I find this absolutely insane. Apple is acting as a payment processor that is charging 30%. I thoroughly enjoy Apple's product, but taking 30 percent of in-app purchases seems crazy.
And you should realize that things like the Kindle app provide added value to the iOS devices that otherwise wouldn't exist. It's a two way street, and it is not just magical handwaving that lets Apple's actions become justified.
ha! If that were the case then AMZN would take their business somewhere else. Make the app only for android and WP7. Would they do it? Of course they won't. It's a massive platform that nobody can ignore and if you want to make some money on it better pay the piper.
You forget that the kindle isn't an app, it's a device, and the convenience of the kindle on alternate platforms is just that. It's still simply added value to those platforms which get the app. This won't hurt Amazon -- they'll pull their app and Apple will lose some value on their platform.
Realistically, it has cost Amazon nothing to support the iOS platform other than a few weeks of dev time to build the app and deploy it to the store. Complying with these ridiculous demands would cause a zero cost platform to suddenly have a very noticeable cost.
So did the shopping mall owners for their tenants but I have never seen such a mall charges you 30% commission for the privilege and convenience (parking, indoors, cleanliness, food court etc) of buying stuff there.
Why do people argue this point? It's not insane because people have to do what Apple wants, no one except for a few entitled folks are arguing this. They can do what they please.
It's insane because Apple have been suckered by their own advertising. Yes, the iPad is one of a kind at the moment, but the android tablet is right around the corner. And that android tablet will be running Kindle and Nook apps.
While the payment platform and app store helps create the ecosystem for apps to exist, the iPad owes it's current success to the the apps people sell for it, not to the payment platform or the app store. The app store and the UI library is a precondition, but it is not sufficient -- if no one made apps for it, no one would buy an iPad.
An iPad without Kindle is slightly worse than a sh*tty microsoft win7 tablet IMO. iBooks is currently not very successful as an alternative. because unlike iTunes, Apple has established competitors who execute very well in this space.
If they try to play hardball with Amazon, Google Android tablets will then just wipe the floor with Apple... same way microsoft did in the 90's. More likely, Amazon is playing hardball with Apple... Maybe Apple will make an "exception" using some tricky accounting to get a part of that 30% back to Amazon.
> iBooks is currently not very successful as an alternative. because unlike iTunes, Apple has established competitors who execute very well in this space.
Furthermore, Apple is demonstrating a very real tendency to retroactively fuck people over. I'd be pretty worried about my book collection if it were in Apple's hands and I stopped paying Caesar.
> * An iPad without Kindle is slightly worse than a shtty microsoft win7 tablet IMO.
Assuming, of course, that the only thing people do with their iPads is read.
(Personally, I can't make myself read for very long on an iPad anyway. I do fine on Kindle DX and Sony Reader. I would do best on a folding two screen eInk device the size of the tall Sony Reader, that opened to reveal two facing pages.)
It's not the only thing, but I'd argue it's a common use. I mean part of the selling point for the iPad was using the internet, which is essentially reading most of the time.
I wonder if it's going to extend to content as well. If Amazon is forced to sell books directly through the Kindle app, will Apple get veto power over the books they sell? Will they be able to ban an "Android for Dummies" book?
ain't gonna happen. AAPL is the biggest and best platform out there when it comes to mobile devices. I don't see anything wrong in they trying to make money out of it.
Well, this invalidates what I thought Amazon should do: remove all purchasing of books from the Kindle app and make it only able to download and read books bought from the website (which it would not link to).
Apple's now saying, if you sell something somewhere else that can be shown in an iOS app, you need to also sell it through Apple for the same price.
I guess when Amazon pulls the iOS app, I can break the DRM on the books I buy from them and read them on Stanza.
Some alternatives to yanking the app would be to adhere to the rule but make it laborious and sufficiently buried beneath menu layers that it becomes too difficult to use versus a link that breaks out to the web browser. Or begin charging on the AppStore for the Kindle app at a price point they believe will compensate for the losses.
I didn't think of that but it's a good idea: charge $5 for the app (or whatever). People who have already bought it don't lose anything, people who do buy the app don't cost Amazon any money.
Or maybe Amazon's margin is over 30% and they just won't care.
Personally my bet is on an HTML5 kindle reader webapp. Only disadvantage is that you'd need a web connection, which you don't always have on iPad and iPod touch.
Safari on iOS does client-side storage, you could let someone read a stored book offline. It would make pirating them a little easier though. Not much easier because it's not exactly hard now, Calibre has a plugin that imports them and breaks the DRM.
Heh, we could buy books from Amazon, de-DRM them, and read them in iBooks. It's probably the best reader software for the iPad other than Kindle.
Amazon's margin is exactly 30% for out of print ebooks they buy directly from the author. For others it varies depending on their deal with the publisher.
> I guess when Amazon pulls the iOS app, I can break the DRM on the books I buy from them and read them on Stanza.
Nobody can blame Amazon from pulling the iOS app. I'd be shocked if they don't. Apple is literally requesting all of Amazon's margins. I guess you can do whatever your ethics permit, but my takeaway is that perhaps you shouldn't be buying devices from such tyrannical manufacturers.
Actually, I'd argue it's absurdly competitive. How would you maximize the value of your 160 million IOS Device platform?
Don't get me wrong - this pisses me off, as approximately 50-75% of my usage of the iPad is reading content like the WSJ, NYT, and, especially, my Kindle Books.
For the very first time, today, I'm actually considering purchasing an Android Tablet for my 2011 Tablet Upgrade - a thought that would have never, ever, entered my mind prior to this behavior of Apples.
With that said - I understand what they are trying to do - but, I think they are being short sighted. This action is going to diminish the value of the platform, and start driving people like me over to Android, where we're pretty certain we'll find a more friendly home.
Oh well - I've loved my iPad for the last year like no other purchase - I've bought a little over $1500 worth of content (TV Shows, Apps, Books) according to my iTunes Bill, and, I expect I'll be able to read and download books with my existing Kindle App for the forseeable future - but, I'm guessing new versions of the iPad will have an IOS that is incompatible with the existing Kindle App in some way, and I'll eventually have to migrate off platform.
Here's hoping Apple comes to their senses and manages to walk this idiotic decision back.
"That link [Shop in Kindle Store Link], which opens the iOS browser and displays Amazon's Web-based e-bookstore, is currently the easiest way for Kindle app users to purchase new books."
Does anyone know or ever heard any metrics about what percentage of users use that link to purchase content? On a regular Kindle (the reader, not the app), even though I have the 3G Kindle, I never shop from it, choosing to use a desktop browser instead (easier, prettier, etc). Do users of the Kindle app do the same, i.e. just shop on their laptops and use the Kindle app to only read the books?
What about incumbent subscription services? For example, Hulu requires you to be paying $8/mo to view their shows on an iPhone or iPad. Since a subscription is required, MUST they be required to Apple's subscription service, or can they just not do anything until you sign up elsewhere?
I have to say that this article is horribly unclear.
It says that if you link to selling digital add-ons outside of the app, you have to sell them in the app. Then it goes on to say that one could "side-step" the requirement by not having a "buy" link at all in the app, but still selling the add-ons elsewhere. Fair enough... But then it says Apple still requires you to have a buy link in the app if you sell any add-ons/subscriptions externally whether the app has a link to them or not.
Here's how Amazon, Sony, B&N, etc., can get around this.
1. They need to get together and agree on a common eBook/DRM format. (I'm assuming the copyright owners of most books won't let them drop DRM).
2. They need to publish the specs so that third parties can implement this, and they need to make sure third parties can license the DRM.
3. Amazon, B&N, etc., then pull their apps from the Apple App Store.
4. People who want to read eBooks from Amazon, B&N, etc., use a third party reading app.
The maker of the third party reading app does not sell content, so does not run afoul of Apple's new rules.
Note the nice side effect that this would have. We'd start to get a competitive market for eBook reader software, as with Amazon, B&N, etc., using a common format and DRM scheme, readers would no longer be tied to one provider.
35 comments
[ 5.5 ms ] story [ 128 ms ] threadRealistically, it has cost Amazon nothing to support the iOS platform other than a few weeks of dev time to build the app and deploy it to the store. Complying with these ridiculous demands would cause a zero cost platform to suddenly have a very noticeable cost.
It's insane because Apple have been suckered by their own advertising. Yes, the iPad is one of a kind at the moment, but the android tablet is right around the corner. And that android tablet will be running Kindle and Nook apps.
While the payment platform and app store helps create the ecosystem for apps to exist, the iPad owes it's current success to the the apps people sell for it, not to the payment platform or the app store. The app store and the UI library is a precondition, but it is not sufficient -- if no one made apps for it, no one would buy an iPad.
An iPad without Kindle is slightly worse than a sh*tty microsoft win7 tablet IMO. iBooks is currently not very successful as an alternative. because unlike iTunes, Apple has established competitors who execute very well in this space.
If they try to play hardball with Amazon, Google Android tablets will then just wipe the floor with Apple... same way microsoft did in the 90's. More likely, Amazon is playing hardball with Apple... Maybe Apple will make an "exception" using some tricky accounting to get a part of that 30% back to Amazon.
Furthermore, Apple is demonstrating a very real tendency to retroactively fuck people over. I'd be pretty worried about my book collection if it were in Apple's hands and I stopped paying Caesar.
Assuming, of course, that the only thing people do with their iPads is read.
(Personally, I can't make myself read for very long on an iPad anyway. I do fine on Kindle DX and Sony Reader. I would do best on a folding two screen eInk device the size of the tall Sony Reader, that opened to reveal two facing pages.)
Apple's now saying, if you sell something somewhere else that can be shown in an iOS app, you need to also sell it through Apple for the same price.
I guess when Amazon pulls the iOS app, I can break the DRM on the books I buy from them and read them on Stanza.
Or maybe Amazon's margin is over 30% and they just won't care.
Personally my bet is on an HTML5 kindle reader webapp. Only disadvantage is that you'd need a web connection, which you don't always have on iPad and iPod touch.
Heh, we could buy books from Amazon, de-DRM them, and read them in iBooks. It's probably the best reader software for the iPad other than Kindle.
Nobody can blame Amazon from pulling the iOS app. I'd be shocked if they don't. Apple is literally requesting all of Amazon's margins. I guess you can do whatever your ethics permit, but my takeaway is that perhaps you shouldn't be buying devices from such tyrannical manufacturers.
The Honeycomb tablets cannot come soon enough...
This is absurdly anti-competitive.
Don't get me wrong - this pisses me off, as approximately 50-75% of my usage of the iPad is reading content like the WSJ, NYT, and, especially, my Kindle Books.
For the very first time, today, I'm actually considering purchasing an Android Tablet for my 2011 Tablet Upgrade - a thought that would have never, ever, entered my mind prior to this behavior of Apples.
With that said - I understand what they are trying to do - but, I think they are being short sighted. This action is going to diminish the value of the platform, and start driving people like me over to Android, where we're pretty certain we'll find a more friendly home.
Oh well - I've loved my iPad for the last year like no other purchase - I've bought a little over $1500 worth of content (TV Shows, Apps, Books) according to my iTunes Bill, and, I expect I'll be able to read and download books with my existing Kindle App for the forseeable future - but, I'm guessing new versions of the iPad will have an IOS that is incompatible with the existing Kindle App in some way, and I'll eventually have to migrate off platform.
Here's hoping Apple comes to their senses and manages to walk this idiotic decision back.
Does anyone know or ever heard any metrics about what percentage of users use that link to purchase content? On a regular Kindle (the reader, not the app), even though I have the 3G Kindle, I never shop from it, choosing to use a desktop browser instead (easier, prettier, etc). Do users of the Kindle app do the same, i.e. just shop on their laptops and use the Kindle app to only read the books?
On the bright side, once my Nano dies, I'll finally be able to drop iTunes for good!
http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/hearings/ip/chapter_5.htm#...
It says that if you link to selling digital add-ons outside of the app, you have to sell them in the app. Then it goes on to say that one could "side-step" the requirement by not having a "buy" link at all in the app, but still selling the add-ons elsewhere. Fair enough... But then it says Apple still requires you to have a buy link in the app if you sell any add-ons/subscriptions externally whether the app has a link to them or not.
So, which is it?
1. They need to get together and agree on a common eBook/DRM format. (I'm assuming the copyright owners of most books won't let them drop DRM).
2. They need to publish the specs so that third parties can implement this, and they need to make sure third parties can license the DRM.
3. Amazon, B&N, etc., then pull their apps from the Apple App Store.
4. People who want to read eBooks from Amazon, B&N, etc., use a third party reading app.
The maker of the third party reading app does not sell content, so does not run afoul of Apple's new rules.
Note the nice side effect that this would have. We'd start to get a competitive market for eBook reader software, as with Amazon, B&N, etc., using a common format and DRM scheme, readers would no longer be tied to one provider.