Amazon, B&N, Kobo: iOS aps to be pulled in June

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by wyndslash

i've never had cherry pie before! O: *curious*

You'll have to try it, it's very good.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by wyndslash

i've never had cherry pie before! O: *curious*

Oh, you have missed a treat.

Graham

[wyndslash]

We dont have it here in the Philippines. Or at least, in Manila.

[stonetools]

And I’m back

How is it different?

More particularly, how is it different from using an Apple computer to purchase a Kindle book online?

In both cases Apple provides the hardware and the OS, but Amazon provides the infrastructure for the purchase - not Apple.

I’m ready to give a better answer for that question. It won’t make anyone happy, but it does have the virtue of being true. The answer is that it is technically the same, but commercially different. Another analogy for you:
Two real estate developers each build a shopping mall. Each builds the exact same building, brick by brick. Yet developer B can charge a much higher rent than developer A. How are they different?
Well, developer A built in the rural Midwest. Developer B built in downtown Manhattan. In some Platonic universe, the two shopping malls should have equal rental incomes. That, however, is not the real world.
Like it or (mostly) hate it, Apple has the equivalent of downtown Manhattan real estate. The IOS platform IS different, commercially, from those other platforms. You can make money-lots of money-on the IOS platform. You can’t make the same money on say, the Blackberry platform. RIM has the same kind of control over the Blackberry platform that Apple has over the IOS platform, but its just in a different league commercially. Developers and merchants are flocking to the IOS platform for that reason, and therefore Apple can do what others cannot –charge rent.
We have to look at how the bookstores operated here. Let’s roll back the clock to I day-April 1. On that date, there was only ONE ebook app on the Ipad-Apple’s. All the other booksellers took a wait and see attitude, because most “experts” predicted that the Ipad would be a flop. Go to I plus 60. Despite the “experts “, the Ipad is a runaway success, and the scramble to get on the Ipad begins. Amazon led the way, but by summers end all the major booksellers are on board. Now all of these guys are commercially sophisticated players. They knew that they were dealing with Apple, and I’m sure their lawyers reviewed every comma of every agreement and developer’s guideline. They knew that Apple was allowing them to set up bookstores rent free on the IOS platform. They also knew or should have known that at some point Apple could start charging rent. Well, the day might be here.
Now consumers may be surprised by this, but I guarantee you the booksellers weren’t, or at least shouldn’t have been. They are negotiating with Apple what the rent will be. Again, Apple can command rent, not because of some technical or moral reason. They are doing it because that’s what owners of very successful merchandising platforms do.
Consumers weren’t cheated by Apple, as some have said. Apple never promised that it would allow the booksellers to operate rent free forever on the IOS platform. I would have preferred that Apple had done that, but they didn’t. Again, I believe that both Apple and the booksellers will negotiate a mutually beneficial deal.

[stonetools]

Apple's deal is with the resellers, not the publishers. The resellers can't give up any of the publishers' share because they don't control it. They can only work with their own subset of the already divided pie.

Apple's deal may have been with the booksellers, but just as the coming of iBooks meant that the agency pricing model was adopted to the benefit of the publishers against the resellers, so too any new understanding with Apple will include an adjustment of the publisher's cut. Everybody will be at the table in the negotiations

[LakeLoon]

Originally Posted by david_e

Let us see if this is 'simple' enough for you...

Mama and Papa have two children. Every Sunday Mama makes pie. Mama, Papa, and their two children eat the whole pie. One day Grandma comes to live with Mama, Papa, and their two children. On Sunday Mama makes pie in the SAME PAN she always used. Mama, Papa, their two children AND Grandma eat the whole pie.

See how simple that was? Five are now sharing what used to be shared by four. Some may now get a little less, but everyone still gets SOME.

Wow. I really should read to the end of the thread before posting, but I couldn't let this pass.

Stevie ain't grandma. This is more like the landlord showing up at your door once the pie is baked and demanding a seat at the table. "But . . . but . . . I didn't make this for you," you say, to which Steve grins and says, "but you used my platform to make the pie. I own this apartment, and the oven too." "But I already paid my rent," you respond reasonably. "Well, that's a shame, but I have decided that this apartment is insanely great . . . magical really . . . for baking pies. Making pies is so much better here, you shouldn't mind giving up a little sliver to the GENIUS who makes it possible." "Look, Mr. Jobs, I can make equally good pies in other ovens and other apartments, ones with more reasonable rents by the way. Those landlords don't show up at dinnertime looking for pie." The grin again. "Should have thought of that before moving in, I guess! Say, is that 'Community' playing on your widescreen TV? I love that show! Did I mention that this apartment is also insanely great for watching TV? I take butter on my popcorn, by the way."

[Horemheb]

Originally Posted by stonetools

agency pricing model was adopted to the benefit of the publishers against the resellers

I think we have to admit that you work hard for your money. You are willing to say utter nonsense and garbage that even Apple management does not believe. There is no intellectual and moral depth you are not willing to descend to.

While Apple really is trying to extort money from other players for an absolute zero added value, the funny thing is that even if purchasing on Apple platform caused you great joy it would be hardly more than irrelevant. Having 4-5 platforms (PC, e-reader, phone, tablet and netbook/notebook) we use to purchase and access content, who would care if one of them was much better than the others (which in Apple's case of course is NOT true)? Even if that was the case it would be much less than justified that Apple deserves anything more than the others. Remember, the content is the product. Not the purchase not any of the many platforms used to access content. And again, Apple provides absolutely zero added value.

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by stonetools

And I’m back



I’m ready to give a better answer for that question. It won’t make anyone happy, but it does have the virtue of being true. The answer is that it is technically the same, but commercially different. Another analogy for you:
Two real estate developers each build a shopping mall. Each builds the exact same building, brick by brick. Yet developer B can charge a much higher rent than developer A. How are they different?
Well, developer A built in the rural Midwest. Developer B built in downtown Manhattan. In some Platonic universe, the two shopping malls should have equal rental incomes. That, however, is not the real world.
Like it or (mostly) hate it, Apple has the equivalent of downtown Manhattan real estate. The IOS platform IS different, commercially, from those other platforms. You can make money-lots of money-on the IOS platform. You can’t make the same money on say, the Blackberry platform. RIM has the same kind of control over the Blackberry platform that Apple has over the IOS platform, but its just in a different league commercially. Developers and merchants are flocking to the IOS platform for that reason, and therefore Apple can do what others cannot –charge rent.
We have to look at how the bookstores operated here. Let’s roll back the clock to I day-April 1. On that date, there was only ONE ebook app on the Ipad-Apple’s. All the other booksellers took a wait and see attitude, because most “experts” predicted that the Ipad would be a flop. Go to I plus 60. Despite the “experts “, the Ipad is a runaway success, and the scramble to get on the Ipad begins. Amazon led the way, but by summers end all the major booksellers are on board. Now all of these guys are commercially sophisticated players. They knew that they were dealing with Apple, and I’m sure their lawyers reviewed every comma of every agreement and developer’s guideline. They knew that Apple was allowing them to set up bookstores rent free on the IOS platform. They also knew or should have known that at some point Apple could start charging rent. Well, the day might be here.
Now consumers may be surprised by this, but I guarantee you the booksellers weren’t, or at least shouldn’t have been. They are negotiating with Apple what the rent will be. Again, Apple can command rent, not because of some technical or moral reason. They are doing it because that’s what owners of very successful merchandising platforms do.
Consumers weren’t cheated by Apple, as some have said. Apple never promised that it would allow the booksellers to operate rent free forever on the IOS platform. I would have preferred that Apple had done that, but they didn’t. Again, I believe that both Apple and the booksellers will negotiate a mutually beneficial deal.

So basically it boils down to: They're entitled to it because they think they can get away with it. They think access to their platform is valuable enough that they should get baksheesh for transactions in which they take no part.

It's simple economic parasitism.

[lotrfan]

Originally Posted by stonetools

And I’m back

I’m ready to give a better answer for that question. It won’t make anyone happy, but it does have the virtue of being true. The answer is that it is technically the same, but commercially different. Another analogy for you:
Two real estate developers each build a shopping mall. Each builds the exact same building, brick by brick. Yet developer B can charge a much higher rent than developer A. How are they different?
Well, developer A built in the rural Midwest. Developer B built in downtown Manhattan. In some Platonic universe, the two shopping malls should have equal rental incomes. That, however, is not the real world.

The problem with the analogy is that in effect both malls are doing the same the only difference is that one can have a higher rent than the other.

What Apple is doing is different than any of the other “malls” as none of them are charging or plan to charge (that we know) this special rent that Apple decided to have. The other problem is that malls are only as good as the stores in it and if the rent becomes too high that the stores can't have any profits then no amount of sales will allow them to survive in said mall. Also a rent is a fixed number that stores can agree on and work hard to sell enough to pay said rent and still have profits. Under Apples new rules these stores are not only paying a rent but would need to provide all their profits to Apple so what is the point of staying there if they can't make money.

They are entitled to force the inapp buy but not to force the price of the consumable to be less or equal to the sales outside. If they are so sure of their user base then having a magazine or ebook be $3 to $5 more for in app buys shouldn't be a problem for Apple. Or is it that they fear that people will stop coming to the mall and start going to the shopping center a mile a way where the same item will cost much less than the gas to get there.

[Worldwalker]

You still keep throwing random analogies (and occasional falsehoods) in the air, and still not addressing the point:

Let's say this computer was built by HP. (it wasn't, I built it myself, but just to pick a manufacturer we can talk about) It's running the Windows operating system, with Firefox for a Web browser, and I bought a book recently from Baen Books, which maintains a Web storefront. There is no difference between an HP computer running Windows, with Firefox riding on that, buying from Baen, and an Apple computer with iOS running on it, with the Kindle app riding on that, buying from Amazon. In fact, for the sake of discussion (and comparison), let's pretend I'm a Kindle owner instead of a Sony owner, and I have the PC Kindle program running on my computer, and bought my book from Amazon -- all of which I very easily could have if I had different platform preferences -- so we're dealing with the same thing.

Computer: Apple -or- HP
OS: iOS -or- Windows
App: Kindle for iPad -or- Kindle for PC
Bookstore: amazon.com -or- amazon.com

The bookstore is the same. The program, an Amazon-written, Amazon-provided, Amazon-accessing program, is the same. The only differences are in the computer manufacturer and the operating system manufacturer.

And you're trying to tell me that a difference of computer manufacturer (Apple instead of HP) and/or different operating system (iOS instead of Windows) means it's only natural and right that the computer manufacturer charge money to every store that uses its computer, or its operating system. And you're refusing to acknowledge that those stores don't pay money to HP, or Dell, or e-Machines, or any other computer builder, nor do they pay money to Microsoft, or the Linux project, or even Apple, for what they do using the operating systems they wrote, nor do they pay MS or Opera or Google or the Mozilla Foundation for the browser they make the purchase through.

If Amazon should pay Apple when someone buys a book on the iPad, shouldn't Amazon pay HP when someone buys a book using an HP computer?

If Amazon should pay Apple when someone buys a book using iOS, shouldn't Amazon pay Microsoft when someone buys a book using Windows?

If Amazon should pay Apple when someone buys a book using Kindle for iOS, shouldn't Amazon pay Microsoft when someone buys a book using Kindle for PC?

If Amazon should pay Apple when someone buys a book using the iOS browser, shouldn't Amazon pay the Mozilla Foundation when someone buys a book using the Firefox browser?

If not ... why not?

How is the iPad not a computer?

How is iOS not an operating system?

How is Kindle for iOS not an Amazon program?

How is the iPad browser not a browser?

You haven't given us any answers to those because you can't. Not real ones. You can regurgitate reams of Apple talking points in a valiant but ultimately futile effort to swamp all argument under a wave of verbiage, and hope that the lurkers just see the quantity of your words rather than analyzing the meaning of your ideas. That probably works elsewhere. People on MobileRead, though, aren't stupid. They can see our questions, and they can see your non-answers.

I have a little story for you ...

Long, long ago, back in the days when Apple still sold really cool computers, there was a big company called Texas Instruments. And there was a big company called IBM. Texas Instruments sold an amazingly awesome home computer, the TI-99/4. It has a 16-bit CPU, great graphics, speech synthesis, and all kinds of things. IBM came out with a home computer, too. It was, not to put too fine a point on it, a piece of trash in comparison. It had an 8-bit CPU, and a slow one at that. You had two choices in graphics, bad and worse. It could beep. And it was expensive. But IBM did one thing differently: Texas Instruments was threatening to sue any company that sold a program that could run on a TI-99/4. They insisted that they controlled it, and no program could be run on it unless the manufacturer paid them money. IBM, on the other hand, threw open their specifications. They told the whole world how to build programs that would run on their computers, and even supplied a programming language with every one, so you could write your own and share them, too.

So how did that work out?

Well, have you ever seen a TI-99/4 outside a computer museum?

Texas Instruments, as a computer manufacturer, was a flash in the pan. Their awesome computer was ignored, and ultimately forgotten.

In fact, TI ended up doing chip fab for IBM.

[snipenekkid]

Originally Posted by Lemurion

So basically it boils down to: They're entitled to it because they think they can get away with it. They think access to their platform is valuable enough that they should get baksheesh for transactions in which they take no part.

It's simple economic parasitism.

nice take!!

I would go further to say at this point in time it also proves spongetools is a bottom for the Jobsian Klan dare we say the Dalek's could be the blueprint for the iOS subterfuge? What all of the comments overlook when bragging about the "what did developers thing it was always going to be 'free' [it has never been completely free]?" logic is none of the big developer/corporations jumped on board initially not because they worried iOS would flop as a platform but they were watching to see if the Apple Tax would be implemented. Apple actively chose to NOT enforce that because none of the big players were rushing to get on board. So to attract them Apple gave the illusion of not heading off in that self-defeating direction that is akin to per-byte web access on fiber connections with a 5GB cap. Now Apple is tying the very same level tactics which, as I keep pointing out, almost killed the company and has croaked pretty much any other hardware vendor who has tried anything similar. And no CellCo's don't count as they are not hardware providers.

Apple also knew if they called the iOS devices just a mobile "pocket-mall" the business sector would never sniff around the things. Now, with Apple moving in that direction they will again scare away the business world simply because the device will, over time become more closed unless a company is willing to devote zillions for custom in-house app development with little hope of being able to justify the budge for such development, remember not all companies want that overhead preferring instead to opt for the stability of proven Windows based apps which already fit the current office work flows. Even WebOS is likely more friendly to an office already using a Microsoft infrastructure than iOS ever will become, if ever.

But lose the business community and you end up as nothing but a company selling some mid-grade hardware to consumers who like shiny, yet oddly enough do not have the normally required 3/4 rusted and the rest several colors of primer but under "restoration" Trans-maro up on cinder-blocks in the front, back and side yards to be that attracted to 'shiny'. I even doubt the normal Skinny Elvis on Velvet portrait is likely also missing from over the mattress on the floor on the bedroom with a set of fancy store-bought 180-thread count bed-sheet curtains covering the window. But these consumers do use the devices and they work for that limited core of uses, but it's pretty much just games, a few videos, and some mobile porn.

Hmmmm, speaking of iPorn, I wonder if anyone has lost their grip on their iOS-thingy in an airplane bathroom dropping it in the swirling blue waters contained therein resulting in a while new definition of "Blue Screen of Death?"

Yes this topic has devolved down to THAT level of pointlessness...our pal Maggie must be laughing at the efforts wasted on the whole topic, hell, it's become it's own iOS Porn thread now.

[kennyc]

Hmmmm. So after totally trashing the ebook world by creating the Agency Model and supporting collusion in pricing they are going to kick everyone out. Great.

Let us all now bow our heads and contemplate open source and free market capitalism.

[snipenekkid]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

You still keep throwing random analogies (and occasional falsehoods) in the air, and still not addressing the point:


In fact, TI ended up doing chip fab for IBM.

had to snip...too much good stuff but wanted to add before heading off to catch-up on the lack of sleep in the past 54-hrs that I buy a LOT of my books from Webscription.net using my Kindle browser. It's not pretty, it's not easy but it works. Same for several other sites paid and free. I dunna see Amazon screaming for their cut. They know their model works, makes money and the option, even if it's more illusion, of freedom of choice always makes a customer feel happier and in my case I LOVE Amazon and buy 90% of my household goods, even some food staples and a fair percentage of my camera gear from them simply because I trust them to not try and screw me even if it's a simple $20 pack of new Eneloop batteries I needed overnight, it was worth the extra $4 because I KNEW they would deliver but gave me the option to buy elsewhere.

In fact I trust Amazon with my info far more than Apple as they have shown a willingness to assault the customer base over other issues while hiding behind the veil of doing the best for the stockholders. I don't believe I have read anything from Bezos stating they put the shareholders in front of the customer this time and every time. So why would anyone trust Apple in the long term when they KNOW Apple is not on their side?

[david_e]

Originally Posted by wyndslash

i've never had cherry pie before! O: *curious*

Cherry is always the pie I think of when thinking of pie.

My grandmother was an awful cook in that everything she made came out of a box, a can, or was prefrozen. She became a wife and mother as the era of 'making things easier' was born and she ran with it. The exception to this was cookies, candies, and pie. She made the most flaky crust I have ever experienced. The fillings were always store bought / from a can but the crust was amazing.

[tomsem]

Originally Posted by MsAstoria

If only It would sync across devices like amazon does, then it would be perfect!

However, Stanza is just as threatened as the Kindle, B&N, Kobo apps by whatever June portends for reading apps. It also launches to storefronts for purchasing ebooks.