Quote:
Originally Posted by tubemonkey
You hit the nail on the head! Their whole model revolves around greed.
This is why I love my netbook. I don't need MSI's permission to download a program and I don't have to pay Microsoft a fee for every program I use on Windows.
|
And the news papers and magazines have yet to find a way to make money selling information to people who use windows. Nor Apple, if they deliver their paper via the web.
But Apple has created a content purchasing platform and built a base of customers that actually pay for content. So much so, that even though the number of iOS users is pitifully small when compared to windows users, publishers are EAGER to get into this "folks actually pay for content" platform.
They don't want to pay Apple's toll. I think both sides have room for compromise. Clearly the publishers are MOST in need of collecting subscriber information and I remain unclear on why Apple opposses this. But it's an area that, without compromise, will keep iOS out of the running.
Apple, on the other hand, deserves to be paid it's share of those wanting in on the iOS gravy train. The notion that a company can put a free app in the app store, and charge people for the app outside of the app store, thus cutting out Apple's cut....that's simply not going to fly.
What I find interesting are the example of Amazon and Borders. You get their app for free, and buy the books online. I'm not sure how that's different from what the newspapers are desiring.
Lee