Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan • Hacker News Board

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#41

Post by invertd » Fri, Feb 18, 2011, 8:04 PM UTC

danilocampos wrote: post #25

Kylekramer wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that hard? I mean, yes, it took tons of manhours and billions of dollars, but the "fucking science fiction" they made is pretty much par for the course these days. You can say it is a "superior user experience" and stuff like that, but c'mon. That is how tech advances. If I wanted, it would be quite trivial to get something delivered to someone anywhere without anything made by Apple. I'd amazed by how much people…

> I'd amazed by how much people support one of the richest companies in the world get richer off the backs of others. Apple is getting rich by making extremely good stuff. I support them getting richer because I want them to continue making really good stuff I enjoy using. Because I can't trust any other company in the world to do that hard work. Let me show you something: 2001: http://www.wired.com/gadgets/miscellan…

My question to you; is consuming content in a device that is not "dull, stodgy" worth 30% overcharge for life?

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#42

Post by alanfalcon » Fri, Feb 18, 2011, 8:05 PM UTC

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #34

alanfalcon wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not highway robbery. It's the cost of doing business on the App Store. You always have the option to serve your customers on their iOS devices over the web. If you want the convenience of the App Store and a native app, then 30% is the going rate.

And paying the bandits on the highway was the cost of doing business if you wanted to run your trade caravan through the forrest. I love my Apple products. I'm in awe at what the company has accomplished over the last decade. That doesn't mean they can do no wrong and their decisions can't be questioned. I'm not talking about the cost of doing business here. I'm talking about the cost of being a customer here and the…

The parent comment makes no mention of any terms beyond the 30%.

I agree that there seem to be some questionable terms (especially involving the most favored nation clause) but the 30% fee itself is simply not highway robbery.

There are two roads to your customer on an iPhone. One is nicely paved with trees planted and maintained for maximum appearance, and if you take this road you're charged 30%. The other road is a path in the forest where maybe you need to chop down some trees as you go, but there is no 30% fee. There are no robbers in any of these options, one just happens to include a toll booth and you can decide if the nice view and comfortable ride is worth paying the toll.

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#43

Post by ScottBurson » Fri, Feb 18, 2011, 8:06 PM UTC

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #2

Fully recognizing that Apple's 30% is highway robbery, isn't Google's "only 10%" still fairly outrageous? This seems like more a 5% feature, since the app providers still have to provide all their own infrastructure to actually support the subscription.

Right. Now when Apple gives in and drops the fee to 15%, everyone will relax, even though if they'd asked for 15% initially, they would have gotten much the same reaction they're getting now. It's a brilliant strategy.

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#44

Post by notahacker » Fri, Feb 18, 2011, 8:10 PM UTC

siglesias wrote: post #31

Here's the part where Apple argues that the iPad is part of the PC market, and thus represents < 1%. No antitrust.

That's going to conflict with their magical revolutionary marketing as a "whole new class of product"

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#45

Post by Kylekramer » Fri, Feb 18, 2011, 8:11 PM UTC

danilocampos wrote: post #25

Kylekramer wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that hard? I mean, yes, it took tons of manhours and billions of dollars, but the "fucking science fiction" they made is pretty much par for the course these days. You can say it is a "superior user experience" and stuff like that, but c'mon. That is how tech advances. If I wanted, it would be quite trivial to get something delivered to someone anywhere without anything made by Apple. I'd amazed by how much people…

> I'd amazed by how much people support one of the richest companies in the world get richer off the backs of others. Apple is getting rich by making extremely good stuff. I support them getting richer because I want them to continue making really good stuff I enjoy using. Because I can't trust any other company in the world to do that hard work. Let me show you something: 2001: http://www.wired.com/gadgets/miscellan…

I am just missing the connection between "making good products you like" to "making it cool to have all the money in the world". You paid for the device. Apple was (more than) suitably compensated. It should end there.

I personally think Netflix/Amazon/Spotify are doing science fiction too (every movie and song ever made, at your fingertips in a second!) and I would like them to survive too.

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#46

Post by ghshephard » Fri, Feb 18, 2011, 8:15 PM UTC

The last thing we need at this stage of the game is "Regulators" messing around in the market. It's early years, in the tablet market, and Google is going to come out with some awesome android operating systems, and I'm confident we're going to see some great tablets that will let me read my Kindle books on.

If Apple wants to shoot itself in the foot, and send everyone over to Google/honeycomb tablets by coming up with some insane pricing strategy for resellers - I think they should be free to.

If _anything_ this step by Apple, at this stage of the tablet market, _ensures_ we'll have competition. If they weren't making blunders like this, then the argument for going with an Android tablet would have been much, much weaker. As it is - I, Mr Apple fanboy himself, am finally preparing to purchase a non-Apple tablet, simply because all the content providers I'm interested in (WSJ, NYT, Economist, NetFlix, KINDLE(!)) are going to start abandoning the iPad and moving over to the Android Tablets.

And I'll follow them. No government assistance required.

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#47

Post by soljin2000 » Fri, Feb 18, 2011, 8:15 PM UTC

I remember when another giant monopoly got investigated by Anti-trust regulators a few times a year. I miss hating on MSFT. But Apple actually worries me more than MSFT ever did.

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#48

Post by jokermatt999 » Fri, Feb 18, 2011, 8:18 PM UTC

alanfalcon wrote: post #42

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And paying the bandits on the highway was the cost of doing business if you wanted to run your trade caravan through the forrest. I love my Apple products. I'm in awe at what the company has accomplished over the last decade. That doesn't mean they can do no wrong and their decisions can't be questioned. I'm not talking about the cost of doing business here. I'm talking about the cost of being a customer here and the…

The parent comment makes no mention of any terms beyond the 30%. I agree that there seem to be some questionable terms (especially involving the most favored nation clause) but the 30% fee itself is simply not highway robbery. There are two roads to your customer on an iPhone. One is nicely paved with trees planted and maintained for maximum appearance, and if you take this road you're charged 30%. The other road is…

But Apple made the other path illegal, so as it stands, you have to give the bandits your money.

Personally, I just hope people realize the kingdom of Android has a much nicer path. Sure, some parts aren't as nice as iOS, and the locals tend to do less business, but there are no bandits, and no gate keeping you out if the king suddenly decides he doesn't like what you're selling.

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#49

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Feb 18, 2011, 8:20 PM UTC

danilocampos wrote: post #9

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #2

Fully recognizing that Apple's 30% is highway robbery, isn't Google's "only 10%" still fairly outrageous? This seems like more a 5% feature, since the app providers still have to provide all their own infrastructure to actually support the subscription.

> the app providers still have to provide all their own infrastructure Like the credit card processing, the hardware manufacturing facilities in China, the software libraries, the industrial designers... Apple has made it absurdly convenient to consume rich content. They have built fucking science fiction . 30% to get delivered to someone anywhere , any time is a bargain. You're paying to be part of the gut wrenching…

[deleted]

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#50

Post by dialtone » Fri, Feb 18, 2011, 8:20 PM UTC

ScottBurson wrote: post #43

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #2

Fully recognizing that Apple's 30% is highway robbery, isn't Google's "only 10%" still fairly outrageous? This seems like more a 5% feature, since the app providers still have to provide all their own infrastructure to actually support the subscription.

Right. Now when Apple gives in and drops the fee to 15%, everyone will relax, even though if they'd asked for 15% initially, they would have gotten much the same reaction they're getting now. It's a brilliant strategy.

The problem is not the 30% fee. The problem is the requirement to offer inside iOS the same or better deal that you give outside of it.