6 ms·

I suspect Apple may have to back down over this... So much of the value they paint of the iOS ecosystem is in the apps - 'There's an app for that' was a large

I suspect Apple may have to back down over this... So much of the value they paint of the iOS ecosystem is in the apps - 'There's an app for that' was a large campaign last year. Yet they're now threatening to make a number of their more popular apps economically unviable according to their creators. In-app payment will mean a new app, no? Which won't get approved if it contains a rant against Apple on that screen explaining the price hike they need to make it viable. Yet the current versions contain links to web-based payment, which would be relatively easy to update to include a page saying 'Apple are thieves' and explain why. I'm well aware that many / most customers would see such a message, give a stereotyically teenage whatever reaction and move to a competitor, but a good percentage won't and we've seen how fast bad news travels now. Enough providers that customers value enough are now angry enough with Apple to try their luck at this, particularly with a competing platform available and growing without the same restriction, and I wouldn't like to bet on Apple winning this.

extension 16y ago
I suspect Apple has something up their sleeve. Nothing stops them from cutting a deal with certain publishers, except maybe accusations of hypocricy. It isn't, but it could be perceived that way.
- jokermatt999 16y ago
  Perhaps not hypocrisy, but greed and unfairness, yes. It cuts out the folks that Apple doesn't make a deal with an entrenches the major players, simply for Apple to make more profit. That might not be hypocritical, but it's a shitty thing to do.
JamieEi 16y ago
I fear that they will "back down" to something like a 5% cut for certain types of low margin content. In other words something that looks good in comparison but is still completely unreasonable when compared to the 1% that Visa & Mastercard take. Maybe that's even been the plan all along.
- Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
  The minute that Visa and Mastercard provide a place to sell your stuff and a fulfillment model that will be a useful comparison.
  - JamieEi 16y ago
    Apple is already richly compensated for the additional value that their platform provides. The minute you understand that you will be a useful troll.
  - grhino 16y ago
    I haven't looked in to MasterCard's market place close enough, http://www.marketplace.mastercard.com/ http://www.marketplace.mastercard.com/
    - Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
      It's basically a discount code site with click through links for Mastercard holders. It's closer to a loyalty program than it is to iTunes.
rimantas 16y ago
> Yet they're now threatening to make a number of their more > popular apps economically unviable according to their > creators. How's that? Or are we again talking pandora and netflix there? In that case I couldn't care less: these are not available in my country, and most likely never will be. Heck, even iTunes Music is not available, only apps. Now imagine you are a new company just going to start selling subscriptions in iOS app. I'd say you get a lot of convenience with this Apple offering. As for end user, there is no loss there: just a convenient way to buy subscription with one tap. All this sounds once again blown out of proportion, everyone is shouting without any effort to really understand what they are shouting about.
- JonoW 16y ago
  > I'd say you get a lot of convenience with this Apple offering Question is, is that convenience worth 30%? I'd say most companies wouldn't think so.
  - rimantas 16y ago
    Most? Ok, those who don't like it are free to setup worldwide payment processing, and get customers to submit their CC details.
    - JonoW 16y ago
      But every app developer who has a subscription model for their iOS app already has this in place. And they can do it for a 3% fee from PayPal, where is the other 27% of value?
      - rahoulb 16y ago
        Ask the guy who made a million dollars off Pixelmator in the first week because his was the featured app on the Mac App Store
        JonoW 16y ago
rst 16y ago
That only works if Apple doesn't withdraw the current version of the app from the store --- which they're entitled to do. The EFF got a copy of last year's legalese and posted it[1][2]. Apple reserves the right to withdraw any app for any reason. (The key language is Section 8, which says that they can pull any app at any time for any reason. For good measure, section 4 says that if you don't accept new terms as they are offered by Apple, they can "suspend or terminate" your use of Apple services, including presumably the App Store itself. Section 12 reiterates. There's also language in there that says new terms won't apply retroactively, but their line here is, I think, that they're only getting more stringent about enforcement of existing terms --- and the other sections clearly state that nothing there limits their rights under section 8.) [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/03/iphone-developer-program-license-agreement-all https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/03/iphone-developer-progr... [2] https://www.eff.org/files/20100127_iphone_dev_agr.pdf https://www.eff.org/files/20100127_iphone_dev_agr.pdf
- dhimes 16y ago
  How about if a customer buys an app. Can Apple take it away without reimbursing the customer?
  - jonknee 16y ago
    Many of these are free apps (Pandora, Kindle, etc). No refund needed. And if they are the reason you bought your iOS device I'm sure Apple won't be accepting hardware returns past the regular 14 day limit.
  - halostatue 16y ago
    Yes, they can, but they have yet to use the app killswitch.
    - alanfalcon 16y ago
      Which they don't do.
- eftpotrm 16y ago
jsz0 16y ago
That's probably part of the plan. If they had started at 15% there would be the same complaints. They would have to back it down to 10% to appease people. If they start at 30% they can back it down to 15% as a public act of concession. It would not surprise me at all if they selling this to major players as an opportunity to raise their prices and make more money for themselves in the process. If Apple wants 15% prices will go up 20%
- narag 16y ago
  I've already upvoted you, but it didn't feel like it's enough... because the same I did with the person that, a couple weeks ago, predicted that Apple would require prices inside and outside of App Store to be the same. IOW: good job.
jm4 16y ago
I would hope so. My decision to purchase an iPad was based, in part, on the availability of applications that would likely no longer be available if this policy were to go into effect. As a consumer, this feels completely deceptive. For me, the usefulness of the iPad is being arbitrarily reduced, quite drastically, only after I have purchased it. I may not have purchased it in the first place if not for the functionality I am on the verge of losing. I understand Apple's position and desire to turn a profit, but these actions feel hostile towards me, as the consumer, and leave a pretty sour taste in my mouth. No matter how this shakes out I would be wary of committing to another Apple platform for fear that they will completely change the rules to make it an untenable situation. I really hope they back down, but if they don't I would gladly join a class action lawsuit against them.
- portman 16y ago
  Personally, I wouldn't ever join a class-action lawsuit. But small claims court sounds perfect... If Amazon ends up removing the Kindle app over these new policies, I would sue Apple (via my local Apple Store to establish jurisdiction) in small claims court for $139. The case would be relatively straightforward: I purchased an iPad because it could do everything a Kindle could do as well as more; Apple then caused functionality to be removed, so I would like Apple to buy me a Kindle to replace the functionality. I've been to small claims court 3 times in my life, and each time won a default judgment because the other side didn't show up. Then, I faxed my judgment to my credit card company, and they promptly credited me (and presumably issued a chargeback to the merchant). This was in Fairfax County, Virginia. I suspect that Apple will quietly reverse themselves, just like they did on the "apps can only be written in C, C++, and Objective C" last year. But if they don't, your local small claims court provides a wonderful opportunity to make your dissatisfaction known. And it only takes about 4 hours.
  - kenjackson 16y ago
    Honestly, while I empathize, you would so lose that case. I'm fairly certain that Apple makes no guarantees about functionality other than some very narrow statements (like supporting 3g or WiFi). If you thought the iPad replaced your Kindle, that's on you. And at worst, Apple will simply say that Amazon voluntarily decided to not abide by the terms of the app store. Any time they are willing they are invited back in. As much as I despise many of Apple's business practices I think this is a case where they are fairly making their own call. I'd love to see some companies "man up" and say, "Lets go all in on Android, WP7, and WebOS -- screw iOS".

extension 16y ago

I suspect Apple has something up their sleeve. Nothing stops them from cutting a deal with certain publishers, except maybe accusations of hypocricy. It isn't, but it could be perceived that way.

jokermatt999 16y ago
Perhaps not hypocrisy, but greed and unfairness, yes. It cuts out the folks that Apple doesn't make a deal with an entrenches the major players, simply for Apple to make more profit. That might not be hypocritical, but it's a shitty thing to do.

JamieEi 16y ago

I fear that they will "back down" to something like a 5% cut for certain types of low margin content. In other words something that looks good in comparison but is still completely unreasonable when compared to the 1% that Visa & Mastercard take. Maybe that's even been the plan all along.

Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
The minute that Visa and Mastercard provide a place to sell your stuff and a fulfillment model that will be a useful comparison.
- JamieEi 16y ago
  Apple is already richly compensated for the additional value that their platform provides. The minute you understand that you will be a useful troll.
- grhino 16y ago
  I haven't looked in to MasterCard's market place close enough, http://www.marketplace.mastercard.com/ http://www.marketplace.mastercard.com/
  - Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
    It's basically a discount code site with click through links for Mastercard holders. It's closer to a loyalty program than it is to iTunes.

rimantas 16y ago

> Yet they're now threatening to make a number of their more > popular apps economically unviable according to their > creators. How's that? Or are we again talking pandora and netflix there? In that case I couldn't care less: these are not available in my country, and most likely never will be. Heck, even iTunes Music is not available, only apps. Now imagine you are a new company just going to start selling subscriptions in iOS app. I'd say you get a lot of convenience with this Apple offering. As for end user, there is no loss there: just a convenient way to buy subscription with one tap. All this sounds once again blown out of proportion, everyone is shouting without any effort to really understand what they are shouting about.

JonoW 16y ago
> I'd say you get a lot of convenience with this Apple offering Question is, is that convenience worth 30%? I'd say most companies wouldn't think so.
- rimantas 16y ago
  Most? Ok, those who don't like it are free to setup worldwide payment processing, and get customers to submit their CC details.
  - JonoW 16y ago
    But every app developer who has a subscription model for their iOS app already has this in place. And they can do it for a 3% fee from PayPal, where is the other 27% of value?
    - rahoulb 16y ago
      Ask the guy who made a million dollars off Pixelmator in the first week because his was the featured app on the Mac App Store
      - JonoW 16y ago

rst 16y ago

That only works if Apple doesn't withdraw the current version of the app from the store --- which they're entitled to do. The EFF got a copy of last year's legalese and posted it[1][2]. Apple reserves the right to withdraw any app for any reason. (The key language is Section 8, which says that they can pull any app at any time for any reason. For good measure, section 4 says that if you don't accept new terms as they are offered by Apple, they can "suspend or terminate" your use of Apple services, including presumably the App Store itself. Section 12 reiterates. There's also language in there that says new terms won't apply retroactively, but their line here is, I think, that they're only getting more stringent about enforcement of existing terms --- and the other sections clearly state that nothing there limits their rights under section 8.) [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/03/iphone-developer-program-license-agreement-all https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/03/iphone-developer-progr... [2] https://www.eff.org/files/20100127_iphone_dev_agr.pdf https://www.eff.org/files/20100127_iphone_dev_agr.pdf

dhimes 16y ago
How about if a customer buys an app. Can Apple take it away without reimbursing the customer?
- jonknee 16y ago
  Many of these are free apps (Pandora, Kindle, etc). No refund needed. And if they are the reason you bought your iOS device I'm sure Apple won't be accepting hardware returns past the regular 14 day limit.
- halostatue 16y ago
  Yes, they can, but they have yet to use the app killswitch.
  - alanfalcon 16y ago
    Which they don't do.
eftpotrm 16y ago

jsz0 16y ago

That's probably part of the plan. If they had started at 15% there would be the same complaints. They would have to back it down to 10% to appease people. If they start at 30% they can back it down to 15% as a public act of concession. It would not surprise me at all if they selling this to major players as an opportunity to raise their prices and make more money for themselves in the process. If Apple wants 15% prices will go up 20%

narag 16y ago
I've already upvoted you, but it didn't feel like it's enough... because the same I did with the person that, a couple weeks ago, predicted that Apple would require prices inside and outside of App Store to be the same. IOW: good job.

jm4 16y ago

I would hope so. My decision to purchase an iPad was based, in part, on the availability of applications that would likely no longer be available if this policy were to go into effect. As a consumer, this feels completely deceptive. For me, the usefulness of the iPad is being arbitrarily reduced, quite drastically, only after I have purchased it. I may not have purchased it in the first place if not for the functionality I am on the verge of losing. I understand Apple's position and desire to turn a profit, but these actions feel hostile towards me, as the consumer, and leave a pretty sour taste in my mouth. No matter how this shakes out I would be wary of committing to another Apple platform for fear that they will completely change the rules to make it an untenable situation. I really hope they back down, but if they don't I would gladly join a class action lawsuit against them.

portman 16y ago
Personally, I wouldn't ever join a class-action lawsuit. But small claims court sounds perfect... If Amazon ends up removing the Kindle app over these new policies, I would sue Apple (via my local Apple Store to establish jurisdiction) in small claims court for $139. The case would be relatively straightforward: I purchased an iPad because it could do everything a Kindle could do as well as more; Apple then caused functionality to be removed, so I would like Apple to buy me a Kindle to replace the functionality. I've been to small claims court 3 times in my life, and each time won a default judgment because the other side didn't show up. Then, I faxed my judgment to my credit card company, and they promptly credited me (and presumably issued a chargeback to the merchant). This was in Fairfax County, Virginia. I suspect that Apple will quietly reverse themselves, just like they did on the "apps can only be written in C, C++, and Objective C" last year. But if they don't, your local small claims court provides a wonderful opportunity to make your dissatisfaction known. And it only takes about 4 hours.
- kenjackson 16y ago
  Honestly, while I empathize, you would so lose that case. I'm fairly certain that Apple makes no guarantees about functionality other than some very narrow statements (like supporting 3g or WiFi). If you thought the iPad replaced your Kindle, that's on you. And at worst, Apple will simply say that Amazon voluntarily decided to not abide by the terms of the app store. Any time they are willing they are invited back in. As much as I despise many of Apple's business practices I think this is a case where they are fairly making their own call. I'd love to see some companies "man up" and say, "Lets go all in on Android, WP7, and WebOS -- screw iOS".