Live data from Hacker News

Dirty Percent

daringfireball.net

71–80 of 98 posts

Re: Dirty Percent

#71

I just know one thing: the moment Kindle is removed from the app store, I'm selling my iPad.

I'd love for Amazon to remove the DRM from their books, and just sell books in epub format which can be read on any device without a Kindle app. That would solve Amazon's problem with iOS/Apple, and also be an ideal solution for end users. EDIT: what I mean is, music is now sold without DRM. Why do we still need DRM for ebooks? I'd love to be able to just put all my ebooks in a Dropbox folder, and not depend on Amazo…

You can do this yourself (you can Google for how-to). The process of stripping Kindle DRM-MOBI format and converting it into ePUB is about as simple as ripping a DVD.

Re: Dirty Percent

#72
One reason: Apple wants its customers to get the best price — and, to know that they’re getting the best price whenever they buy a subscription through an app. It’s a confidence in the brand thing: with Apple’s rules, users know they’re getting the best price...

So just like all the iPhone cases, laptop bags, headphones, and external hard drives at the Apple Store, then.

Re: Dirty Percent

#73
post #64
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

And add "Strawman" to Ad-Hom Block Pro. The moment I see somebody use that word I think, "This person learned to 'argue' by reading Internet forums. Disregard." Few things grate as much as the self-satisfied "strawman" police.

Please also add 'begs the question' to Ad-Hominem Block Pro.

Your post raises an interesting point, how did all these 'strawman police' become such a bunch of self-satisfied nazis in the first place?

Re: Dirty Percent

#74
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?

And, come to think of it, who isn't going to be pissed as hell to (2.0) update of your (1.5-ish) iPad?

It feels like an imitation of what they did with 3GS, but I can't recall the details and time frames of it compared to iPhone 4 back then.

Re: Dirty Percent

#75
"Kindle doesn’t use subscriptions. Kindle offers purchases." The Kindle app doesn't support subscriptions, but the Kindle device does.

$35.88/year for the New Yorker (47 issues/year) on (B&W) Kindle vs. $234.53/year in the New Yorker iPad app and about $50/year for the paper version which comes with access to the archive on the web.

http://www.amazon.com/The-New-Yorker/dp/B001O2SCKI/ref=sr_1_...

The xfinity iPad app now offers "Play Now" so it's not just a fancy remote control, but a content delivery app with a monthly subscription handled outside the app.

http://paidcontent.org/article/419-first-look-comcast-xfinit...

Re: Dirty Percent

#76
I don't like Apple's business practises and never have, but this 70/30 split furore is hilarious to someone who has worked in retail and supply before. It is entirely normal for a retailer (apple) to take this kind of split in the retail price and the supplier/wholesaler to take 70%. In the retail industry I worked in, the retailer took a 35-40% portion.

This split is yawningly normal in retail. What's not normal is the huge numbers of "one-person" wholesalers... who have very little in the way of business experience and see that split as a "tax" rather than payment for a service.

Re: Dirty Percent

#77
" (Going further, many charge cards offer cash back on each purchase — they can do this because the cash-back percentage refunded to the customer is less than the transaction processing fee paid by the retailer.)

So the same-price rule is good for the user, and good for Apple."

This type of arrangement is not good for users and is very anti-competitive.

Banks often offer reward points worth 1% of a purchase in exchange for the use of their credit cards which incurs something like a 3% fee on merchants. The merchants have to increase their prices to maintain their margins but since they are contractually obligated not to charge credit card users more, price is increased for everyone. Even those who avoid credit cards end up paying the banks for other's use of them. If fact those who use the cards pay a little less for than those who don't because they get the 1% kickback. Next time you spend $500 of airmiles or reward points, know that you imposed $1500 worth of fees on customers likely not even using the service. The bank gave you a $500 kickback and pocketed $1000.

This scheme basically amounts to imposing a tax on everyone and it's enabled by the one percent reward points along with the price matching rule.

It's the same situation when selling on iOS. In order to pay for Apple's fees and maintain competitive margins, merchants will have to increase the prices of their products across the board, even when they are sold completely outside the Apple ecosystem. This means that if Amazon keeps their Kindle app in iOS, Amazon will have to increase prices _on every devices_ and when someone purchases a book on an Amazon device, through Amazon only, they will be indirectly paying a portion of the sale to Apple. That, IMO, is screwed up. This type of rule is illegal in many countries (at least with regards to credit cards) because it is clearly anti-competitive.

Re: Dirty Percent

#78
post #74

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?

And, come to think of it, who isn't going to be pissed as hell to (2.0) update of your (1.5-ish) iPad? It feels like an imitation of what they did with 3GS, but I can't recall the details and time frames of it compared to iPhone 4 back then.

At least in that case they were a year apart from each other (iPhone 3G 2008, 3GS 2009, iPhone 4 2010) on the normal release cycle.

I thought the furor over the 3GS was from people who bought the original 2007 iPhone at the non-subsidized price and then turned around and traded up to the 3G model at launch and paid the subsidized price. When the 3GS came out those folks were halfway into two-year contracts and didn't have any upgrade options with AT&T, so they couldn't do the same again, and felt slighted that a year later a better phone would come out and they couldn't get the subsidized price.

And that's not Apple's fault, that's just nerd rage over what happens when you buy a carrier-subsidized cell phone.

Re: Dirty Percent

#79
post #64
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

And add "Strawman" to Ad-Hom Block Pro. The moment I see somebody use that word I think, "This person learned to 'argue' by reading Internet forums. Disregard." Few things grate as much as the self-satisfied "strawman" police.

Actually I learned to argue by going to college.

And instead of issuing snide remarks about categories of bad arguments, why not tell me why you don't think the label fits, and if it does why you don't feel compelled to address it?

Re: Dirty Percent

#80
post #28
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe Costco publishes their vendor agreements so you really have no idea how Costco treats their suppliers. Also, no one complains that Google takes 32% of AdWords.

Google takes all of AdWords, since it's on their own site. They take a 32% cut of AdSense. The thing is, advertisers could use other channels to put ads up on the web. They can advertise with Chitika or whatever and get a bigger cut than they would with Google. They typically don't, because AdSense adds a lot of value by targeting the ads well. On the other hand, if you want to sell software on an iOS device, the onl…

I think the last argument is misframed. If you want to sell software on a tablet device, you can do it through Android, iOS, or probably a couple other ways. Apple's claim, presumably, is that the quality of iOS, the App Store, and of the hardware that runs iOS, adds at least that much value over Android. And, given how much more money people make on iOS apps compared to Android apps, they're probably right.

The argument about subscription issues is related but more complicated.

Post reply on HN