Could you imagine hmv selling music in asda or tesco?
It's not the same thing and you know it's not the same thing. That is a very silly comment. You can however buy vouches for other retailers in asda and tesco!
It's not the same thing and you know it's not the same thing. That is a very silly comment. You can however buy vouches for other retailers in asda and tesco!
Why is it not the same thing? You are expecting a retailer to be allowed to trade via someone else's store for free.
And your voucher comment is a very good example.
When asda sell a voucher, they make money out of it, just like apple expect to. Are asda being unreasonable?
It's funny how any other platform allows this, yet apple surprise surprise, don't allow it.
Asda and other places make a tiny amount from it if any at all. Apple would want a huge chunk of the price which is the difference here.
I believe, although have never seen the terms, that apple make approx 30%
I believe on a gift voucher asda would make about 20%. I base that on the fact that I have access to sites which allows me to buy gift vouchers with at least 10% discount (and many at 15% discount), and the site selling them to me also make a profit, so 20% is not an unreasonable guess.
HMV do not make any physical products. So how are they going to sell them in asda or tesco?!
So you think it is ok if they go in, set up a little stand and start selling goods for profit (not sure why they needed to make them). That's fine, let me know when you open a shop and we will all rock up and use it for free.:)
I do laugh at the fuss that is made when it has no effect on the user.
So you think it is ok if they go in, set up a little stand and start selling goods for profit (not sure why they needed to make them). That's fine, let me know when you open a shop and we will all rock up and use it for free.:)
I do laugh at the fuss that is made when it has no effect on the user.
Competition is a good thing. Unless you want a monopoly and restrictive practices. I suspect you would.
So you think it is ok if they go in, set up a little stand and start selling goods for profit (not sure why they needed to make them). That's fine, let me know when you open a shop and we will all rock up and use it for free.:)
I do laugh at the fuss that is made when it has no effect on the user.
So, why does any other platform allow this yet apple as always refuses?
As for the vouchers, asda etc are lucky to make 5% from them. 30% is excessive.
its not just music. I was amazed to discover that the iOS kindle app won't let you buy books. You have to purchase kindle books through a browser.
All seems rather infantile. I suspect anyone who wants to have the Kindle app/HMV app will just make their purchases by other means anyway rather than buying from itunes, so just leads to being a bit of PITA for users.
its not just music. I was amazed to discover that the iOS kindle app won't let you buy books. You have to purchase kindle books through a
Ok I don't have a Kindle but I do have IOS devices. It seemed so easy and sensible to choose books on the web-interface it has NEVER even vaguely occured to me to want to buy via the Kindle App!
there are apps that do offer content to purchase within the app - but they follow the app store rules that allow it.
HMV et al wish to sell content which is supplied from outwith the app store "wall" - it's that which is not allowed.
I think its less about where they went to sell it and more about not destroying any chance of being competitive by paying apple a hefty cut of their income.
Which book or music sellers currently offer inapp purchasing on iOS?
Which book or music sellers currently offer inapp purchasing on iOS?
i never specifically said music or books, just that there are apps that provide content - thus the mechanism exists.
the mechanism is there should HMV (or whoever) choose to sell via the app store.
i don't think anyone is suggesting that apple shouldn't be entitled to some sort of recompense afterall they host the app and the content (and the associated costs involved). or do HMV (or whoever) expect apple to do all the work and take nothing in return?
i never specifically said music or books, just that there are apps that provide content - thus the mechanism exists.
the mechanism is there should HMV (or whoever) choose to sell via the app store.
i don't think anyone is suggesting that apple shouldn't be entitled to some sort of recompense afterall they host the app and the content (and the associated costs involved). or do HMV (or whoever) expect apple to do all the work and take nothing in return?
Google doesn't take any cut from the sales through apps on the Play store. Why should Apple. 30% is a little too much just for hosting the app don't you think? Competition laws should sort this out when the regulators get off their backsides.
Ok I don't have a Kindle but I do have IOS devices. It seemed so easy and sensible to choose books on the web-interface it has NEVER even vaguely occured to me to want to buy via the Kindle App!
Does the Amazon MP3 app not exist on iOS? I use that on Android for all my music purchases as it is straightforward, cheap and gives me MP3 files that I can transfer and use on my other devices without any fuss.
It does indeed exist https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/amazon-cloud-player/id510855668
You can play any Amazon music you own, but cannot purchase directly from the app itself, without going to Amazon's website via a web browser. This is the way to avoid Apple getting a hefty commission from in-app purchases.
Google doesn't take any cut from the sales through apps on the Play store. Why should Apple. 30% is a little too much just for hosting the app don't you think? Competition laws should sort this out when the regulators get off their backsides.
don't they?
google still take 30% for app purchases, so it seems google thinks 30% is a fair price for "just hosting the app".
i never specifically said music or books, just that there are apps that provide content - thus the mechanism exists.
the mechanism is there should HMV (or whoever) choose to sell via the app store.
i don't think anyone is suggesting that apple shouldn't be entitled to some sort of recompense afterall they host the app and the content (and the associated costs involved). or do HMV (or whoever) expect apple to do all the work and take nothing in return?
Host the content? They don't do that. That will come direct from HMV's servers.
So, why does any other platform allow this yet apple as always refuses?
As for the vouchers, asda etc are lucky to make 5% from them. 30% is excessive.
How much do you think your hotel makes? Far, far more than 30%.
How much do you think agents make who sell rooms on behalf of your hotel? I assume 30% is only excessive when it is apple.
It's called supply and demand. I don't think there is a shortage of developers waiting to join the App Store and the money making opportunities it provides.
i don't think anyone is suggesting that apple shouldn't be entitled to some sort of recompense afterall they host the app and the content (and the associated costs involved). or do HMV (or whoever) expect apple to do all the work and take nothing in return?
There's no need for apple to host anything except the app, which it happily does for free for thousands.
Comments
It's not the same thing and you know it's not the same thing. That is a very silly comment. You can however buy vouches for other retailers in asda and tesco!
Why is it not the same thing? You are expecting a retailer to be allowed to trade via someone else's store for free.
And your voucher comment is a very good example.
When asda sell a voucher, they make money out of it, just like apple expect to. Are asda being unreasonable?
Because it just isn't the same thing!!
It's funny how any other platform allows this, yet apple surprise surprise, don't allow it.
Asda and other places make a tiny amount from it if any at all. Apple would want a huge chunk of the price which is the difference here.
I believe, although have never seen the terms, that apple make approx 30%
I believe on a gift voucher asda would make about 20%. I base that on the fact that I have access to sites which allows me to buy gift vouchers with at least 10% discount (and many at 15% discount), and the site selling them to me also make a profit, so 20% is not an unreasonable guess.
HMV do not make any physical products. So how are they going to sell them in asda or tesco?!
So you think it is ok if they go in, set up a little stand and start selling goods for profit (not sure why they needed to make them). That's fine, let me know when you open a shop and we will all rock up and use it for free.:)
I do laugh at the fuss that is made when it has no effect on the user.
Competition is a good thing. Unless you want a monopoly and restrictive practices. I suspect you would.
So, why does any other platform allow this yet apple as always refuses?
As for the vouchers, asda etc are lucky to make 5% from them. 30% is excessive.
All seems rather infantile. I suspect anyone who wants to have the Kindle app/HMV app will just make their purchases by other means anyway rather than buying from itunes, so just leads to being a bit of PITA for users.
there are apps that do offer content to purchase within the app - but they follow the app store rules that allow it.
HMV et al wish to sell content which is supplied from outwith the app store "wall" - it's that which is not allowed.
I think its less about where they went to sell it and more about not destroying any chance of being competitive by paying apple a hefty cut of their income.
Which book or music sellers currently offer inapp purchasing on iOS?
i never specifically said music or books, just that there are apps that provide content - thus the mechanism exists.
the mechanism is there should HMV (or whoever) choose to sell via the app store.
i don't think anyone is suggesting that apple shouldn't be entitled to some sort of recompense afterall they host the app and the content (and the associated costs involved). or do HMV (or whoever) expect apple to do all the work and take nothing in return?
Google doesn't take any cut from the sales through apps on the Play store. Why should Apple. 30% is a little too much just for hosting the app don't you think? Competition laws should sort this out when the regulators get off their backsides.
Its the first place i buy my books from!!
It does indeed exist https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/amazon-cloud-player/id510855668
You can play any Amazon music you own, but cannot purchase directly from the app itself, without going to Amazon's website via a web browser. This is the way to avoid Apple getting a hefty commission from in-app purchases.
don't they?
google still take 30% for app purchases, so it seems google thinks 30% is a fair price for "just hosting the app".
Host the content? They don't do that. That will come direct from HMV's servers.
So basically apple want money for doing sweet FA?
Non story, frankly.
How much do you think your hotel makes? Far, far more than 30%.
How much do you think agents make who sell rooms on behalf of your hotel? I assume 30% is only excessive when it is apple.
It's called supply and demand. I don't think there is a shortage of developers waiting to join the App Store and the money making opportunities it provides.
that's the point, the app store doesn't allow content to come from HMV's servers.
From apps that cost yes.
What they don't do is take money from in app purchases.
i guess the 30% google charges is also excessive.
There's no need for apple to host anything except the app, which it happily does for free for thousands.