If Apple wants to charge for every app and get rid of the free model so be it. Then they have charged you for Kindle and you now have the app. The fact that you are buying something from Amazon on an application you have bought on a phone you have bought should mean you don't have to pay Apple anything. The 'free' nature of the app is where I think things get funny. I'm comfortable with the idea of having to pay for every app that gets to the phone through iTunes because you are using their platform. But once you have that app, why should anyone have to pay Apple anything since the purchase is done inside an app on a network that Apple doesn't own? Initial download yes, but in app purchases should be free of the Apple tax. How else are businesses going to make money writing apps and have a relationship with customers?
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 4:25 AM, Moandji Ezana <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 5:44 AM, work only <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 1, Well if millions download the App then yes its Apple bandwidth, I'm >> sure a lot of people have download Amazon App, I have :) >> > > I was talking about the bandwidth to download books, not the app itself. > > >> 2, Yes this is just business, they are free to use the web go ahead. >> >> if you are bake bean producer then you have to cut a deal with Wall >> Mart for shelf space AND PAID for best placement. >> > > Yeah, but Walmart doesn't levy a tax on people who then decide to subscribe > to your beans and have them delivered to their home every week. > > >> If you want to be in Apple Store then you have to paid.... >> > > But where does the "It's Apple's store, they do what they want" logic stop? > Is my hypothetical identity managemnt scenario acceptable to you? > > >> 3, I do think that 30% does not work for them (small margins), but >> Apple could and should maybe do a deal with them based on volume. >> > > My point was that for Netflix, you might happen to subscribe on your iPad, > but then consume the content via your laptop, TV or game console. Why should > Apple get a cut of that? And the thing is, if I understand the wording, if > you offer a subscription outside the app, you HAVE to offer it in-app as > well: > > "However, Apple does require that if a publisher chooses to sell a digital > subscription separately outside of the app, that same subscription offer > must be made available, at the same price or less, to customers who wish to > subscribe from within the app" > > So Netflix couldn't just say "Sorry, you can't subscribe from within the > app". And they can't provide a link to their online sign up form. > > It's the all-or-nothing nature of this proposition that strikes me as > really strange and overreaching. > > Moandji > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > -- Robert Casto www.robertcasto.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
