Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

AT&T CEO says apple app store bad for consumers.

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)

This guy is an idiot. Bashing the product that kept your company viable for four years is not smart.
 
He is an idiot. Before the iPhone there was no real app environment. Certainly not one where programs transfered between phones.

So him saying that "This is not how our customers want to experience this" is absurd.

His problem is he does not have any leverage at all with Apple. Verizon and AT&T have lost their control of the marketplace and Apple and Google have it now.

People would much rather be tied to having good apps on a apple or google based phone than they would having portable apps on the one million suck phones that existed before.
 
doubleaa said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)

This guy is an idiot. Bashing the product that kept your company viable for four years is not smart.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. If ATT loses the iPhone I'm going to be ****ing pissed if Verizon is the ONLY option.:mad:
 
By the way I would let him know too that this dumb wac store these cell companies are coming up with is a fail.

That is exactly what Steve Jobs and Apple wanted to do with the iPhone. They wanted Web-Based applications to drive the phone. It was a failure. HTML5 is not going to make the application market go away... The reality is apps are the way to go with the current technology, so going backwards is not going to work for them.
 
I bet he would be singing a different tune if it was the AT&T app store, instead of the Apple app store.:D
 
well in some ways I agree with him. Not that carrier is any better.

In what why I agree with him is if someone leaves iOS to go to Android they have to rebuy all their apps since they are not on the same phone.

It is one thing if the app is only on that one OS but annoying when you switch and it is on both.

For example fruit Ninja is on both iOS and Android. Buy it for iOS and then you switch to Android and boom you are SOL and have to re buy it. Add in with Apple ever increasing lock in and blocking out a lot of things the more and more I think Apple is not much better of a choice over the carriers.
Look how long it took to get google voice put into the App store with a complete BS reasoning to block it that 100% falls on to Apple.
 
doubleaa said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)

This guy is an idiot. Bashing the product that kept your company viable for four years is not smart.
Click to expand...

MarximusMG said:
Yeah, that's a smart move. Burn bridges with the company that has kept you afloat. What a dumbass.
Click to expand...
One would qualify as a fool if one were to believe the iPhone kept AT&T "afloat" or "viable" for the last four years.
iPhones subscribers are a small portion of AT&T's total profits.
 
Rodimus Prime said:
well in some ways I agree with him. Not that carrier is any better.

In what why I agree with him is if someone leaves iOS to go to Android they have to rebuy all their apps since they are not on the same phone.

It is one thing if the app is only on that one OS but annoying when you switch and it is on both.

For example fruit Ninja is on both iOS and Android. Buy it for iOS and then you switch to Android and boom you are SOL and have to re buy it. Add in with Apple ever increasing lock in and blocking out a lot of things the more and more I think Apple is not much better of a choice over the carriers.
Look how long it took to get google voice put into the App store with a complete BS reasoning to block it that 100% falls on to Apple.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying, but most apps are like $.99 and you can share them with multiple devices. Additionally, if you ever switch back to the first OS, you still have the apps (assuming you didn't delete them).

You're paying for the app on the OS, not for a lifetime's use among multiple platforms. With this reasoning, if I buy Office for Mac, I should also get a free version of Windows Office just in case I switch computer OSes???

The app store is absolutely great for consumers. We pay very little for apps, and can store them on 5 computers and unlimited devices. If you're unhappy with the device and want to switch...it goes with the territory. Sorry, but like another poster just stated, without Apple the "app" stores would not have been invented. Now everyone wants a piece of Apple's innovation.

Completely off topic, but it amazes me how some of these companies can dog Apple when it is Apple that started all of this to begin with. Look at these new tablets coming online. The interface is almost EXACTLY like an iPad (icons for apps, multi-touch, etc). But yet their solutions are so much more superior. Android is starting to raise awareness that their app store growth might exceed Apple's by the end of this year. Again, who invented the "app store?" Give me a break! These CEO's should be paying Apple a royalty for their copy cat work. Now, grumblings are surfacing about antitrust issues concerning in-app purchases and Apple's policy on them. It amazes me how Apple has provided a platform for developers to make a ton of money and yet they complain.
 
There are a lot of fan boys on this thread. Yes, the app store is ridiculously bad for consumers. This is nothing new.

When computers were new, you bought whatever program you wanted and used it as you saw fit. The company who make your computer didn't reserve the right to tell you which programs you could and couldn't use, and they didn't force you to buy all of their software from them.

Actually, one company did try to control as much of their market as they could, and IBM ended up handing them their ass. Sound familiar?

Anyways, of course carriers want to sell apps. Apple is taking 30% of sales that are being downloaded on AT&T's network. Its greed vs greed. Of course AT&T is going to want to double dip or triple dip if they can. I'm surprised it took them this long to start selling software as a service.

Ridiculous, huh? They charge you for the program, and then they charge you for the bandwidth you use to download it.

Its a Brave New World
 
dsnort said:
Yeah!!! Like, when I switched from Windows To Mac, MS gave me a new free copy of Office for Mac! That's the way it should be!

Oh, wait.....
Click to expand...
YEAH!!!

I own Mario Bros. but Microsoft won't let me play it on XBOX 360.... Mad as hell bro.... :mad: :rolleyes:
 
The problem is these companies all believe they should be the only ones reaping the profits:

Apple believes it because they provide the hardware
AT&T believes it because they provide the pipe the software goes down
Content providers believe it because they provide the content

Fact:

AT&T is greedy
Apple is greedy

AT&T's belief that "it's our network so we should get more of the pie" is about as ridiculous as Apple saying "we own the hardware so we should get of the pie" when it relates to Apple's subscription policy.

I pay for both the hardware and for the bandwidth, let me get my content where I damn well please.
 
Tarzanman said:
There are a lot of fan boys on this thread. Yes, the app store is ridiculously bad for consumers. This is nothing new.

When computers were new, you bought whatever program you wanted and used it as you saw fit. The company who make your computer didn't reserve the right to tell you which programs you could and couldn't use, and they didn't force you to buy all of their software from them.

Actually, one company did try to control as much of their market as they could, and IBM ended up handing them their ass. Sound familiar?

Anyways, of course carriers want to sell apps. Apple is taking 30% of sales that are being downloaded on AT&T's network. Its greed vs greed. Of course AT&T is going to want to double dip or triple dip if they can. I'm surprised it took them this long to start selling software as a service.

Ridiculous, huh? They charge you for the program, and then they charge you for the bandwidth you use to download it.

Its a Brave New World
Click to expand...


I actually have Comcast Cable Internet where I download apps via iTunes. Oh, and on the off chance I do purchase with my phone...it's MY BANDWIDTH...I paid for it! I'm sure AT&T was really complaining when they had exclusive rights to the millions of iPhone customers.

And when computer's were new, you bought software in stores. Do you think these stores sold at cost or do you think there was a markup? I am a fanboy, and I make no apologies for it. I also don't care if you like Android, iOS, or anything else. I'm happy we have competition. But to say the app store is bad for consumers is a distorted view of reality. Without the app store, Angry Birds would sell for $6 or $7 dollars and may or may not be transferable to multiple devices. Why, because the developer would set the terms, and they wouldn't have the exposure they get in the Apple app store. Because they would have to sell on their own websites they would jack the prices up. Also, this would make the consumer hunt for the hundreds of thousands of apps available. Of course, there wouldn't even be this many apps without the app store, because the worldly success of it has actually driven more developers to jump on the cash cow which is the app store.
 
Last edited:
thetexan said:
The problem is these companies all believe they should be the only ones reaping the profits:

Apple believes it because they provide the hardware
AT&T believes it because they provide the pipe the software goes down
Content providers believe it because they provide the content

Fact:

AT&T is greedy
Apple is greedy

AT&T's belief that "it's our network so we should get more of the pie" is about as ridiculous as Apple saying "we own the hardware so we should get of the pie" when it relates to Apple's subscription policy.

I pay for both the hardware and for the bandwidth, let me get my content where I damn well please.
Click to expand...

Don't forget, Apple provided the App Store (you know, like Wal-Wart). This is where the consumers come to shop for stuff. Oh, also add in the small ingredient of the actual CONSUMER. Apple created them too. Without the hardware and it's ability to use apps, the millions who purchased it wouldn't need a store or developer to begin with.

AT&T only provides the pipeline if actually download apps on the phone. Consumer's can use their ISP via iTunes. Also, don't forget the consumers pay for the data from AT&T, NOT to Apple. So in my estimation, AT&T is getting their fair share. As far as the developers: they can charge whatever they want (free or a $.99 minimum). Apple doesn't regulate their prices. If the developer does a good enough job, they could sell their apps for $50, 60, 70...whatever. The market drives the best price, not Apple.
 
CosmoPilot said:
Don't forget, Apple provided the App Store (you know, like Wal-Wart). This is where the consumers come to shop for stuff. Oh, also add in the small ingredient of the actual CONSUMER. Apple created them too. Without the hardware and it's ability to use apps, the millions who purchased it wouldn't need a store or developer to begin with.

AT&T only provides the pipeline if actually download apps on the phone. Consumer's can use their ISP via iTunes. Also, don't forget the consumers pay for the data from AT&T, NOT to Apple. So in my estimation, AT&T is getting their fair share. As far as the developers: they can charge whatever they want (free or a $.99 minimum). Apple doesn't regulate their prices. If the developer does a good enough job, they could sell their apps for $50, 60, 70...whatever. The market drives the best price, not Apple.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with Apple's appstore and their 30% charge...

Their greed is coming into play by pretty much stating an app like Pandora can not exist on iOS unless the end user has the option to buying a Pandora subscription via Apple.
 
This shouldn't be compared to windows vs mac apps, which are far more sophisticated than phone apps. What he's saying is that when you buy an app or subscription, it should work on another phone and you shouldn't have to rebuy it. In other words, app stores should use the same programming languages rather than each make its own SDK and proprietary programming language. Duh, this is good for consumers. Stop sucking up to the apple way.
 
vistadude said:
This shouldn't be compared to windows vs mac apps, which are far more sophisticated than phone apps. What he's saying is that when you buy an app or subscription, it should work on another phone and you shouldn't have to rebuy it. In other words, app stores should use the same programming languages rather than each make its own SDK and proprietary programming language. Duh, this is good for consumers. Stop sucking up to the apple way.
Click to expand...

Yeah, let's get the US Congress on it right now. They can can enforce this "SDK Justice" and force all cell phone vendors use the same SDK designed by government bureaucrats. And then we'll all live happily ever after!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back