Yep.
Didn't the Amazon Kindle app have this same problem?
They weren't allowed to put a link to the Kindle Store to sell books... so I thought they told people what to do instead.
I don't have the Kindle app installed so I can't verify.
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.
Senator Elizabeth Warren Accuses Apple of Trying to 'Snuff Out Competition,' Spotify Agrees
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yep.
Didn't the Amazon Kindle app have this same problem?
They weren't allowed to put a link to the Kindle Store to sell books... so I thought they told people what to do instead.
I don't have the Kindle app installed so I can't verify.
That argument works both ways. Netflix is a successful platform in its own rights. Why should Apple have perpetual kickbacks from it just because someone signed up to the service on iOS? Amazon hosts their own books and movies on their own servers with their own bandwidth. Why should Apple take a 30% cut off every transaction made through Amazon's app, just because it's on iOS?
Once again, this isn't about apps being given free access to iOS. I have no problem with 3rd parties having to pay Apple something for access to the App Store. It's just that there should be limits to how much they can take.
You can subscribe to these services through Safari without Apple getting its 30% cut but apps are not allowed to put button with a link into their app. If this were allowed, every app would opt for this instead of IAP
It's been a bit since I've used it too. I vaguely recall there being a link at one point, but not a wordy suggestion.
But I do know that on my SP4, I can buy Kindle books directly through the app. It's so nice, too. Especially when you consider how crap stupid convoluted Amazon's website is these days.
Costco works for me because a Spotify family plan is analogous to an 80 pack of bathroom tissue.
Costco works for me because a Spotify family plan is analogous to an 80 pack of bathroom tissue.
I love those things. You don't have to worry about running out of TP for YEEEAARRS!
...but you'll take all that bulk for granted, never thinking you'll ever run out. But nothing lasts forever. You'll eventually run out. It's inevitable. When that day comes, all you can do is cry and scream as you're left to deal with the consequences of your hubris.
Last edited:
/let's the visual set in
Cats have claws, man. I'd have to reach a level of desperation I've never before experienced to consider that.
Maybe I should invest in a bidet. Or at least run a water hose through the bathroom window. You know, for those contingencies.
Did she buy an iPhone? Did her 'free' subscription to 
Music run out? Was she unhappy that Adele took so long to be on ?
Why not focus on the more serious issues that we have in our society today. Unfortunately, we have enough and our current political processes can't seem to get a grasp or a clue on any of them.
Music run out? Was she unhappy that Adele took so long to be on ?Why not focus on the more serious issues that we have in our society today. Unfortunately, we have enough and our current political processes can't seem to get a grasp or a clue on any of them.
Eric keeps saying "free access" to iOS. Where does this idea come from? Afaik, Apple get's a yearly c note from devs whether their app sells or not. That's the cost entry, or at least it should be. Even with newly minted 15% fee structure it still seems more like smoke and mirrors than a legit cost benefit for devs. Doesn't Apple still get 30% for 12 months of subscriptions?
I'd be interested to see how long the average customer maintains a subscription.
If you want to open a brick and mortar store, you can either buy the land and pay to construct a building, or, you can rent a store front in either a strip mall or regular mall. Basically, Apple built the mall with the App Store. You get to set up your store and, unlike a physical mall, you only pay your landlord when you get paid. People spend money, Apple gets a cut. You don't like it, go pay for your own infrastructure.
Facebook pays $99 a year for access to The App Store. Do you think that $99 covers the billions and billions of downloads Apple has hosted on their servers?
I'd be interested in knowing how many subscribers on Spotify paid through iOS, Android and through a browser. Of course, Spotify won't ever release those numbers because it would look terrible for them to complain about Apple fees when the majority of their users signed up via the iOS App. In fact, if most of their users DIDN'T sign up on iOS, then they wouldn't be whining so much about Apple fees.
Ouch, yeah. Forgot about the claws. Water hose? Effective, I'll give you that. But the wife and I are on this eco kick these days so wasting water wouldn't fit in with our new lifestyle. I've never been one to give advice, but we've been test driving some alternatives that may work for you in a pinch.
The wife is trying the paleo route:
I went a little more high tech:
We should stop. I feel like a 10 year old making poop jokes.
Anyone who uses their "race" to get an advantage at a job is a disgusting, immoral racist who deserves the mocking. Using skin color and "race" to advantage or disadvantage anyone makes about as much sense as using hair color.
Why should someone who is on Apple platform because their marketing brought them there be allowed to advertise lower pricing on their platform. If the want to do so run adds like Apple does and sing the praises of their service pricing. Wait, they can't afford to market on that scale. Tell me again why Apple should allow that.
Elizabeth Warren is a looney moonbat! Identifies herself as Native American yet can't substantiate her claims. Must run Tim Cook ragged to have a political "ally" put Apple on blast!
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...zabeth-warren-native-american-or-what/257415/
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...zabeth-warren-native-american-or-what/257415/
I think if the Sharks were representing a company that had 30% of their revenue stream skimmed off the top for very little value, they would argue just as hard the other way.
I totally get Apple getting a charge on the initial purchase. But there is no 'contact or marketing prowess' that earns them a cut of the sub fees month after month after month.
If Apple played fair they would at least allow developers to notify customers of an alternative option. The fact we as consumers accept it....and some of you actually defend it, is amazing.
Consumers go apeschit when insurance, oil, pharmacy or cable/satellite companies charge them an extra $1. But they will grab their torch and pitchfork to defend the most profitable company in the world using sketchy tactics to shake down their customers.
[doublepost=1467252847][/doublepost]
That analogy makes sense on the initial purchase. If I go the music store in the mall and buy a product, part of that fee I pay the merchant pays the landlord.
But ongoing sub fees is like a customer renting something from a store in the strip mall, taking it home - then having to pay the store and landlord forever. The value Apple provides is in the original purchase. (And that's a bit arguable for companies like Spotify and Netflix since most consumers seek those products out without any marketing from the App Store.) Apple doesn't provide any service beyond the initial purchase. They just skim free money if someone paid through an IAP. It's even more nefarious because they don't allow the company to advertise/link an alternate payment method.
It's a tough thing to manage though. For every Netflix and Spotify there are probably 100 companies who do rely on the App Store to get their foot in the consumer's door.
Note to self: Continue never signing up for 3rd party subscription services using Apple devices.
I agree on your first point: it doesn't seem right that Apple forbids any particular communication from the developer to their customer. This seems to me like censorship.
However, your second point about API's is ridiculous. It's all fine and good for people to want them and it's great when Apple or anyone else provides them, but how can you honestly argue for such a thing to be required? Apple should have every right to build walls wherever they want them in their software. Whether or not that works for Apple is on Apple, and whether or not it works for a developer is on the developer.