Tweet
They never learn.
Android just surpassed iPhone in marketshare, not only worldwide but in the US as well. And Android is growing FAR faster than iPhone.
So what does Apple do? Keep setting up rules to piss off developers and publishers, and instituting an Apple Tax on subscription content for iOS devices.
Now I wonder which platform publishers will end up preferring? Which one will they push users to more, Android (0% tax) or iOS (30% tax)? Accordingly, which one will they put most of their effort and marketing in?
Apple's business stupidity never ceases to amaze. They never know what to do with a good thing.
Android just surpassed iPhone in marketshare, not only worldwide but in the US as well. And Android is growing FAR faster than iPhone.
So what does Apple do? Keep setting up rules to piss off developers and publishers, and instituting an Apple Tax on subscription content for iOS devices.
Apple: if we get you subscribers, we deserve a cut
By Jacqui Cheng | Last updated about 2 hours ago
It has been almost two weeks since The Daily made its debut on the iPad, but Apple has finally announced its in-app subscription terms for other offerings in the App Store. The system is open to all publishers of content-based apps—music, newspapers, video, and magazines, but not insurance policies. Anyone who sells subscription-based content outside the App Store must also use Apple's system, giving Apple a 30 percent cut. Hello in-app Netflix subscriptions?
"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," CEO Steve Jobs said in a statement. "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."
Apple's announcement went on to emphasize that publishers are not limited to using the App Store for subscriptions; they're allowed to use their own websites to sell subs. They can even offer free access via their apps to existing out-of-app subscribers (so, if you subscribe to a magazine in print form and that magazine lets you get iPad subscriptions for free as part of your agreement, that's still allowed). However, companies cannot offer those types of subscriptions as the only options within their iOS apps—just like Apple's newly enforced rule with e-books, publishers must go all-in with Apple's subscriptions and their own, or they can't be on the App Store.
Oh, and the subscriptions offered within iOS apps must be the same price or less as the company's other offerings, and the apps can no longer link to an outside store where users can purchase content.
The official terms are hardly surprising, given Apple's recent stance on content sales outside of the App Store. The company rejected the Sony Reader app for giving users access to content outside of the App Store (and apparently not offering that same content for purchase in-app), leaving e-book aficionados wondering what will happen to their other favorite e-book apps (such as the Kindle app or Barnes & Noble app) on iOS devices. That's still up in the air, but Apple's terms for publishers offering newspaper, magazine, music, or video subscriptions is very clear: if Apple helps bring in customers, then Apple gets to take a cut of content sales.
By Jacqui Cheng | Last updated about 2 hours ago
It has been almost two weeks since The Daily made its debut on the iPad, but Apple has finally announced its in-app subscription terms for other offerings in the App Store. The system is open to all publishers of content-based apps—music, newspapers, video, and magazines, but not insurance policies. Anyone who sells subscription-based content outside the App Store must also use Apple's system, giving Apple a 30 percent cut. Hello in-app Netflix subscriptions?
"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," CEO Steve Jobs said in a statement. "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."
Apple's announcement went on to emphasize that publishers are not limited to using the App Store for subscriptions; they're allowed to use their own websites to sell subs. They can even offer free access via their apps to existing out-of-app subscribers (so, if you subscribe to a magazine in print form and that magazine lets you get iPad subscriptions for free as part of your agreement, that's still allowed). However, companies cannot offer those types of subscriptions as the only options within their iOS apps—just like Apple's newly enforced rule with e-books, publishers must go all-in with Apple's subscriptions and their own, or they can't be on the App Store.
Oh, and the subscriptions offered within iOS apps must be the same price or less as the company's other offerings, and the apps can no longer link to an outside store where users can purchase content.
The official terms are hardly surprising, given Apple's recent stance on content sales outside of the App Store. The company rejected the Sony Reader app for giving users access to content outside of the App Store (and apparently not offering that same content for purchase in-app), leaving e-book aficionados wondering what will happen to their other favorite e-book apps (such as the Kindle app or Barnes & Noble app) on iOS devices. That's still up in the air, but Apple's terms for publishers offering newspaper, magazine, music, or video subscriptions is very clear: if Apple helps bring in customers, then Apple gets to take a cut of content sales.
Apple's business stupidity never ceases to amaze. They never know what to do with a good thing.
Comment