Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 12th Dec 2012 23:18 UTC
Permalink for comment 545032
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2011-05-12
I don't think Microsoft should get special treatment, but I do think 30% is a lot of money for what Apple gives in return.
If it's apps and app extensions I can understand, because that's code hosted on Apple's servers. Subscriptions aren't. These are costs for who ever is providing a service to subscribers. In this case Microsoft and they need to cover these costs and make a profit, which is hard to do if someone grabs 30% and doesn't give anything in return.
Also 30% is relative. Of $1 it's 30 cents, but of $30 it's $10. Why not use 30% and hard cap it at $2? Or $4, $5?
The more stuff is in the app store the more appealing iOS devices will become. Apple should be less motivated grabbing money from companies who increase the value of Apple's iOS ecosystem.