Apple 'greed' tax spreads beyond music, movies, magazines Apple's recently enacted "give us 30 per cent of your subscription revenue" dictum is metastasizing beyond online magazines, newspapers, music services, and video apps, ensnaring at least one software-as-a-service app as well. Steve Jobs' App Store police have rejected the iOS version of Readability – an online service that …
Why are we surprised at the behavior of the controlling entity of a monopoly? This is a classic "whatever the traffic will bear" scenario. Apple is in this for raw profit, and they are going to tap into whatever is flowing though their pipes as much as they possibly can. The only problem from my perspective about this is that they do not allow ANY competition so that ALL applications and services that want to present themselves to Apple device owners effectivelyl have to go though the Apple Store.
An Idea,
Couldn't subscription services offer 2 levels of subscription through their sites - One providing access from everywhere iDevices (e.g. through their website, or from Android, Blackberry, Meego etc etc.) and a second allowing access also from iDevices, which is 43% more expensive.
They also put an apology on the website stating the reason for the 2-tired pricing model, and politely (and quite rightly) blaming apple for it.
This second priced option is the only option available through the In App Subscription service
In addition they can have an 'Upgrade' option to add iDevice access to the standard subscription.
If everyone did this then everyone would see what a bunch of thieving control freak bastards Apple really are.
So how about you just sell a slightly different app on iOs? example:
News site subscription service for fancy iOs app costs $6.99 with Apple's 30% cut.
Same subscription service for web only or for Android, WP7 etc costs $5 (because you don't have to give a cut to Apple) BUT it's not the same product because this particular subscription service is blue and is called [insert name] Extra++ (or some other slight name variant) and has some extra shiny bits on it.
Hey presto, price your app however you like in any market 'cos it's not the same as the product in the App Store!
They do manually review all of these apps.
Anything Apple finds breaking their desired outcome can be rejected.
Will companies that are dependent on a revenue stream from the itunes store risk this?
I doubt it...
This won't kill Apple, but we can only hope it wakes up a few more of the I-tards out there as to how unfriendly of a company Apple is to its own customers and business partners.
If just a few brave apps start using the marketing line "works on Everything but Apple" it will start making Apple the odd one out.
Apple has cast their lot, and in my opinion its a permanently loosing one, though it will take years to really hit Job's desk. What Apple doesn't understand is you can't work on a Toll Road model when there are other free roads available. Yes some people are currently locked into apple, but HP, Google, MS and others all have competing products without the same issues, and soon (if not already) will have more GOOD apps than apple can offer.
Adobe Flash is one good example of Apple is not in the game. Sure they have competing options, but when iphone users surf to a web site and it doesn't work, all the apple BS will melt away and Apple will be left with too many users who cannot do what they want with their device.
I'd be more than happy to let Apple continue with their self destruction if they allowed users to download their apps from another marketplace. I can't see how restricting users to only using the Apple Apps store and then forcing them to pay what I see is too much money for such little work is not falling foul of trading practices laws.
If their Apps Store offers such great value that it deserves to take 30% then why would they need to block any other software loaded onto the OWNERS handsets? The old excuse of enhancing the overall "experience" of these devices by controlling what you do with it is treading a fine line with corporate greed nowadays.
I thought this kind of corporate chicanery was standard practise - become the "best" (note - I'm using that in quotes to define "sell a lot of high priced tech which can consume media of all kinds"), then when you know you've got the lions' share of that market, start monetizing as much as you can.
Everybody on here seems to be living in a hippy dreamworld - why should Apple suddenly start wearing sandals and chilling out? The iPad still has a head start - make hay while the sun shines.
Do you protest like this when petrol stations close to each other monitor each others prices and keep them maxed out? I doubt it.
BTW, although I'm an iFondleDevice user, I don't do in-app purchases as I'm Gen Xer and don't really believe in them. One day the whole frickin cloud's gonna dump torrential and we'll all be soooo screwed...
Capitalism always, but always, forces change when there is tension in the market. iOS has succeeded because there was tension between consumers who wanted easy-to-use multifunction phones and device manufacturers who were unable to provide it. Apple stepped in and resolved the tension, making a pile of money in the process.
iOS and the App Store ecosystem has worked well so far because there is little tension. Developers get apps to market without building a payment system, consumers buy them from one place, and apple takes a cut of first-sale revenue. Everyone more-or-less wins and the net effect is lots of people on iOS devices and lots of developers writing programs for them. They appear on tables in business meetings, in yummy mummy's handbags and schoolkids' satchels.
Now, with Apple demanding 30% of subscription revenue, there is new tension. It is not commercially viable for Salesforce to give up nearly a third of their subscription revenue to get an app on an iPad, just as it would be silly for a health club (suggested earlier) to do the same so that their clients can schedule training sessions from the bus. Without that key corporate SaaS app the businesswoman may be a bit less likely to buy herself an iPad to use at work and won't work as hard to make the case for her employer to kit out the sales team with iOS kit. If the policy stays the same then Apple will sell fewer iOS devices. It is inevitable.
This new tension creates an opportunity: for a competitor, in the long term and for Apple in the short term - if they listen and change. That subscription clause •will• change, but not because of pressure from enterprise SaaS, not from moaning gyms and especially not from little developers. It'll be because Apple see that they're on to a losing proposition. Many things are true about Apple, but they are not short-termists.
My guess? There will be some sort of primary service clause which removes the obligation to share subscription revenue when the majority of the value of the subscribed service is delivered outside of the iOS sphere.
I will confess now I am typing this on my iPad, however, I am that rare beast who is a disappointed iPad owner. As a developer (multi platform, multi language, Inc robotics) I find the iOS platforms too restrictive. I was planning on keeping my iPad and just using it as I do today. I do mail, browse a little on it, and the odd app like the new BBC iplayer but now I have to seriously reconsider. I was planning on moving back to Android (I still have a HTC android phone, and an early tablet - archos 5it) but was expecting to leave this for at least year. Now I think it is time to move away from iOS. Roll on Honeycomb.
The main reason for my change of mind? I do not like the restrictive practices Apple are going in for, so to follow the advice of a number of Apple apologists I shall vote with my feet. iPad going on eBay now.
I'm an iPhone 3GS owner who was thinking about upgrading to the next iPhone version later in the year. I know I'd have more freedom if I went down the Android route but for me the iPhone was a better fit. Since Apple's latest restrictive practice I'm reconsidering upgrading. My big three apps with subscriptions that I'm concerned about are Remember the Milk, Dropbox and Spotify. If Spotify disappears I'll be annoyed but if either of the other two go then I'll be off too. I've spent some time looking into Android versions of all the apps I have on my main iPhone page and I've been pleasantly surprised by how easy it's been to find alternatives. I'll be sad to give up my iPhone because ATM it works for me but if the apps I use disappear I'll have no choice but to follow.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
