4 ms·

But I also think there is more to it than that. Apple needed to provide those services in order to highlight the devices they were selling, because specs alone

by trotsky 16y ago

But I also think there is more to it than that. Apple needed to provide those services in order to highlight the devices they were selling, because specs alone don’t sell. [...] And you can’t trust third party developers to do it for you. It all sounds pretty reasonable until you remember that the 30% tax is more or less aimed directly at removing Amazon ebooks from the platform, and that the kindle app was available well before iBooks.

rimantas 16y ago
> 30% tax is more or less aimed directly at removing > Amazon ebooks from the platform Lots of books apps were available before iBooks. Apple has no interest of driving any content provider off iOS: anything that helps sell hardware is good for them. And Kindle App is still available on iOS.
- fpgeek 16y ago
  For now. Amazon and the rest have until June 30th to give up their margins on iOS or leave.
  - ghiculescu 16y ago
    If Amazon were serious about leaving, they would have left by now, to try and force Apple to not make the change on June 30. Once June 30 goes past, Apple isn't going to reverse their policy again; if Amazon is there on the 30th, they're not leaving.
    - abraham 16y ago
      Amazon is not going to leave before they absolutely have to. Every second they hare on the iPhone increases their exposer, makes them money, and keeps their customers happy.
      - fpgeek 16y ago
        It is more than that. The latest estimate I've seen says that Amazon has 58% of the ebook market, while Apple has 9%. With every Kindle book bought and every day that passes under the status quo, Amazon's leverage grows. They have no interest in forcing a confrontation even a minute early.
    - recoiledsnake 16y ago
      >If Amazon were serious about leaving, they would have left by now, to try and force Apple to not make the change on June 30. No, Amazon leaving now would make it look like Amazon pulled the app. Perception is very important. Most of the customers do not read tech sites, but they will notice when apps are pulled, and will ask 'Who pulled my app?'? Amazon (and I suspect Apple as well) wouldn't want to be the answer to that and be object of rage. If Amazon doesn't want to play by the new rules, I suspect they will wait for Apple to make the first move. This is definitely true of Netflix too, I suspect there's a percentage of iPad buyers who bought the device just for Kindle/Netflix apps.
      - deong 16y ago
        > I suspect there's a percentage of iPad buyers who bought the device just for Kindle/Netflix apps. It wasn't the only reason I bought an iPad, but had the Kindle app not been there, it would have certainly been a deal-breaker. And even if they back off now, the uncertainty Apple has introduced has driven me to an Android replacement. I simply don't trust Apple to proceed with the customer's best interests in mind anymore.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
hello_moto 16y ago
What if certain companies made a pact of increasing their services/goods cost by some percentage (let's say 15%-30%) and call it "the iPhone tax". Make a beautiful logo out of it, constantly reminding people that the price increase is due to Apple. ... and at the same time offer a clue that they can get the same services/goods cheaper on another platform (say... Android). Would that help to drive users to understand how bad Apple is and hopefully start a public uproar? Perception right?
- trotsky 16y ago
  Apple's service agreement actually demands price matching, which means a content provider must provide their best price available through the app. It is probably possible to charge more for an "iOS edition", but Amazon specifically has a standard publisher contract that requires them to charge the same price on all platforms.
  - alxp 16y ago
    Which is a sensible clause for Apple, so that Amazon can't go and say "all books bought on the Kindle device are 50% off what you pay when you buy the book on the Kindle for iPad app" to drive device sales.
    - trotsky 16y ago
      You have it a bit backwards, the kindle is there to drive ebook sales, not the reverse. Apple only added the clause when they added the mandatory in app sales with the 30% tax - if amazon had any intention of doing something like that you'd presumably already have seen that behavior on the iphone or pc or osx or android.
- recoiledsnake 16y ago
  Whats in it for the companies? Run afoul of Apple and get locked out(rejected or worse, approval gets delayed for months) of the tens of millions of potential customers? This has already happened for many apps. No one except very small companies are going to go this route, if any.

by trotsky 16y ago

rimantas 16y ago

> 30% tax is more or less aimed directly at removing > Amazon ebooks from the platform Lots of books apps were available before iBooks. Apple has no interest of driving any content provider off iOS: anything that helps sell hardware is good for them. And Kindle App is still available on iOS.

fpgeek 16y ago
For now. Amazon and the rest have until June 30th to give up their margins on iOS or leave.
- ghiculescu 16y ago
  If Amazon were serious about leaving, they would have left by now, to try and force Apple to not make the change on June 30. Once June 30 goes past, Apple isn't going to reverse their policy again; if Amazon is there on the 30th, they're not leaving.
  - abraham 16y ago
    Amazon is not going to leave before they absolutely have to. Every second they hare on the iPhone increases their exposer, makes them money, and keeps their customers happy.
    - fpgeek 16y ago
      It is more than that. The latest estimate I've seen says that Amazon has 58% of the ebook market, while Apple has 9%. With every Kindle book bought and every day that passes under the status quo, Amazon's leverage grows. They have no interest in forcing a confrontation even a minute early.
  - recoiledsnake 16y ago
    >If Amazon were serious about leaving, they would have left by now, to try and force Apple to not make the change on June 30. No, Amazon leaving now would make it look like Amazon pulled the app. Perception is very important. Most of the customers do not read tech sites, but they will notice when apps are pulled, and will ask 'Who pulled my app?'? Amazon (and I suspect Apple as well) wouldn't want to be the answer to that and be object of rage. If Amazon doesn't want to play by the new rules, I suspect they will wait for Apple to make the first move. This is definitely true of Netflix too, I suspect there's a percentage of iPad buyers who bought the device just for Kindle/Netflix apps.
    - deong 16y ago
      > I suspect there's a percentage of iPad buyers who bought the device just for Kindle/Netflix apps. It wasn't the only reason I bought an iPad, but had the Kindle app not been there, it would have certainly been a deal-breaker. And even if they back off now, the uncertainty Apple has introduced has driven me to an Android replacement. I simply don't trust Apple to proceed with the customer's best interests in mind anymore.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]

hello_moto 16y ago

What if certain companies made a pact of increasing their services/goods cost by some percentage (let's say 15%-30%) and call it "the iPhone tax". Make a beautiful logo out of it, constantly reminding people that the price increase is due to Apple. ... and at the same time offer a clue that they can get the same services/goods cheaper on another platform (say... Android). Would that help to drive users to understand how bad Apple is and hopefully start a public uproar? Perception right?

trotsky 16y ago
Apple's service agreement actually demands price matching, which means a content provider must provide their best price available through the app. It is probably possible to charge more for an "iOS edition", but Amazon specifically has a standard publisher contract that requires them to charge the same price on all platforms.
- alxp 16y ago
  Which is a sensible clause for Apple, so that Amazon can't go and say "all books bought on the Kindle device are 50% off what you pay when you buy the book on the Kindle for iPad app" to drive device sales.
  - trotsky 16y ago
    You have it a bit backwards, the kindle is there to drive ebook sales, not the reverse. Apple only added the clause when they added the mandatory in app sales with the 30% tax - if amazon had any intention of doing something like that you'd presumably already have seen that behavior on the iphone or pc or osx or android.
recoiledsnake 16y ago
Whats in it for the companies? Run afoul of Apple and get locked out(rejected or worse, approval gets delayed for months) of the tens of millions of potential customers? This has already happened for many apps. No one except very small companies are going to go this route, if any.