iFlow reader another casualty thanks to the Agency 5 and Apple

[SharkLaser]

Why would you base an entire business on hoping Apple continues to allow you to profit from their platform for free? That just seems a bit silly. It was hardly unexpected that Apple would want a cut.

It's Apple's platform, ultimately. So it's their rules. They could be like Amazon if they really wanted, and shut off all competition on their platform outright.

[RockdaMan]

Originally Posted by covfam

i usedosx for all my productivity software and surfing the net, and managing itunes, thne booted up my windows when i wanted to play my computer games.
--
Feels like freedom to me

YOU tell 'em!!

[RockdaMan]

Originally Posted by SharkLaser

Why would you base an entire business on hoping Apple continues to allow you to profit from their platform

Google does the same with Android.

[petermillard]

Originally Posted by SharkLaser

Why would you base an entire business on hoping Apple continues to allow you to profit from their platform for free? That just seems a bit silly. It was hardly unexpected that Apple would want a cut...

This. If I was setting up a business as a middleman (or as a middleman to middlemen) the first question I'd want the answer to is 'if one of the other parties changed their terms, how would that impact on my business?' That this doesn't appear to have occurred to the iFlow team suggests that perhaps their head wasn't fully in the game.

Also; am I the only person here who hadn't heard of iFlow before this thread?

[tompe]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

Google does the same with Android.

Eh, no they do not base their business on a single third party allowing them to do business.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by SharkLaser

Why would you base an entire business on hoping Apple continues to allow you to profit from their platform for free?

Because generally speaking, that's how platforms work.

If you develop apps for Windows, OS X, and Android -- and even Linux -- there are always risks that whoever controls the platform might do something that will completely screw your business model.

In most cases though, the developer can survive if the platform controller changes something that breaks your app. Every once in awhile they try to drive you out of business instead; e.g. Microsoft vs Netscape, Google updates Android frequently, Apple coming up with apps that compete with Adobe and blocking out Flash from iOS, etc etc.

This is just a different form of screwage, in that Apple demands 30% of the revenues for payment processing and delivery, without being completely clear on whether work-arounds will be tolerated.

I do have to say that I'm not sure how much a competing service or in-house would charge/cost for those services, I just know it's not free. It might have cost iFlow 5%, 10% or 15% of revenues to do that in-house.


I'm also unclear on something. It appears their ebook store sold ePub with ADE. Why couldn't they just keep the store open, work around Apple's cut, and port to Android? Android development is a bit more complex, but it's a sizable platform now.

I'm not sure how they'd survive with non-agency pricing either. Let's say they pay $5 for the ebook "wholesale," sell it for $10, that gives them a 50% cut. Amazon then slashes its price to $7.50; iFlow is forced to cut the price to $7, which results in.... an effective payment rate to the publisher of 70%. Did they genuinely believe they could undercut Amazon, Apple and B&N on price?

[RockdaMan]

Originally Posted by tompe

Eh, no they do not base their business on a single third party allowing them to do business.

They arbitrarily cut off of third parties whenever they choose to.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

They arbitrarily cut off of third parties whenever they choose to.

I really doubt they do that arbitrarily.

But that is beside the point. Look at the statement you commented. It as about a company trusting another company. And Google do not do that.

[RockdaMan]

Originally Posted by tompe

I really doubt they do that arbitrarily.

They have. And they only pay the barest lip service to 'open source'.

[egarbacz]

Originally Posted by SharkLaser

Why would you base an entire business on hoping Apple continues to allow you to profit from their platform for free? That just seems a bit silly. It was hardly unexpected that Apple would want a cut.

It's Apple's platform, ultimately. So it's their rules. They could be like Amazon if they really wanted, and shut off all competition on their platform outright.

It is easy to call it silly looking back on it now. As a small company starting out you have to set limits. They admitted they only had 5 developers and limited funds. If from the beginning they split these resources among 2 or 3 platforms the results would be slower releases with fewer features. Instead, they chose the platform with the biggest user base and jumped in to release a quality product with features that no other reader had. The point of thread isn't what iFlow did wrong, or how big iFlow is the point is Apple limiting competitors and innovation on their platform. While I agree it is their platform and their choice, it is also our choice as customers to say we don't like it and we won't buy into it.

It is different from Amazon. Amazon never released a general purpose device allowing others to sell competing readers on the Kindle. It is clear to people who buy a Kindle that they are buying a product to read Amazon created books. This is not so clear on iOS devices.

[elcreative]

It is not as clear as you think, there have been numerous posts on MR from Kindle owners asking why their downloaded book was unreadable on the Kindle as they didn't realise that the Kindle used a proprietary DRMd format and they couldn't use other DRMd formats directly... they didn't know about multiple formats and thought that because a Kindle was an eReader, it would let them read all eBooks. I agree that if people looked into it a little more carefully then it is pretty clear but not everyone does that...

Originally Posted by egarbacz

It is different from Amazon. Amazon never released a general purpose device allowing others to sell competing readers on the Kindle. It is clear to people who buy a Kindle that they are buying a product to read Amazon created books. This is not so clear on iOS devices.

[carld]

Originally Posted by elcreative

It is not as clear as you think, there have been numerous posts on MR from Kindle owners asking why their downloaded book was unreadable on the Kindle as they didn't realise that the Kindle used a proprietary DRMd format and they couldn't use other DRMd formats directly... they didn't know about multiple formats and thought that because a Kindle was an eReader, it would let them read all eBooks. I agree that if people looked into it a little more carefully then it is pretty clear but not everyone does that...

That's because people are .... not very knowledgeable about even the slightest technical issue (to put it nicely). Back in the 8-bit days everything was an "Atari." It didn't matter who made it, if it played video games it was an Atari. And people would complain that they couldn't play their Mattel games in their Atari 2600, after all they were both Ataris.

Some people can't be bothered to learn anything, at all, and it's their own fault when issues like this crop up.

[SharkLaser]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

I'm also unclear on something. It appears their ebook store sold ePub with ADE. Why couldn't they just keep the store open, work around Apple's cut, and port to Android? Android development is a bit more complex, but it's a sizable platform now.

They almost certainly could. But then, selling stuff through Android doesn't really work terribly well on the whole (advertising is more effective, but not much good for eBook readers). Apple is still very much the platform where the money is, which is presumably why they decided to develop there.

iFlow just doesn't really strike me as a company than really thought through their business model at all. Even without Apple taking a cut, I don't really see what was going to make them succeed in a very competitive market, up against big boys like Apple and Amazon. And it's been predicted for ages that Apple would clamp down on people making money from the platform while getting around the 30% cut. So it shouldn't have come as a surprise.

When you're a middleman (or even a middleman to a middleman), you're always at risk of getting squeezed. You have to actually add value to survive, and I don't see iFlow really did that (or at least not enough).

Incidently, I wonder if Amazon switches to read-only, whether that will satisfy Apple. It's not like people would struggle to find Amazon in Safari, so I imagine that might be a reasonable solution for both. Though really I don't have much sympathy for Amazon if Apple does push them off, at least until they allow an iBooks Kindle app.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

They have. And they only pay the barest lip service to 'open source'.

Please give an example of this. Notice that the important property in the example is "arbitrarily".

[elcreative]

And why should they have to be technically knowledgable... most people want to buy a device to do something, they are not interested in getting under the hood to use it, just like cars where most people use a garage to get things fixed.

This is one of the biggest problems with computing today, we have immensely powerful machines but they still require too much user intervention... try starting up a Windows PC, for example, without a keyboard attached and you'll be told that there's no keyboard detected... Press any key to continue! This is dumb, has been present since DOS days and still hasn't been corrected. Try installing an OS or a program and you'll have to babysit through unending "Do you want to continue?" or other unnecessary messages. If I start an install then guess what, I want to install... just go ahead and do it... if there are decisions needed then ask all the damn questions at the start and get on with it...

If I buy a book then it isn't difficult to help a "customer" with a simple question or statement... "This doesn't work on a Kindle" or "What eReader do you have?" and deal with the answer... it's called customer service and is very conspicuous by its lack...

Originally Posted by carld

That's because people are .... not very knowledgeable about even the slightest technical issue (to put it nicely). Back in the 8-bit days everything was an "Atari." It didn't matter who made it, if it played video games it was an Atari. And people would complain that they couldn't play their Mattel games in their Atari 2600, after all they were both Ataris.

Some people can't be bothered to learn anything, at all, and it's their own fault when issues like this crop up.