syndrome.
Whatever it is, it is not normal and defies reason.
I agree. I mean in Portugal Ibooks Store, it has the same books since half year ago. I mean Winnie The Pooh is the best selling in Portugal Store of ibooks for the last 6 months.
To be honest is now the current worst e-reader book store available outside of major markets--- i mean countries. And if they remove this apps, the sales of Ipad, Ipod Touch and Iphone, specially Ipad will suffer a blow.
If this happen Apple will be shooting on his own foot.
Of course they are getting something, they are getting the access to a market for free (apple makes it so easy for anyone to get an app sold in the app store, you don't have to pay anything for their infrastructure or their server costs). Thats just like why does a company pay taxes, because the government allows them to use their market and infrastructure.
Microsoft isn't entitled to a share because they havn't created a market. If you want to watch a movie on netflix netflix has to advertise its product and get laymen to download it off their servers.
Your TV manufacturer isn't getting a a percentage of what you pay for your cable because your TV Manufacturer hasn't set up a market or infrastructure, had they laid all the cables in the ground, then sure why not, but they don't.
I can't see Apple getting rid of apps such as Kindle. It's currently a selling feature for many people, and as others have said, the ibook store isn;t very good.
It's interesting though, that companies such as Amazon or 7Digital don't have apps that work in a similar way to Kindle but with music downloads.
If Apple do decide that they are going to restrict me from buying media content for my ipad/iphone from anyone other than them, I for one will be considering my attitude towards buying anything from Apple in the future.
It's interesting though, that companies such as Amazon or 7Digital don't have apps that work in a similar way to Kindle but with music downloads.
If Apple do decide that they are going to restrict me from buying media content for my ipad/iphone from anyone other than them, I for one will be considering my attitude towards buying anything from Apple in the future.
STOP!
Read para #3 of the NYT article
Think
Nothing has changed. Apple are not about to ban the Kindle or any other app that lets you access content you bought outside of the App-store - that's just a stupid knee-jerk reaction.
What I interpret this to mean is that Sony tried to implement in In-App purchase model, which clearly violates the App-Store terms and conditions - and when they got rejected, went whining to some reporter at the NYT with what on the surface looks like a scoop change of policy story.
It's not. It's Sony being pissy because they tried to break the rules and got smacked down.
Read para #3 of the NYT article
Think
Nothing has changed. Apple are not about to ban the Kindle or any other app that lets you access content you bought outside of the App-store - that's just a stupid knee-jerk reaction.
What I interpret this to mean is that Sony tried to implement in In-App purchase model, which clearly violates the App-Store terms and conditions - and when they got rejected, went whining to some reporter at the NYT with what on the surface looks like a scoop change of policy story.
It's not. It's Sony being pissy because they tried to break the rules and got smacked down.
I think this kinda blows.
I have been primarily purchasing books through the Kindle app because I want to be be able to use them if I should one day decide to migrate away from my iPad and iPhone to a different format.....which I'm sure is part of Apple's scheme....to deter me from doing that.
Pile of dookie!
I wouldn't have as much of an issue if the iBook Store was a real competitor to Amazon...but in my opinion it is not....yet. How about Apple step up the to the plate and make it world class and then they wouldn't have to deal with these other services.
Steve
I have been primarily purchasing books through the Kindle app because I want to be be able to use them if I should one day decide to migrate away from my iPad and iPhone to a different format.....which I'm sure is part of Apple's scheme....to deter me from doing that.
Pile of dookie!
I wouldn't have as much of an issue if the iBook Store was a real competitor to Amazon...but in my opinion it is not....yet. How about Apple step up the to the plate and make it world class and then they wouldn't have to deal with these other services.
Steve
The fact that some people would defend Apple over a decision like this (if true) is laughable. I feel sorry for people here that can't see anything beyond the Apple logo.