Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 26th Jul 2011 21:14 UTC
Apple Petty Apple is petty. Amazon, Kobo, and others have changed their applications to conform to Apple's App Store rules, and if there's one word that describes the situation these booksellers are in, it's petty. Still, it's leading to good things: Kobo has announced it's going to bypass the App Store by writing an HTML5 e-reader for iOS (and thus, for other HTML5-capable mobile devices).
Permalink for comment 482961
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[10]: Not surprising, really!
by fmaxwell on Sun 31st Jul 2011 22:48 UTC in reply to "RE[9]: Not surprising, really!"
Member since:

It sounded like you were downplaying the utility of those things for people who found them important, but if that was not your intention, then ok.

Since I made it a point to even name advantages that the other poster had not mentioned, it's pretty clear that I'm not trying to downplay anything.

Apple supporters have absolutely no wiggle room to criticize others about this though.

My iPad has ebook readers from Amazon (Kindle), Barnes & Noble (Nook), and Kobo, all advertised on and, and downloaded from, Apple's App Store. To the best of my knowledge, Apple charged no fees to any of those competitors.

By contrast, I see no Amazon-provided facility through which Kindle users can install ebook readers from Amazon's competitors (correct me if I am wrong, as I don't profess to be expert on Amazon's Kindle marketplace). In light of that, I believe that there is plenty of room to criticize about monopolistic practices.

You're definitely showing quite a lot of pro-apple bias though, almost all your criticisms of amazon apply equally if not more so to apple.

Again, how?

Does Amazon distribute an Apple-supplied iBook app for the Kindle? No.

Does Amazon provide a means by which their users can purchase and read ebooks from Apple, or any other competing vendor? No.

Has Amazon provided a huge marketplace to Apple in which to sell ebooks? No.

Yet Apple provides all of those things for Amazon in return is a cut from sales of ebooks. Amazon has a big headline on their web site "Newspapers and magazines in color on iPad and iPhone." It sure sounds like Amazon recognizes the importance of color, even if some of their vocal customers do not.

Think about this: Apple has sold 29 million iPads, over 100 million iPhones (as of March 2011), and tons (how's that for specificity?) of iPod Touchs. Had Apple played hardball, prohibiting the distribution of competing ebook readers through the App Store, Amazon would be stuck trying to market to their 1.5 million Kindle buyers. Instead, they have access to Apple's massive consumer market. In return, if they want the convenience of in-app purchases, they pay a percentage to Apple.

What's your alternative model? Apple distributes Amazon's app for free and lets Amazon lure away sales from Apple's own iTunes store and Apple gets no compensation? And in return, Amazon continues to prohibit Kindle owners from buying content from Apple?

Siding with the company that wants a cut from competitor's in-app sales versus siding with a company that prohibits competitors from selling at all hardly sounds like bias.

Reply Parent Score: 1