NYT: Apple Moves to Tighten Control of App Store

[BuddyBoy]

Ok, I've come up with an idea to allow Amazon, Sony, BN et al to fulfill the letter, if not the spirit of the "new" rules.

Inside the reading app you have your Shop the Store page. You can click a button to be taken to the nicely designed searchable website ... or you can manually enter in the 13 digit ISBN number of a book you want to buy it via the Apple Store.

[Maggie Leung]

Originally Posted by BuddyBoy

Ok, I've come up with an idea to allow Amazon, Sony, BN et al to fulfill the letter, if not the spirit of the "new" rules.

Inside the reading app you have your Shop the Store page. You can click a button to be taken to the nicely designed searchable website ... or you can manually enter in the 13 digit ISBN number of a book you want to buy it via the Apple Store.

Or maybe you could force buyers to draw the book cover.

[tomsem]

Originally Posted by WillysJeepMan

But if we accept Amazon's claim at face value, then the number of kindle books downloaded to iOS devices is less than 20%... perhaps significantly less.

And if that's the case, then I expect Amazon to yank the kindle app from the app store rather than give Apple a cut of kindle book sales. Because after all, with the growing number of non-iOS devices being sold this year, they can easily write off the small percentage of sales generated by iOS devices.

NOBODY can afford to give Apple a 30% cut of their ebook sales, especially if they are not free to factor this into pricing (because of agency model). Apple can not realistically expect to get this from anyone.

Instead, anyone who wants to have an iOS ereader app will have to decouple storefront access from the app. They could then create a storefront web app, or even a full blown iOS app strictly for purchasing ebook content - the former is not something Apple can control, and the latter does not technically violate Apple's guidelines, which don't impinge on retail sales except when it involves content that the app itself consumes.

The business implications will depend on the app. Some will have to try to generate ad revenue somehow, or start charging for the app, or rely on the kindness of strangers, but Amazon/B&N/Kobo can probably rely on the fact that a good percentage of people using their iOS app also have a dedicated ereader or are used to buying ebooks with a web browser (not that it means much in terms of arguing my point, but that's how I do most of my ebook purchasing).

Amazon has the least to worry about because if you want to read Kindle books on iOS, there is no other app that can do it. Since the existence of an iOS app is a selling point for the Kindle 'read with anything' platform, they'll continue to make one available, even without direct storefront access.

Note that nothing about this should preclude purchase by clicking the 'purchase this book' link in a book sample (which is often how I initiate a purchase). Apple might not like it, but would have to apply some pretty twisted logic to justify banning the reading app.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by sbtx99

Maybe 50% of people do read Kindle ebooks on iOS devices, but I wonder what percentage of the people who use the iOS apps are also Kindle owners. And what percentage of people who use the iOS apps actually purchase content via the apps. Or what percentage have the app just to take advantage of free content.

Before I purchased my Kindle, the only time I used the kindle app on my iPod was to read free ebooks from Amazon. I never purchased any ebooks from Amazon until I bought a kindle. Even now that I have a kindle, the only content I "purchase" on my iPod is free content. For paid content, I do almost all of my purchasing on my computer via Amazon's website, except for maybe 2 or 3 ebooks that were purchased on my Kindle.

Even if you purchased it on your Kindle, you could have read the majority of it on your iPod/Pad/Phone.

The above demonstrates exactly why ANY numbers -- official or otherwise -- will never be able to be trusted. Just because an ebook was purchased on one device does not mean that that's the device (or the only device) the ebook was read with.

The numbers are really rather meaningless when it boils down to it. Just because 20% of Kindle books being sold are being delivered to non-Kindle devices doesn't necessarily mean that the percentage of Amazon users reading Kindle books on an iOS platform is 20% or less of the total users. Users numbers and sales numbers will never be able to be reconciled.

Which brings up a valid question: If Apple did decide to enforce this requirement, wouldn't people still be able to purchase Amazon content on their PC, Mac, or other non-iOS device and simply synchronize and then pull the newly purchased item from their Archive on the iOS device and start reading... bypassing the "store" completely?? Isn't that the whole point of all these Kindle Apps?? Buy on one device, read on another?? How would Apple ever get around that?

[BuddyBoy]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

There has been a lot of hue and cry over app store policies in the past. They have not yet stunted the popularity or the growth of the platform.

I suspect that the users are content and quiet, and the critics are a vocal non-using minority.

While there is a cadre of anti-fanbois on the internet eager to diss apple and preen over their flavour-of-the-month (Android, Linux, etc, etc), there have been plenty of disgruntled or annoyed apple users too. Just go read the apple support boards.

These folks (and I'm one of them) still buy apple products as long as the products meet their needs and the company's policies don't piss them off enough to overcome the inertia that prevents them from moving to another platform.

Where this latest issue has touched a nerve is in threatening a use of the platform which has been adopted by a non-trivial number of users. Oh, sure, everyone could transition to reading from iBooks (and Apple would love that!) but for those of us who are long-time ereaders with a substantial external library, it's unacceptable. And for those of us who are really long term, frankly, I think we're sick of having our books and formats being chopped off at the knees every 5 years, and having to start over. I have a whole library of .rb and .imp books, some .mobi and .pdf I lost when Amazon shut down their original eBook store 8 or 10 years ago. I lost access to over 100 titles when Overdrive pulled away from Fictionwise. When Sony went from lrf to epub, not all the titles went with them.

I have a whole lotta .lit which are a pain to read in their own format because everytime you rebuild a computer or fix a crashed drive, or move to a new machine you used up 1 of your 6 activations, after which you have to beg microsoft for one extra activiation, only once or twice a year. They never actually reply to tell you if they granted you one, you just have to keep trying to activate the reader until it works, some weeks or months later.

Now, the last thing I want to do is start building up a library of ePubs with yet another DRM scheme. And frankly, who know how long it'll last? I'm one of those poor sucker who had a Newton. Two of them in fact.

Finally, the big push over something like this is the realization that Apple can and will pull these kind of stunts again and again. The rules change, the interpretation changes, and suddenly the platform you bought into doesn't do the things you bought into it for. And no matter how they try to dress it up, citing "improved stability" or "consistent interface" the end result is the move profits Apple at the expense of their users.

Expense? Yes. Now I risk a situation where I have a limited choice in content sources. And frankly, a real risk of increasing ebook prices too - if other stores stay involved they have to find the cash to pay the extors.... uh, service fee, somehow.

Is it Apple's right to make changes in their garden? Sure, to a reasonable extent. It may be their walled garden, but it's also MY iPad and iPhone and if Apple's change in policy since I have purchased them has decreased the value of them, there should be some accounting for their behaviour.

After all, a walled garden can be a very nice place, but when you start jacking the walls up 50 feet high and mowing down all the flowers it starts to look a lot more like a prison yard.

[wodin]

I do not, and probably will never have an iPad. I do, however, do most of my reading on my Android phone. I nearly always buy my ebooks from my PC, I just find it more convenient to be able to see the descriptions, reviews, alternative formats/prices on the larger screen. In a pinch, I can use the Android browser and pinch to zoom (pun intended).

[BuddyBoy]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

The numbers are really rather meaningless when it boils down to it. Just because 20% of Kindle books being sold are being delivered to non-Kindle devices doesn't necessarily mean that the percentage of Amazon users reading Kindle books on an iOS platform is 20% or less of the total users. Users numbers and sales numbers will never be able to be reconciled.

Actually, until recently, I believe the only way to get a Kindle book on the iPad or iPhone was to download it via the app. The 20% figure does not reflect sales on the iOs, just actual downloading to the iOs. (Not necessarily reading either - a friend has tons of books downloaded on her iPhone, but has quite a few she hasn't read yet).

I'm sure a good portion of the 20% a folks like me, who download it to my Kindle and to my iOs machines so that should I have some spare time waiting somewhere without my Kindle, I can still whip out my iPhone or iPad and continue my book where I left off.

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Which brings up a valid question: If Apple did decide to enforce this requirement, wouldn't people still be able to purchase Amazon content on their PC, Mac, or other non-iOS device and simply synchronize and then pull the newly purchased item from their Archive on the iOS device and start reading... bypassing the "store" completely?? Isn't that the whole point of all these Kindle Apps?? Buy on one device, read on another?? How would Apple ever get around that?

Apple's comments about the policy are anything but clear (a deliberate ploy in my opinion) but it seems that they're saying if an app has access to any externally purchased content, whether you bought it on your PC, over the phone, etc, the app has to provide access within the app to purchase the same content through the Apple store.

Taken to the extreme, this also means you cannot provide access to any content that Apple refuses to provide through iBooks, so farewell to whole ranges of books.

Personally, I think Apple is being deliberately vague to gauge the reaction of the public, user base and regulatory folks, before coming up with an acceptable compromise. ("30%?? No, we never said that! Just a small, tiny, minuscule handling charge of 11.3% plus 75c per transaction....")

[BuddyBoy]

Originally Posted by Maggie Leung

Or maybe you could force buyers to draw the book cover.

Considering how often bookstore clerks get asked for a book that starts with "It has a red cover...." that might not be a bad idea.

And, believe it or not, I'm serious about the ISBN thing. Apple doesn't say you have to make the buying experience the same - in fact they're so sure in-app is always better. I say make it basic. ISBN number. Or SKU.

[Maggie Leung]

Originally Posted by BuddyBoy

Considering how often bookstore clerks get asked for a book that starts with "It has a red cover...." that might not be a bad idea.

And, believe it or not, I'm serious about the ISBN thing. Apple doesn't say you have to make the buying experience the same - in fact they're so sure in-app is always better. I say make it basic. ISBN number. Or SKU.

Agreed on Apple being purposely vague, too. Trial balloons sometimes work. Sometimes they blow up, lol.

[sbtx99]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Even if you purchased it on your Kindle, you could have read the majority of it on your iPod/Pad/Phone.

The above demonstrates exactly why ANY numbers -- official or otherwise -- will never be able to be trusted. Just because an ebook was purchased on one device does not mean that that's the device (or the only device) the ebook was read with.

The numbers are really rather meaningless when it boils down to it. Just because 20% of Kindle books being sold are being delivered to non-Kindle devices doesn't necessarily mean that the percentage of Amazon users reading Kindle books on an iOS platform is 20% or less of the total users. Users numbers and sales numbers will never be able to be reconciled.

Exactly. The device used to read and the device used to purchase might be the same... or they might be different. Only the individuals doing the purchasing and the companies doing the selling know for sure. For me, the devices and apps used to read ebooks, be it kindle or epub, and the devices used to purchase those ebooks are almost never the same.

[RockdaMan]

Originally Posted by Maggie Leung

Apple's idea of a solution doesn't fit my needs.

Is that any Apple solution, or just this one?

[Maggie Leung]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

Is that any Apple solution, or just this one?

I've become bored by your posts. If you actually want to know, please reread this thread.

[RockdaMan]

Originally Posted by Maggie Leung

I've become bored by your posts.

And I've become convinced that you don't like your inconsistencies pointed out to you.

[Maggie Leung]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

And I've become convinced that you don't like your inconsistencies pointed out to you.

Actually, I don't like it at all. I doubt anyone does. But I think you've been incapable of pointing out anyone's inconsistencies.

I do notice that you consistently defend Apple on various threads, though, with the same lack of sense.

[RockdaMan]

Originally Posted by Maggie Leung

Actually, I don't like it at all.:

Then think before you post.

Back to the topic at hand...