This feels like Gruber wanted to write an article from Apple's side, and felt an obligation to do so, but couldn't come up with any arguments nor solutions, yet still continued to write the piece out of obligation to his cause.
Dirty Percent
11–20 of 98 posts
Re: Dirty Percent
#12I 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…
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 unfortunate that he chose to address it. It has absolutely nothing to do with Apple's fairness in charging 30%, which is what we should all be talking about because it's a very important topic.
Very sorry to see this community of rationalists fall for a refutation of something that's irrelevant to the main discussion.
Re: Dirty Percent
#13I 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…
Definitely agree. Plus defending every single part of Apple's policies makes him set up straw men and false dichotomies like nobody's business.
Take his summation: "iOS isn’t and never was an open computer system. It’s a closed, controlled console system..." The implication being that iOS users have no right to complain because they signed up for a "closed" system.
Systems are never just "open" or "closed." Apple's move here is making the system more closed.
Re: Dirty Percent
#14I think Gruber is ignoring the competitive disadvantage Apple is putting themselves in by shutting out the "middle man" apps. Kindle, Spotify and Netflix are deeply entrenched, best-of-breed services - consumers have deep investment with their Kindle devices, Netflix accounts, etc. These are not minor points. People will give up their Kindles and use iBooks the day they uninstall iTunes and start using a Zune.
So Android, which is already very feature competitive and may have a bigger install base, could have no competitor in distributing a range of very popular, rapidly growing services. Vic Gundotra must be grinning ear to ear.
Re: Dirty Percent
#15Earlier 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.
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 selling trinkets with a minimal markup it's probably not worth it. If you're selling high end with lots of markup it's probably worth it. iOS isn't for everyone, it's a luxury brand, not every model is going to work on that platform. 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.
Re: Dirty Percent
#16bit.ly told me that daring fireball was potentially problematic...
http://bit.ly/a/warning?url=http%3a%2f%2fdaringfireball%2ene...
Re: Dirty Percent
#17I 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
#18I think Gruber is ignoring the competitive disadvantage Apple is putting themselves in by shutting out the "middle man" apps. Kindle, Spotify and Netflix are deeply entrenched, best-of-breed services - consumers have deep investment with their Kindle devices, Netflix accounts, etc. These are not minor points. People will give up their Kindles and use iBooks the day they uninstall iTunes and start using a Zune. So And…
No, Gruber has stated that he does not believe Apple is ignorant of the consequences of taking 30% of Kindle sales or Netflix subscriptions via iOS — after all, Apple built Netflix support directly into AppleTV. He believes the company has probably been in talks with Amazon, Netflix, and similar companies for some time.
Re: Dirty Percent
#19I 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…
Brands like Costco and Amazon make a huge chunk of change, but you don't see them getting into petty stuff like this.
Is the following statement (from the article) false?
As for ruthless profiteering, consider that Amazon, with their e-book publishing, originally took the fat end of a 70-30 revenue split with authors.
Re: Dirty Percent
#20bit.ly told me that daring fireball was potentially problematic... http://bit.ly/a/warning?url=http%3a%2f%2fdaringfireball%2ene...
think it has to do with the fact that he is running a URL shortener himself (i would guess bit.ly pro?) when he tweets it: http://df4.us/h8h