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.
Will Kindle App Survive Apple's Deadline for iOS Content Purchasing Compliance?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If Apple in fact utilized a Kill the App approach here. I have absolutely no doubt that Amazon will launch a big lawsuit against them.
Honestly, this approach to demanding 30% of anything on an ipad that generates $$ is not what an OS company ought to be able to do.
Sorry, but i believe this is monopolistic behaviour. Especially when you look at the fact that App's are demanded to ONLY be sold in the Apple App store. no independent sales and installations allowed unless people Hack their iphone/ipad.
I don't want apple controlling what software i can use on my computers, honestly this kind of behavior is needing to be fought, because in the future it will possibly expand to Mac's.
Can you show me where I said that Apple is being anti competitive? I'm tired of the way you twist arguments or put thing I haven't said on my mouth
If you want, here's a link
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm
And yes, Apple can't make anything anti competitive, Apple can do what they want without fear or facing legal scrutiny. now, are you happy?
good bye
Since Apple doesn't have a legal team of "actual" lawyers to advise them in these matters, I am sure the countless "experts" on this forum will be receiving calls. Apple certainly gave no consideration as to whether this would clear legal challenges, and is blindly making these choices.
Sure!
How did I twist your words?
Very funny. Basically, it seems illegal to you and you have nothing to back that up.
None of that is true. I was commenting on specific claims, not any possible action by Apple in the future.
They've ridden back on several things on the app store recently when anti-competition authorities in the US and EU begun to ask questions (using Flash to create apps for example). I suspect Apple's lawyers know exactly that what they're doing is very risky. This is brinkmanship, and they know better than you if it doesn't work they're going to have to row back very quickly indeed.
Phazer
True. My point being more that Apple wouldn't be doing it if they thought they had no legal standing. I simply refer to the "experts" on this forum who state so matter-of-factly that this is an illegal practice or position Apple is taking, as if they have been on the Federal Bench for years. I find it amusing.
I don't get how people are saying Apple is anti-competitive in this case when Amazon has a huge closed platform themselves called.. 'Kindle' e-book reader. it has many more units out there than there are iPads.
Can Apple sell iBooks on Kindle without paying Amazon *at least* 30% comission (or 70% on many markets)? No.
Is there an option to install an Apple store on the Kindle? No.
Maybe the anti competition authorities some commenters have in mind could look into this problem.
Can Apple sell iBooks on Kindle without paying Amazon *at least* 30% comission (or 70% on many markets)? No.
Is there an option to install an Apple store on the Kindle? No.
Maybe the anti competition authorities some commenters have in mind could look into this problem.
I don't have any numbers either. Personally I never got into eBooks until the iPad came out. First I tried iBooks and the library sucked. Then I downloaded the Kindle app and now I have a few hundred dollars worth of Kindle Store purchases synced between my iPad and desktop.
That Kindle app is the only thing that makes the iPad worthwhile as an eReader. Remove it and it becomes an eReader for a couple mediocre libraries and all the readers will follow the Amazon library to other platforms.
Yeah, Amazon is a pretty hardnosed company. Forget other companies, look at what they've been doing to punish State governments that try to tax them or their affiliates. They have no problem dropping all local affiliates and moving any operations (along with jobs) to other states.
It's only that simple if you look at the apps and not the libraries. The Amazon Kindle Store is twice as big as B&N, iBooks, etc, which is why most readers are vested in it. If the Kindle app goes, most readers will go with it. It wouldn't really matter if B&N replaces Amazon on iOS because less people would be using the iPad as an eReader anyway.
Doesn't Kindle app already meet new requirements?
I was using the Kindle app yesterday and they have a "Kindle Store" button that loads a Safari web page. Doesn't this mean Amazon purchases are handled outside of the app as Apple requested? It certainly doesn't seem to use the In App Purchasing API.
I was using the Kindle app yesterday and they have a "Kindle Store" button that loads a Safari web page. Doesn't this mean Amazon purchases are handled outside of the app as Apple requested? It certainly doesn't seem to use the In App Purchasing API.
Not the same. Kindle doesn't allow any 3rd party apps (unless I'm wrong). So it's not the same.
Besides of which - Apple would never partake in someone else's ecosystem. It's a moot point.
For anti-competitive reasons it doesn't matter if it's Apple or any other company, eg B&N. What matters is that anyone wishing to sell their e-books on the Kindle - which has by far the largest market share of any e-book reader - would see that path administratively blocked and could complain.
The Kindle being closed to 3rd party stores is the same as Apple applying restrictions to their platform. There's no valid reason you can't run other stores on the Kindle, it works for Amazon's and it's a computer after all, so any reason is purely designed to exclude others from the platform.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Couldn't any vendor get around this by having the user click link or button in the app that would send an SMS message with a link that users could click to take them to the website that would require one click for purchase
Couldn't any vendor get around this by having the user click link or button in the app that would send an SMS message with a link that users could click to take them to the website that would require one click for purchase
Steve, I love you and I love Apple, but F you for this.
One of the reasons I bought an iPad was because it had the Kindle app, without it... it looses 80% of the functionality the iPad has for me.
One of the reasons I bought an iPad was because it had the Kindle app, without it... it looses 80% of the functionality the iPad has for me.
You're missing the point.
The Kindle is a DEDICATED E-Reader designed and sold by Amazon SPECIFICALLY for the purpose of reading e-books sold through Amazon.
Consumers know this when they buy it.
The iPad us a multipurpose device. Not just another e-reader.
As for third parties wanting to sell their e-books on a Kindle, anyone can... through Amazon's store.
Sounds like a familiar process doesn't it.
How Much Is Enough?
Approaching $70 Billion in the bank.
Highest profit margin of any computer / tech company.
Goliath of the tablet and MP3 market, working on smart phone market.
30% of app sales for iOS and Mac App Stores.
So....
Does there come a point when Apple decides they don't need to mak money on everything? That the consumer benefitting is a means that justifies the end of more profits?
Approaching $70 Billion in the bank.
Highest profit margin of any computer / tech company.
Goliath of the tablet and MP3 market, working on smart phone market.
30% of app sales for iOS and Mac App Stores.
So....
Does there come a point when Apple decides they don't need to mak money on everything? That the consumer benefitting is a means that justifies the end of more profits?
By now it's very clear to consumers that all content for the iPad outside the web has to go through Apple's approval and channels. Even content inside apps is regulated, like you can't get porn subscriptions on Zinio. So it's not really as multipurpose as you think.
Exactly, and the same goes the the iPad, any digital media you buy outside the Web goes through Apple.
So both platforms are on similar footing, the difference is you can do more things with the iPad, but for media purchases it's essentially the same concept as the Kindle.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
No because the shareholders demand they make money. It is not up to Apple.
iPastor said:
No because the shareholders demand they make money. It is not up to Apple.
It's not patronizing. I stated my opinion and you repeated yours for a second time. I don't want to go back and forth stating the same thing over and over nor do I want to read your contrary opinion. Call it a conservation of words/discussion.
If you found it patronizing - that's your issue.