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

Apple responds: we want a cut of Amazon, Sony e-book sales

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 129 posts

Re: Apple responds: we want a cut of Amazon, Sony e-book sales

#31

Post by coffeedrinker »

raganwald wrote: post #10
theBobMcCormick wrote: post #9

Is it just me, or is this every bit as outrageously greedy as consumer ISP's (Comcast, etc) wanting to charge Netflix, Youtube, etc.?

It's not just you, but it is far more reminiscent of being every bit as greedy as console manufacturers demanding licensing fees from cartridge manufacturers (or whatever we call sharecroppers). Remember that if a developer makes an app and sells it for money, Apple gets 30% of their revenue, period, full stop. That's the App Store deal, if you don't like it, you don't develop an iOS app. So what happens when a devel…

>So what happens when a developer builds an app that does almost nothing.

You will never get that app approved in the first place.

Re: Apple responds: we want a cut of Amazon, Sony e-book sales

#32

Post by barrkel »

YooLi wrote: post #13

What Apple actually said (emphasis mine): "We are now requiring that if an app offers customers the ability to purchase books outside of the app, that the same option is also available to customers from within the app with in-app purchase." What ars interprets that to mean (emphasis mine): "If an app lets users access content that they purchased via Amazon's website, for example, then that same app must also let user…

There's a slippery slope / definition problem here. This is essentially trying to disallow certain kinds of links from applications to the web: links that lead to a purchase decision, where the thing purchased is related to the app.

Couldn't this argument also be used against all sorts of advertising and up-sell / cross-sell in apps? No matter what way I look at it, it looks like a huge land grab attempt by Apple.

Re: Apple responds: we want a cut of Amazon, Sony e-book sales

#33

Post by potatolicious »

jws wrote: post #16
drivebyacct2 wrote: post #5

I don't want to seem like I'm overreacting or hating on Apple or anything like that, but this seems to be in a whole new realm of greedy/controlling for Apple. Or is it really reasonable to force apps to use your payment platform? edit: It seems in other threads on the front page that this is likely Sony blowing things out of proportion. Most of the "news" is all speculation and discussion. I suppose we'll have to wa…

The consistent, simple user experience is the key to the platform. I think it's reasonable to require it. I know as a customer I don't want to be hassling with multiple payment accounts. Presumably it is permissible for Sony to bump the price up on in app purchases to cover the 30% "shipping and handling" charge from Apple. I wonder if they can show it as "Apple™ brand Shipping and Handling" on the screen.

Even if it's your Amazon or eBay account that you already have?

This stinks of Apple trying to tip the playing field in their favor. Despite the flashy, polished app, it appears that Kindle is trouncing Apple on its own platform in the eBooks realm. This reeks of Apple trying to cut out the competition.

There's IMHO no need to enforce this sort of thing. If Nameless iPhone Game wants me to buy downloadable content and expects me to sign up for a payments account, they're not getting my money, period. For the majority of things being sold in-app, Apple's payments platform makes sense, and generates customers. For the ones where the systems makes no sense, there's usually good reason.

Re: Apple responds: we want a cut of Amazon, Sony e-book sales

#34

Post by JunkDNA »

archgrove wrote: post #19

I can make no possible reading of the App Store guidelines that results in this policy - it's clearly new. I guess if Google can't make the Android App Store attractive to developers, Apple sure can. Surely, this cannot be "official" policy, or if it is, it can't be one that lasts more than a couple of weeks. It's not one of those geek-annoying App restrictions that 99% of the iOS target market wouldn't care about ev…

Or possibility number 4: Amazon removes any mention of purchasing books from the app. The way I read the statement from Apple, they are not saying that if developers offer purchasing outside the app, then they must offer in-app purchasing. They are saying that if an app offers purchasing options, those have to go through the in-app purchasing model. It's still pretty crappy, but basically, all Amazon would have to do is remove the "buy more books" button if my read of this is correct.

Re: Apple responds: we want a cut of Amazon, Sony e-book sales

#35

Post by dablya »

NonMint wrote: post #21

If the issue is that Apple wants 30% of all eBook sales for anything that can be viewed on the platform, that's really scummy and an abuse of standards. If instead, they just want to make sure that if you can buy it on a Kindle/whatever and read it on the iPhone that you can also BUY it from the iPhone in the first place, not such a big deal. There seems to be some confusion on this issue.

My understanding is that it is in fact Apple wanting their 30% (since kinle app already allows people to purchase books from the iPad through safari). I don't think it's a big deal as long as the additional cost is not spread to all kindle content purchasers. iPad users get the ease of use by being able to do in app purchase vs safari, it's only fair the pay the additional costs.

Re: Apple responds: we want a cut of Amazon, Sony e-book sales

#36

Post by potatolicious »

raganwald wrote: post #10
theBobMcCormick wrote: post #9

Is it just me, or is this every bit as outrageously greedy as consumer ISP's (Comcast, etc) wanting to charge Netflix, Youtube, etc.?

It's not just you, but it is far more reminiscent of being every bit as greedy as console manufacturers demanding licensing fees from cartridge manufacturers (or whatever we call sharecroppers). Remember that if a developer makes an app and sells it for money, Apple gets 30% of their revenue, period, full stop. That's the App Store deal, if you don't like it, you don't develop an iOS app. So what happens when a devel…

It's a hypothetical problem that doesn't really exist in real-life. Separating people from their money is hard, quadruply so when you expect them to sign up for a new payments account.

This is also why PayPal is the de facto payments platform on the internet - consumers are wary of signing up for ever more payment options. You need to be well established to have enough customer confidence to pull it off - and even then, you're probably taking a large hit in conversion rate.

So sure, you can ship your app for free and try to make an end run around Apple - but it won't work. Even if you're a big, trusted name like EA the number of customers you lose forcing people through yet another payments process is likely not worth the extra sales you get from just giving Apple their cut.

The difference here is if the customer already has a payments solution set up - e.g., Amazon, eBay, etc. In this case the friction is minimal, and you'd want to keep your 30% margin. I don't see a problem with allowing this.

Re: Apple responds: we want a cut of Amazon, Sony e-book sales

#37

Post by jarek »

JamieEi wrote: post #25
tomh- wrote: post #23

How long till I have to pay Apple 30% for ordering a pizza using an iPhone? How long till I have 30% premium to pay for shopping online using a mac computer?

Yes, but it will be an iPizza and have amazing industrial design.

With insanely great UX.

Re: Apple responds: we want a cut of Amazon, Sony e-book sales

#38

Post by ojbyrne »

raganwald wrote: post #8

This doesn't seem ridiculous to me as a user . I read this as saying is that if an app plays content I can purchase elsewhere, then Apple wants to be able to also sell the content in the app. If I have it correct, I as a developer can make a maze application and sell mazes on my own web site, but I must also give users the option of buying them in the app and fork over 30% to Apple. If I do this, it's up to me to con…

Not sure I have it correct either, but wouldn't charging 30% less on your website make it somewhat compelling?

Re: Apple responds: we want a cut of Amazon, Sony e-book sales

#39

Post by archgrove »

JunkDNA wrote: post #34
archgrove wrote: post #19

I can make no possible reading of the App Store guidelines that results in this policy - it's clearly new. I guess if Google can't make the Android App Store attractive to developers, Apple sure can. Surely, this cannot be "official" policy, or if it is, it can't be one that lasts more than a couple of weeks. It's not one of those geek-annoying App restrictions that 99% of the iOS target market wouldn't care about ev…

Or possibility number 4: Amazon removes any mention of purchasing books from the app. The way I read the statement from Apple, they are not saying that if developers offer purchasing outside the app, then they must offer in-app purchasing. They are saying that if an app offers purchasing options, those have to go through the in-app purchasing model. It's still pretty crappy, but basically, all Amazon would have to do…

Good point - with a bit of re-parsing, I can see this ready. Still, it's a stupid decision:

"Dear Amazon, Sony, Spotify etc,

Please make your Applications less useful to our users. We're sure they'll still love our devices when your apps are crippled compared to the Android version!.

Thanks, Apple".

Unless there's back-door negotiations going on, they must know no big name will ever go for this (indeed, any size name at all that sells content and can process payments for less than 30% of the price). I'm a pretty strong Apple defender (see my comment history!), but this is just user hostile, through and through - in any reading.

Re: Apple responds: we want a cut of Amazon, Sony e-book sales

#40

Post by chc »

cletus wrote: post #29

I think we were all afraid of some move like this. Nobody cares about Sony's ebooks. Everybody (me included) cares about Kindle. I can sort of understand where Apple is coming from in this. They provide an ecosystem and apps live within their ecosystem. That being said, I can't see Amazon or any other big player rolling over on a margin of 30%. This is the problem with one fixed margin: it works well for apps and mus…

You'd think the App Store pricing model would repulse the big players, but Microsoft have actually said they're seriously considering the Mac App Store (http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/20110127/microsoft-consideri...).
Post reply on HN