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

Dirty Percent

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 98 posts

Re: Dirty Percent

#51

Post by lwhi »

sutro wrote: post #24
siglesias wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ad hominem. You should address logical flaws and false statements. And he was critical of Apple in two of the four points, so your premise is false. Edit: This discussion is also something of a strawman, attacking none of the important arguments made in the article. The point about what Gruber would say if Microsoft had done this is simply a preemption of an ad hominem attack against himself and it's quite unfortunat…

Does anyone know of a browser plugin that will automatically eliminate from view any Hacker News comment containing the phrase "ad hominem?" Ad-Hom Block Pro or some such?

Well said. I die a little inside, every time I read those words (and the inevitable dissection that veers away from the actual content of the discussion, and towards the process of deciding who's 'right').

Debating is good and fine - but (imo) sometimes, concentrating on the minutia isn't as worthwhile as expressing an idea.

Discussion can exist without this constant battle to score 'points'.

Re: Dirty Percent

#52

Post by jad »

Lewisham wrote: post #4

I used to be a big fan of Gruber, but I'm getting increasingly tired of his "defend Apple at all costs" mentality. When Apple was the underdog, it all seemed to be about not what was possible, but what was fair, and what was right. Now it's a "Well, of course Apple would do that, wouldn't you?" And he then punts on the biggest question of all: What if Microsoft did this with Windows, and, say, tried to require Apple…

"well, that would definitely require competition regulators"

No offense, but the idea that the government needs to step in is a nonsensical argument that is getting repeated with increasing frequency whenever Apple does something controversial. There is not a single market in which Apple competes where they have a monopoly (caveat: tablet computers right now, but that market is revving up to be hyper competitive in the very near future, and who would want the government intervening there at this nascent stage). A monopoly is required for antitrust investigations.

Do you know who Apple's "competition regulators" are? Google, Microsoft, RIM, Nokia, Palm/HP, et al.

Re: Dirty Percent

#53

Post by lwhi »

pederb72 wrote: post #49
lwhi wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you'd like Amazon to make a concession as large as this, surely Apple should be asked to make a few concessions too? Both companies sell IP - and both rely on a various forms of DRM to enforce scarcity. I think selling IP will eventually be seen as a fruitless (and unsustainable) pursuit - but for the time being this is a way both these companies are making a profit selling digital goods.

As far as I can remember, Apple/Steve Jobs talked the music industry into dropping DRM on music. As the leading ebooks store Amazon should be the one to push to remove DRM from books.

Well, I'm still waiting for the day when I can drag and drop one of these DRM free MP3s onto an iPod (without having to shackle my device to my computer via iTunes).

It's not exactly freedom in the best sense of the word ;)

Are iBooks DRM free? I don't think so ...

Re: Dirty Percent

#54

Post by [deleted] »

Lewisham wrote: post #4

I used to be a big fan of Gruber, but I'm getting increasingly tired of his "defend Apple at all costs" mentality. When Apple was the underdog, it all seemed to be about not what was possible, but what was fair, and what was right. Now it's a "Well, of course Apple would do that, wouldn't you?" And he then punts on the biggest question of all: What if Microsoft did this with Windows, and, say, tried to require Apple…

[deleted]

Re: Dirty Percent

#55

Post by jonknee »

mbrubeck wrote: post #45
Lewisham wrote: post #4

I used to be a big fan of Gruber, but I'm getting increasingly tired of his "defend Apple at all costs" mentality. When Apple was the underdog, it all seemed to be about not what was possible, but what was fair, and what was right. Now it's a "Well, of course Apple would do that, wouldn't you?" And he then punts on the biggest question of all: What if Microsoft did this with Windows, and, say, tried to require Apple…

What I like about Gruber, even when I disagree with him, is that I think he understands , better than any other outside commentator, how Apple's management team thinks and works. He's not a leading expert on business, or on technology, but I'd call him a leading expert on Steve Jobs' mind. This understanding is part of why Gruber often seems like an Apple apologist. Even when he disagrees with Apple' decisions, he ca…

> This understanding is part of why he often seems like an Apple apologist. Even when Gruber disagrees with Apple' decisions, he can generally give a good explanation of why the decision was made and why Steve and Tim and company probably think it is the right one. And of course, when he is writing based on Apple's point of view as a corporation, the primary question is always "What is best for Apple?"

Yet he rarely qualifies that with, "While I don't agree" or something similar. He does sometimes, which leads me to believe that he usually is talking about what he believes.

Re: Dirty Percent

#56

Post by jonknee »

fleitz wrote: post #15
jrockway wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't take 32% of the purchase price for purchases that were made by someone who clicked on an AdWords link, though.

If you're monetizing your content via adsense then they're taking 32% of your profit. It's been repeated over and over again that this is about content publishers. eg. Selling magazine subscriptions. Apple provides access to a large number are: A) affluent, B) have credit cards in the system C) are conditioned to buy via that medium, to me it's worth 30% to get access to that market. It's like rent on a busy street,…

They're doing work there though--selling the ads. Apple is taking 30% of your sales when you're doing the work (other than the actual payment processing).

Re: Dirty Percent

#57

Post by sedev »

Lewisham wrote: post #4

I used to be a big fan of Gruber, but I'm getting increasingly tired of his "defend Apple at all costs" mentality. When Apple was the underdog, it all seemed to be about not what was possible, but what was fair, and what was right. Now it's a "Well, of course Apple would do that, wouldn't you?" And he then punts on the biggest question of all: What if Microsoft did this with Windows, and, say, tried to require Apple…

Your comment essentially assumes "someone who disagrees with me so much, couldn't possibly be sincere!" Please don't do that, that's bad discourse.

Brands like Costco and Amazon make a huge chunk of change, but you don't see them getting into petty stuff like this. No, you don't - because you're a developer, not someone who has to argue with them in the areas where they do do petty shit like this.

Re: Dirty Percent

#58

Post by mdonahoe »

kenjackson wrote: post #40
kmfrk wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple have done a great job of undermining their impending iPad 2 launch. I was on board for buying one (or the iPad 3), until the 30% subscription debacle ensued.

Whoever at Apple said that the iPad2 was a speedbump and the real glory was iPad3 kind of killed the iPad2 for me. Who's going to buy a tablet that is going to be obsolete in 6 months?

Gruber said it http://daringfireball.net/2011/02/the_next_six_months

Re: Dirty Percent

#59

Post by jrockway »

fleitz wrote: post #15
jrockway wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't take 32% of the purchase price for purchases that were made by someone who clicked on an AdWords link, though.

If you're monetizing your content via adsense then they're taking 32% of your profit. It's been repeated over and over again that this is about content publishers. eg. Selling magazine subscriptions. Apple provides access to a large number are: A) affluent, B) have credit cards in the system C) are conditioned to buy via that medium, to me it's worth 30% to get access to that market. It's like rent on a busy street,…

If you're monetizing your content via adsense then they're taking 32% of your profit.

Right, and that's absolutely expected. Apple should feel free to take 30% of anything purchased in-app. What they shouldn't do is force vendors to charge everyone else 30% more for the same product.

It would be like Google saying, "if you want to show an ad on your blog, you have to give us 30% of the money you make at your garage sale". It simply makes no sense.

Want a marketplace where no one buys anything, there are confusing payment options, and your product is next to 10 task killer apps, well then there's a Marketplace for that.

I want one where I can pay $10 for a book on my Kindle and read it on my phone when I don't have the Kindle with me. Paying Apple an extra $3 so that I can read my books on my phone doesn't make much sense to me.

But that's why I don't own an iPhone. My phone is a chunk of circuit boards that fits in my pocket, not my life.

Re: Dirty Percent

#60

Post by kenjackson »

mdonahoe wrote: post #58
kenjackson wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoever at Apple said that the iPad2 was a speedbump and the real glory was iPad3 kind of killed the iPad2 for me. Who's going to buy a tablet that is going to be obsolete in 6 months?

Gruber said it http://daringfireball.net/2011/02/the_next_six_months

From an actual, yet unnamed, Apple Staffer:

http://www.cultofmac.com/apple-staffer-ipad-3-is-the-one-to-...

That's what I was thinking of. Kind of throws a wet towel on the already rumored incremental iPad2 release.

Post reply on HN