Apple Is Now Dead To Me

Apple’s new App Store rules affect Amazon’s Kindle

Apple spokeswoman Trudy Muller confirmed that those rules apply not only to newspaper and magazine publishers, but also to content sellers like Amazon.com, which offers a Kindle app for the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad.

To meet Apple’s guidelines, Amazon must remove its “Shop in Kindle Store” link from its Kindle application.

Boldfaced emphasis added by me.

All today people on Twitter have been in denial that Apple’s 30% vig announcement applied to eBooks.

Well, there it is, confirmed by Apple itself.

Sony’s Reader app was rejected on this basis, Sony blew the whistle on what was coming, people disbelieved it, Apple announced its 30% vig today and people denied it would happen to eBooks.

When the hell do you wake up?

Apple has become the face-sucking vampire squid of media now!

I will not buy an iOS device. I am not Apple’s bitch and my device is not a colonial outpost of its manufacturer.

Thank you, Samsung, for providing an alternative to the iPod Touch.

Thank you, HP, for providing an alternative to the iPad.

Apple is dead to me.

Previously here:

iOS Developers: You’re Next In Apple’s Sights
Apple’s Content-Creator Recruiting Poster
What Apple Looks Like Today
Apple’s Greed Will Keep This Going
All Devices Should Access Everything. Period.
The Day Apple Became Nathan Myhrvold

70 Comments

Filed under Apple: The Company

70 responses to “Apple Is Now Dead To Me

  1. Klaatu

    I hope more people choose the light side.

  2. Jim Beam

    I would rather not use the app store for subscription based content than to use an apple knock-off device. They are all strictly worse in most ways. Apple is doing a bad thing, but your reaction is akin to that of leaving the country because the government passed a few stupid laws.

  3. Hmm … after reading the press release I realised that the only people affected by this are publishers. The consumer wins. So publishers may not like but Apple is holding true to its focus on the customer above all else.

  4. James Katt

    Goodbye. Good luck. And don’t let the door kick your behind as you leave.

  5. James

    I’m not sure what the big deal is for Amazon. Is the “buy” button that important? I already just go to Amazon’s website without the intermediate and frankly irrelevant step of starting in the Kindle app.

    As long as Apple allows the Kindle app to work with books sold on their website, I don’t see the big issue. Sony has a problem because they don’t have a website and even if they did, who would bother to go there instead of Amazon?

  6. Pete

    What makes me laugh about rants like yours is that if you buy the books on your computer and sync it with the app there is no cut for Apple.

    Why you actually care that Apple is making money or not is another issue.

    Does Amazon let you buy Sony eBooks on the Kindle at all? Does Sony let you buy Kindle books? I don’t think so.

    • mikecane

      Apparently you won’t know that the Kindle app will not sideload books. It’s built for download-only. Unless Amazon decides to change that in reaction to Apple. Which I doubt. But we’ll see.

      • Ravi

        Kindles *can* sideload DRM-free books. They’re limited in the formats they support (PDF and mobipocket), but if your book is DRM-free it should be straightforward to convert.

      • mikecane

        Kindles, but not the iOS Kindle app as far as I know.

  7. Shock Me

    Are you Walmart’s bitch because they have been so successful they now offer the lowest prices?

    If you don’t want to buy meat at Walmart support your local Butcher.

  8. filecat13

    So I guess Target is dead to you, Sears is dead to you, Borders is dead to you, Amazon is dead to you, ebay is dead to you, in fact every store, virtual or otherwise, that gets paid for selling things to you is now DEAD! Your little hissy fit cannot gloss over the hypocrisy of your blog and your world outlook.

    I suppose once you buy a cup of soda at McDonald’s, you take it back every time you go and insist they fill it for free. After all, didn’t they get a cut of the first drink you bought? You’ve got the cup now, so they should keep filling it.

    Or better yet, take your cup down to the Pepsi plant and ask them to fill it for free. See how that works out.

    • Speaking as an avid fan of Apple products, and an iPad user, you Apple Fanboys are an unbelievable lot.

      This is akin to Sony demanding that Comcast pay them 30% of your cable bill because you watch cable on a Sony TV.

      Get this: Apple does not produce the content. Apple does not store the content. Apple does not filter the content. Apple does not provide the bandwidth for the content. Apple does not in any way, shape, or form provide or facilitate the production or distribution of the content, and yet they still demand that they be paid for it? And you think this is fair? What planet are you living on?

      • mikecane

        Thank you for saying that!

      • Darwin

        Yes they do. They facilitate purchasing and make it more likely people will buy because it is easier. This is really obvious.

      • Ravi

        You really think Apple does *anything* to make it more likely that a user of the Kindle app will buy a Kindle book? Do you really think Amazon (holder of the one-click patent) really needs Apple’s help to facilitate a purchase? Really?

      • EB

        Apple does the billing. Apple brings in the customer. Apple provides the impulse buy. Apple provides the distribution for the app and the bandwidth to download the app.
        When Publisher’s Clearing House delivers a subscriber to a magazine, and takes 85%+ of the money from the publisher, do they pay for the postage of the magazine? The content? Do they shape it? Do they house the stacks of magazines? How DARE they demand 85%+ of the cost of the subscription. Why, that is so un-American.
        Get over yourselves. I am an no Apple apologist, and I may not like it, but I certainly don’t see it as unfair or different than what anyone else does in publishing.

      • JS

        Oops, manufactured outrage. Amazon charges its marketplace sellers up 25% (+ a variable closing fee + a fixed closing fee) for all items they sell. And what about pricing?

        “By our General Pricing rule, you must always ensure that the item price and total price of an item you list on Amazon.com are at or below the item price and total price at which you offer and/or sell the item via any other online sales channel.”

        So Amazon dictates pricing on items that its sellers advertise in its online marketplace. Where’s the outrage over that?

      • I’m sorry but you’re an idiot — and more likely you’ve never run or ever owned your own business because you clearly no jack-s**t about how to run a private sector, for profit business. Get a clue!

      • mikecane

        And look at you, with your fake email address and URL that goes to HostGator. Yes, everyone kneels before your expertise. I’d hate to be YOUR customer. If you ever have them. Which I doubt you ever will.

  9. maff

    Ive never understood this massive overreaction to any announcement about apple terms and conditions. Its not like this isn’t typical apple commercials. it surprises me that people are surprised. And apple are dead to you, wow, i feel sorry for you if this is the reason. I guess it helps to look at both sides here. As a supplier the current state with iOS is awesome, i can provide a free app and hit literally 10s of millions of customers, Someone else distributes my app and someone elses device hosts my content, all i need to do is accept payment and provide a way of accessing it and hey presto i can make megabucks.. On the other side, i create a device eco-system that is arguably the most popular in the world allowing anyone to create an app and deploy it to millions of customers but i have a problem, im basically providing a HUGE sales channel for free to many large corporates and i think its only fair that they pay a percentage towards the provision of a system that provides instant access to tens of millions of customers… hmm, i can see both sides here. cant we just draw a parallel with the world of broadcast here ? someone has to pay for delivery…

    • Ravi

      I think the reactions to Apple’s various changes of their terms and conditions are driven by a fundamental misconception. People think they own their iPhones and iPads (rather than having an unusual, perpetual, transferable license under terms that Apple can revise at any time). Whenever Apple changes those terms, people are reminded that they don’t actually own their devices and the cognitive dissonance drives their reactions.

    • Jubei

      According to TUAW

      “Apple’s subscription model is boon to consumers, bad for publishers”

      • mikecane

        No, it is not. Apple has been the worst thing to consumers who read. They brought in the Agency Model with his a Cartel of 5 of the 6 big publishers who now fix prices instead of letting the stores do it. Why you see many eBooks above $9.99 now. Despite the fact most eBooks sell for far less.

      • Darwin

        Seriously Mike, pay attention. It is well known that Amazon has underpriced eBooks as a competitive tactic for the short term. This has undermined publishers and authors.

  10. D-

    “Our philosophy is simple—when Apple brings a new subscriber to the app, Apple earns a 30 percent share; when the publisher brings an existing or new subscriber to the app, the publisher keeps 100 percent and Apple earns nothing,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “All we require is that, if a publisher is making a subscription offer outside of the app, the same (or better) offer be made inside the app, so that customers can easily subscribe with one-click right in the app. We believe that this innovative subscription service will provide publishers with a brand new opportunity to expand digital access to their content onto the iPad, iPod touch and iPhone, delighting both new and existing subscribers.”

    Mike…. It’s called Capitalism..It’s the price they pay to get access to 160 million credit cards.

  11. Mike

    Go with a dead in the water platform (WebOS) and enjoy fragmentation land with your Android device.

  12. Blad_Rnr

    Tell us what you really think. :-)

    Mike, I have been following your blogs for many years now. I usually agree with you, but not this time. Apple is a business. Doesn’t matter how much money they have in the bank. Doesn’t matter how much they are worth. Business is business. Why can’t you understand that? How we forget that Apple was once on the ropes back in the mid-’90s. That will never happen again as long as Steve is in charge and it only makes sense that if you want to live in the building with the high-rise view, you have to pay rent. Let’s see what the market does. They either embrace it, reject it, or somewhere in between.

    You can’t have your cake and eat it to. Besides, Apple is not dead to you. We all know you’re a Mac user. ;-)

    • mikecane

      Sorry, but I’m not. I’ve been stuck on Windows since my LC III couldn’t be updated to System 7 (I waited too long, like years long, and 7 was no longer available or easy to install). I was looking forward to augmenting Windows with a return to Mac. Not anymore.

  13. pjs_boston

    When Apple sells its computers through Best Buy, Best Buy pays wholesale and charges retail. Why shouldn’t the App store work the same way? Allowing competitors to give away free apps for the purpose of selling content outside of the Apple ecosystem is bad business for Apple. As an Apple shareholder, I prefer Apple to make money rather than offer charity to its competitors. Anyone who wants to piggyback on the Apple ecosystem should pay Apple the retailer’s cut.

    • Peter

      The problem is, Apple makes it a requirement to use their ecosystem.

      If I write an App and want to give it away, can I just put it on my website? Nope. I have to go through the App Store. Now Apple complains about having to host free apps? Well, it’s your own damn fault!

      Frankly, if I were Amazon and Netflix, I’d tell Apple to stick it where the sun don’t shine. Amazon has 400,000 e-books. Apple has 40,000. Amazon is making good money off their e-books outside of Apple. Same with Netflix. Hey, you won’t miss them, right?

      There’s an old saying, “Software Sells Systems.” I’d say that the newer rule is that content sells systems. When I can use Netflix to rent a movie on my computer, on my TV, on my Android/Windows Phone 7/WebOS phone and tablet, Apple’s gonna be looking pretty damn lonely with their iPads.

  14. John

    Apple didn’t say you can’t have an outside store. You do have to offer a way to purchase through Apple.

    I’m mixed on this. If you buy a laptop the maker doesn’t get a cut of what you buy. On the other hand, if you have a destination that people go to then you charge rent. People go to a bookshop for content and coffee. Would Borders allow Amazon to setup a terminal in their store to sell books without getting a cut? Would Mall of the America’s let you set up a stall in the aisle selling something without paying rent?

    I can see both sides of the argument.

    • Will

      If you own your iPad, who is Apple to limit how other companies interact with you? The way I see it, if I want to let Amazon or Kobo set up a shop on my iPad – let them!

      Once an application is on your iPad, Apple has no role in your interaction with that app. If i want to go to Amazon’s website and buy books then use them in that app, why can Apple force Amazon to offer those for sale in the app itself?

      • mikecane

        Yes. But I think the next step will be to prevent Kindle and other apps from opening things purchased through Safari. People will be forced to sideload books from their desktops while only iBooks has in-app downloading and immediate reading capability.

      • JS

        Want to put money down on that?

      • Darwin

        You think that why? Did it come to you in a dream?

      • Darwin

        Did you read what was said? Vendors have to provide in app purchase but they can also provide a secondary form of purchase.

      • Ravi

        Haven’t you figured it out by now? Unless you’ve been jailbreaking, you *don’t* own your iPhone or your iPad. You just have this strange, perpetual, transferable lease from Apple.

  15. Anon

    Thanks for showing us people still whine when they are beat.

  16. Mikle, one important point that most seem to be missing is that Apple is mostly on the consumer’s side on this one.

    As a consumer I don’t want to have to be forced outside of my ebook or newspaper app to have to navigate through some byzantine website and have to re-enter all my financial details hoping it isn’t a phishing scam just to buy new books or editions or other content. I want to always have a consistent option of buying the content from within the app with a single click.

    THIS is what has made the App Store and the iTunes Music and Media stores such a mega-hit with consumers and such an income generator for developers and content providers.

    Apple is not saying that should be the only way, but they are saying it should always be an option for users.

    Consumers want everything to be an easy one-click purchase option in iOS as it is with music, movies, TV shows, apps and other in-app purchases.

    What these publishers don’t seem to understand is the enormous increase in sales that has been demonstrated comes from fitting into Apple’s ecosystem. Publishers selfishly want it all for themselves, but are actually shooting themselves in the foot.

    There are 30 million app downloads a day from the iOS App Store with many apps such as games, GPS and media apps pushing up close to a gigabyte or more in size. And that is just new app purchases – Apple doesn’t report the enormous additional number of app updates they also support for free forever after the initial purchase.

    Do you seriously think that it doesn’t cost anything in bandwidth usage, hosting & server costs and support for such a huge volume of data and transactions, not to mention the large number of credit card processing fees (on $1 billion worth of purchases and an additional $1 billion in in-app purchases last year alone ) etc. With the vast majority of apps downloaded being free, we’re not talking trivial back-end costs here.

    From a developer or content producer’s perspective, they’ve never had it so good. Before the App Store came along discovery was a bitch – the majority of users never found their websites and other app stores ripped off developers to the tune of 50-70% commissions – Apple’s 30% was a revelation and a breath of fresh air in a moribund industry. With a guaranteed audience of 160 million credit card accounts and customers more than happy to make billions of one-click purchases of everything from media, to apps, to ebooks etc, both small and large developers have never brought in such huge amounts of income so easily or quickly.

    The music industry was the same – there were industry-owned websites for the purchase of digital music tracks and they were all an utter failure. Even now, Amazon with DRM-free music (a year before the Music Cartels allowed Apple to go DRM-free) at cheaper prices has still only managed 13% to Apple’s 65% share. One-click ease of use works.

    The iOS App Store has 84% market share and 50 times the income for developers as compared to the Android Market. Exposure on this Godzilla of a store is worth serious cash. Publishers make far less on content sold through regular book stores and newsagents and yet many are complaining about Apple charging 30% to provide so much value. That’s pretty sad.

    Apple is more than happy for devs and content providers to enable users to pay for content outside the store and make 100% of the profit (minus their own hosting, advertising costs and e-commerce infrastructure and charges and discovery issues), but Apple just asks that publishers also give customers the option to pay for that content with a simple one-click in-app purchase and thus maintain the developer-income-generating ecosystem that has proven so successful for consumers, devs, music and media companies the world over.

    Choice is good for crying out loud – let users pay for their content in whatever way they want (in-app and from vendor’s websites or elsewhere) and everyone wins and Apple makes a bit on the side to cover their costs. And they are only covering their costs – for all the volume in sales, App Store and iTunes Store income for Apple is only a blip on their SEC filing.

    -Mart

    • mikecane

      Yes, I understand the ease of use and security factors. But Apple did not create the content, does not host the content, does not pay for the bandwidth, did not gamble to create those other businesses, etc. It’s basically acting as a transactional intermediary like Visa or MasterCard. The issue would be brought home if those cards tacked a 30% vig onto every purchase someone made. And why not? As Apple apologists would state, “It’s THEIR card!”

      • Darwin

        You somehow fail to understand that Apple is also bringing them new customers and enabling easier ways to purchase which means more purchases.

      • EB

        As I said in another response here, please justify publishers clearing house. magazines.com. Those door to door magazine salespeople. What percentage do you think THEY take? Do they house the magazines? Do they ship the magazines? Why, all they are is a “transactional intermediary”.
        http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/Publishers-Clearing-House-Company-History.html
        “PCH’s share of the subscription price ranged from 74 to 90 percent. These subscriptions were being offered at deep discounts, and PCH insisted on a magazine’s lowest advertised price. Publishers, therefore, collected little money directly, but the increase in circulation allowed them to charge advertisers more money.”
        THAT is how it works. Don’t blame Apple for taking a smidgen of that amount.

        When Apple starts doing NFC payments, then you can start comparing it to credit cards and to PayPal. eBay charges 10%, and they don’t ship anything. PayPal charges up to 5%. Apple still has Credit Card charges — I’m sure they negotiated something really good, but it certainly is not free.

        When this whole debate and discussion started, when I woke up this morning, I was actually on your side. But the more I have researched, looked into it, and actually thought about it, instead of having the strong gut reaction you have had, I realized that what Apple is doing is actually quite proper, and indeed, is quite a reasonable price (in terms of magazine subscriptions).

        As far as subscriptions to Pandora/Netflix — that I don’t know, that does not seem right. Yet it is not really clear yet what it means to them. Does this mean the Netflix DVD subscription I purchased, that came with free streaming, require Netflix to add a subscribe option within their app, one that never existed? I don’t really know. How did I subscribe to Netflix? Via an offer my Frequent Flyer miles gave me for 2,500 free miles. I see no obstacle preventing them form continuing to do things like that. I ignored the thrice monthly letters I had beeb getting from Netflix to sign up, for over 2 years – how much do you think it cost Netflix to send me 3 cards a month for over 2 years? How much do you think they had to pay my Frequent Flyer plan to get them to give me 2,500 free miles?

        In terms of Amazon Kindle and Barns and Noble Nook and Sony eReaders – well, I don’t see them with competitor stores on their devices.

        All I am saying is it is not as clear cut as you suggest, and while you can abandon and go elsewhere, I don’t see anyone else offering their clients anything much better at better terms.

      • maff

        this is not entirely ingenuous. Apple do pay for bandwidth, supplying all those free apps to millions of devices and why should they care is someone gambled or not on creating a business, iOS is more than a platform to most of these people, its a channel and i think you have to think in those terms, Apple provide a channel to millions of customers and make it extremely easy to provide those users with content whether hosted by them or not. Apple gambled creating a phone and device eco system that underlies this channel so as the providers of this sales channel why shouldn’t they charge, why should everyone else make money on their channel and not them ?

      • RWagner

        The credit card companies DO charge high rates for those who do NOT pay fully when they get their statements. That is where the CC companies get a good chunk of their income from.

        EVERY ***Successful*** company knows that profit is the primary factor in keeping the company successful. Growing the company to multiply those profits is what can increase or decrease those profits as the costs to grow can be substantial. Apple chases profits, not marketshare, where other tech companies seem to chase marketshare to try to become the “next Microsoft” monopoly.

        To me, the App Store is a mall. Look up the term triple net and see what it means. Malls get a base rent, get a utilities charge, get a contribution for common services such as parking lot maintenance, security, promotions, etc. AND the mall takes a percentage of ALL sales through the store.

        Go look at a franchise agreement for almost every franchised company. You will find that the company takes a percentage of ALL sales, no matter whether the franchisee made a profit or not.

        Wal-Mart has such a Hugh presence that Wal-Mart dictates to the supplier what kind of deal Wal-Mart will accept, take it or leave it. And Wal-Mart schedules the supplier deliveries and if the supplier misses the loading dock time, there is a penalty charged to the supplier.

        Get real Mike. Your whining will change nothing. You saying Apple is dead to you will change nothing. Apple will continue and those who do not want to be part of Apple’s ecosystem can leave, like NBC-Universal left iTunes way back when to do their own store. Oh right, a year later, NBC was back because they found out they knew how to create content but didn’t know how to sell it.

        Boycotts CAN work, BUT only if you can get enough people involved to exert enough pressure for long enough. I think there are more fans of Apple than you, the content providers and the Apple haters out there will be able to overcome.

      • JS

        Who handles the transaction when a consumer hits subscribe?

        Another point of view a bit more rational than yours:

        http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2011/02/15/does-apple-deserve-a-30-cut-of-itunes-in-app-subscriptions/

  17. kman

    Why should we care? Who wants to buy on a tiny screen anyway? I buy on my full-size computer or laptop, and read on my Kindle (actual Kindle, not Kindle app). My iPhone Kindle app is a last-resort thing. And I can very easily browse to Amazon myself on the iPhone via Safari, if I wanted to buy a book without giving Apple a cut of the money. Or use Amazon’s separate app. The ONLY thing this affects if buying books from within the Kindle app. That would be huge… IF there were no other perfectly viable options.

    This is Amazon’s problem more than ours.

  18. Ronin36

    Great. Apple’s is dead to you. No one is forcing you to buy their products. If you don’t like their stuff, just don’t buy any of it. Apple won’t miss you and you won’t miss them. Everyone’s happy.

    And please, please put an end to your blog. It’s all about Apple, directly or indirectly, so now you can end it.

  19. I think people are fully understanding the situation. A 30% revenue cut for Apple, is excessive as they are simply market makers. While a buy feature in the app is a win for users as far as accessibility is concerned, the cost must be borne by us as well. 30% means that prices must rise significantly.

    Visa/MC is at 2.5% for market making (transactions). Apple was 10x+ that. Think about that.

    I expect there will be significant law suits following this. The next four months will be interesting – to say the least.

  20. VSM

    Stop the madness Mike!

    Mike, say you want to open a retail shoe store. You’re going to sell Nike, Reebok and Adidas shoes in your store. Are you going to let Nike, Reebok and Adidas keep ALL the money you collect from selling their shoes in your store?…. Or are you going to take a cut for putting their shoes on sale in the store you’ve created? I think we all know the answer to this question.

    Imagine this…. tucked inside those shoes from NIke, Reebok and Adidas (on YOUR shelves) are little stickers telling people shopping in your store to go to Nike’s, Reebok’s and Adidas’ websites to get better deals than they can get in your store. Would you leave those shoes on your shelves? We all know the answer to this question as well.

    You and everybody else are ranting about Apple doing what ALL retailers do… taking a cut of goods sold in their store. Get real!!!

    There is something called volition….it’s ‘free will’…. To make your own choices about how and where you spend your money. If you don’t like the way Apple does business, you get to spend your money elsewhere!

    Your blog entries have not been real compelling lately because your arguments are specious. You’ll have to do better than this.

  21. NotTellinYou

    Unbelievable how people that don’t have a clue how this works spewing the same stuff.

    So anyone want to guess what Publisher’s Clearing House got for the subscriptions they brought in? Anyone?

    Their cut of a subscription ranged from 74 to 90 percent!!!!!!!!

    Please…nothing to see here!

    • Ravi

      Perhaps, but Publisher’s Clearing House only gets a cut of the first subscription, not all the renewals. Apple wants a cut across the entire subscription lifetime.

  22. AdamC

    Wow riding your high horse again, do Apple care whether you use any iOS product.

    Oh I forgot you are a publisher.

  23. Oh I hope this does not mean the end of Kindle for the iPad. That was one of the biggest reason I purchased an iPad: to read my Amazon ebooks.

    • Ravi

      Currently the rumor is that Amazon is planning to replace Kindle for iPhone and Kindle for iPad with Kindle for Web. Good enough? I’d say no, but YMMV.

  24. Shock Me

    Mike,

    With respect to Visa and Master Card, the reason the transaction cost to the retailer is low is because those buying on credit and paying interest subsidize the operation of the business.

    Apple provides transaction services, stores the apps for downloads, maintains installation records, and pays for the bandwidth of traffic coming to Apple just as we pay for traffic headed to our homes. For publishers and providers, the benefit is they DON NOT have to finance and maintain a transaction system, design a website or worry about updates.

    A physical store pays for electricity, shelving,property taxes, and employee wages. If I buy a single issue of a magazine at such a store, I pay cover price. If I pay for a paper subscription I get a discount because they can better plan ahead and can tell their advertisers their circulation numbers.

    I welcome the convenience of purchases via my iOS devices. I even subscribed in-app to the more general interst newszine Daily because NEWSCORP took the time to curate the information. It is my first stop every morning or evening. Only then do I got to my RSS feeds and blog trackers, or an app like Flipboard or Pulse where the quality of the writing is variable and we can find rants like yours.

    The only change I would make to the Apple policy is the ability to give discounts and promotions for both the content owner’s website as well as the app store.

    But hey you have plenty of non-Apple options. Honeycomb is looking interesting and will doubtless have a strong and growing app store offering. I have no need for it, but you could consider WebOS, RIM, or even Microsoft and Nokia when they get around to it.

    Then you can stop worrying about how much companies you do no business with make.

    • mikecane

      >>>For publishers and providers, the benefit is they DON NOT have to finance and maintain a transaction system, design a website or worry about updates.

      Factually wrong. Amazon will not be giving over all their eBooks to Apple to host. Amazon will continue to maintain its Kindle servers. This 30% cut is a move to wipe out competition by either robbing such businesses of their profit margin, forcing them to up their prices to everyone by 30% (everyone because offers outside the in-app process must have the same price), or leaving iOS altogether for purchasing (I expect eBooks to be crippled to reading-only with sideloading of eBooks). There is no justification for a 30% cut when Apple is acting only as a transactional intermediary.

  25. Morten

    Don’t be a hater, just don’t buy it. I just want the best products, and that is still apple.

  26. Brett

    That’s so unfair.

    I’m going to immediately sell all my Apple devices and buy some piece of crap Android, designed by geeks for geeks, that will be obsolete in two months. But hey, I’m fighting The Man.

    Then with my newly found freedom, I will create dozens of separate accounts for all of my subscriptions, and enter my contact and payment info for each. For the rest of my life, it will be so much fun to keep all of these accounts updated with my latest email addresses and credit card info.

    • mikecane

      See, there’s the mistake you make: Thinking Android is the only alternative. Right now, yes. But I’ll be buying a webOS HP TouchPad.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s