Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why are you people defending Apple?

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 228 posts

Re: Why are you people defending Apple?

#61

Post by Pooter »

statictype wrote: post #57
lotusleaf1987 wrote: post #16

Zach said it best yesterday: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2224469 Of course Rhapsody can't sell their stuff for a 30% margin. It's not their own stuff! They're trying to be the last link in a chain of 90/10 (or more) splits. They repackage record labels' repackaging of artists' content. Do you think the artists would find 30% economically untenable? The App Store is 70/30 because Apple can take things straight…

The App Store is 70/30 because Apple can take things straight from content producer to customer. When the Apple takes the place of publishing, distribution, inventory, sales, payments and shipping, there's real value for that 30%. This was already addressed in the article. iBooks has a significantly smaller variety of books than Amazon. By becoming the sole gatekeeper for content, Apple is ruling out larger distribut…

Or, you know, it's a way to get content providers to sell through Apple. If there's a 30% premium to get on iOS through Amazon, a way around that is to just sell through iBooks.

We'll see how it shakes out. Maybe it'll be like the "nothing but objective-c" thing. People freak out too much about this kind of stuff.

Re: Why are you people defending Apple?

#62

Post by statictype »

This.

More than the actual policy, what disturbs me is the number of people blindly defending it saying it's in the best interest of the users.

It is not.

This new subscription mechanism will effectively boot all newspaper/book/music subscription services off the App Store. This is great only if you're one of those people that believes every piece of technology you ever use should only be made by Apple.

The only entity that benefits from this scheme is AAPL

Re: Why are you people defending Apple?

#63

Post by doron »

davidu wrote: post #9

Comments all removed. The parent asked why I defend apple and I laid out my argument. Clearly people cared enough to respond and react. And yet I'm being downvoted for sharing my perspective just because it might be contrarian? Maybe that's /not/ why I'm being downvoted, but that's what it feels like to me. So no thanks. I'm content to keep my opinions to myself.

Google is bad for business?? this is an utterly bizarre statement.

HTC seems to be doing well for itself tooling their machines with Google android.

Consider the potential revenue business generates from Adwords. Or freeing small businesses from having to run and manage their own email systems.

My favorite example is the benefit a myriad of startups gained from having access to Google API's like maps, and the benefit business gets from being easily found on a map, a bar for instance is a business too, i find them with Google maps.

You also dont seem to qualify having the most advanced search engine in the world a benefit for businesses, talk about a tremendous impact on the entire ecosystem.

I could go on, with ease. but i think you might get the point, your view of business benefit is too narrow, your sharp dichotomy between business and consumers is false as well, businesses are consumers of other businesses too.

Re: Why are you people defending Apple?

#65

Post by chc »

neutronicus wrote: post #45
chc wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, fighting a monopoly is often a losing proposition. This is already well-known. Ask Netscape. Does the fact that Apple's appeal comes from its monopoly position somehow make its actions less of a shakedown?

Yes, fighting a monopoly is often a losing proposition. This is already well-known Ask Netscape. Does its resemblance to Microsoft in the '90s make Apple's actions more justifiable somehow? You know who Apple doesn't resemble? Sun. Sun let everyone besides themselves get rich off of Java, and look where they are today. And, monopoly, what? Having the best product doesn't make you a monopoly.

Regarding your first paragraph: Are you seriously suggesting that the iPhone, iPod and iPad are anything but ridiculously profitable without Apple taking a 30% cut from Pandora? Apple's reports to its shareholders seem to indicate otherwise. (And if you're not claiming that, bringing up Sun is a red herring.)

Regarding your second paragraph: I agree with you. The Mac is the best personal computing platform, yet it is not a monopoly. But having a monopoly in the mobile app market does give Apple a monopoly.

Re: Why are you people defending Apple?

#66

Post by mcantelon »

davidu wrote: post #9

Comments all removed. The parent asked why I defend apple and I laid out my argument. Clearly people cared enough to respond and react. And yet I'm being downvoted for sharing my perspective just because it might be contrarian? Maybe that's /not/ why I'm being downvoted, but that's what it feels like to me. So no thanks. I'm content to keep my opinions to myself.

>Google has not had this kind of impact on anything short of SEO consultants. Very few industries have trusted Google and ended up satisfied with the outcome.

You've never heard of Google Ads, I suppose.

The idea that Apple's gouging is somehow a boon is completely shortsighted. Android's Market offers a much more lucrative path to the future plus it's possible to create verticals in Android that don't rely on a centrally planned store for approval and distribution. Mobile is young and my guess is these verticals are going to be big. Apple's store won't scale in the long term.

Re: Why are you people defending Apple?

#67

Post by Pooter »

Bossman wrote: post #52
cletus wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the article actually says is: > Not to mention the fact that users have built up libraries of dozens of applications and DRM-laden content that won’t transfer between devices. What you say is (emphasis added): > The article makes another great point about people not being able to leave iOS devices for a competitor because all their music , movies, apps, etc are in Apple's DRM format and won't transfer to other d…

I get what you mean, but it still locks you into Apple's devices. Also, Amazon is able to produce content without DRM. Mp3 format music, etc.

1) You're not locked into Apple's devices. ITunes is standard mp4 audio and plays on a variety of platforms; the DRMed video plays through itunes on windows too.

2) Amazon's VOD service provides DRMed video, too.

Then what's the issue?

Re: Why are you people defending Apple?

#68

Post by statictype »

Pooter wrote: post #61
statictype wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The App Store is 70/30 because Apple can take things straight from content producer to customer. When the Apple takes the place of publishing, distribution, inventory, sales, payments and shipping, there's real value for that 30%. This was already addressed in the article. iBooks has a significantly smaller variety of books than Amazon. By becoming the sole gatekeeper for content, Apple is ruling out larger distribut…

Or, you know, it's a way to get content providers to sell through Apple. If there's a 30% premium to get on iOS through Amazon, a way around that is to just sell through iBooks. We'll see how it shakes out. Maybe it'll be like the "nothing but objective-c" thing. People freak out too much about this kind of stuff.

We'll see how it shakes out. Maybe it'll be like the "nothing but objective-c" thing. People freak out too much about this kind of stuff.

I think part of the reason they rescinded on that is because people freaked out about it :)

Re: Why are you people defending Apple?

#69

Post by stcredzero »

statictype wrote: post #57
lotusleaf1987 wrote: post #16

Zach said it best yesterday: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2224469 Of course Rhapsody can't sell their stuff for a 30% margin. It's not their own stuff! They're trying to be the last link in a chain of 90/10 (or more) splits. They repackage record labels' repackaging of artists' content. Do you think the artists would find 30% economically untenable? The App Store is 70/30 because Apple can take things straight…

The App Store is 70/30 because Apple can take things straight from content producer to customer. When the Apple takes the place of publishing, distribution, inventory, sales, payments and shipping, there's real value for that 30%. This was already addressed in the article. iBooks has a significantly smaller variety of books than Amazon. By becoming the sole gatekeeper for content, Apple is ruling out larger distribut…

By becoming the sole gatekeeper for content, Apple is ruling out larger distributers. Users don't gain from this. Only Apple.

You mean users lose out on the larger distributers. I know I'm going to get voted down for this, but I think an ecosystem of small and independent players producing content might actually be beneficial to users in the long run.

Apple is doing the distribution, so what purpose do the large distributors have? The only things that the customer needs are discovery and tastemakers. Distribution isn't so much a problem in the age of the internet.

Re: Why are you people defending Apple?

#70

Post by [deleted] »

Bossman wrote: post #52
cletus wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the article actually says is: > Not to mention the fact that users have built up libraries of dozens of applications and DRM-laden content that won’t transfer between devices. What you say is (emphasis added): > The article makes another great point about people not being able to leave iOS devices for a competitor because all their music , movies, apps, etc are in Apple's DRM format and won't transfer to other d…

I get what you mean, but it still locks you into Apple's devices. Also, Amazon is able to produce content without DRM. Mp3 format music, etc.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN