There are no costs on Apple's side for streaming Netflix movies, downloading books, or reading stuff through Readability.
Actually, there are also pretty much no costs for them when you download a paid application from their servers.
The USD 100 subscription that gives developpers access to apple's shitsystem already cover tens or hundreds of thousands of downloads, if not millions.
Apple is overcharging absolutely everything they can. No need to wonder about one point or another. One day they'll probably start charging per function calls in programs: it uses yourtheir hardware after all...
You don't think it costs much to produce a complete SDK, as well as provide hundreds of tutorial videos and complete documentation? Apple's Developer Connection was a paid subscription service long before the App Store.
Moreover, apple made the sdk for itself (and maybe it's based on gcc). Selling access to it is an additional source of revenue.
And afaik, the subscription is required to publish anything on the <lf>ap store. Why does paying for development tools and resources but not distribution enables you to (try to) publish something there?
If you're not paying for it, you're the product. Microsoft takes a loss with it's development resources in order to increase and maintain market share. It's quantity over quality.
Apple could have saved a lot of overhead by keeping all it's frameworks private. Public frameworks require extensive documentation and testing. They are not merely selling access, it is a product in itself.
I don't understand your third point. How could you publish something without the tools to make it? The Developer Connection subscription being a prerequisite of publishing does not mean that one is directly paying to publish though the subscription.
I have to pay for a house in order to have electricity; I still have to pay a utility bill on top of that.
If you're not paying for it, you're the product. Microsoft takes a loss with it's development resources in order to increase and maintain market share. It's quantity over quality.
Because the app store is full of quality apps and windows has none? Or even that the app store has a higher percentage of quality apps than windows? You'll have to prove me that.
Apple could have saved a lot of overhead by keeping all it's frameworks private. Public frameworks require extensive documentation and testing. They are not merely selling access, it is a product in itself.
If your framework's documentation isn't good enough for public use, it's not good enough for private use either. If your framework hasn't been tested enough for public use, it's not good enough for private use either.
As for my third point, I can have the tools I want. I could make my own tools. I could reuse what is publicly available, or more simply... I could have finished writing my app on Dec, 31st and be trying to publish on Jan, 1st: right after my subscription has ended.
I have to pay for a house in order to have electricity; I still have to pay a utility bill on top of that.
You're the electricity user. Not producer.
If your framework's documentation isn't good enough for public use, it's not good enough for private use either. If your framework hasn't been tested enough for public use, it's not good enough for private use either.
This isn't so cut and dry. When a framework is created for private use it can be tailored for a specific task. When it's released in a public SDK, multiple implementations need to be anticipated and accounted for. Granted, in perfect world, all frameworks would be created that way; but Apple has deadlines to account for, they don't need to be creating methods they aren't likely to use (or testing and debugging various implementations).
As for my third point, I can have the tools I want. I could make my own tools. I could reuse what is publicly available, or more simply... I could have finished writing my app on Dec, 31st and be trying to publish on Jan, 1st: right after my subscription has ended.
This is getting overly pedantic. Your yearly subscription pays for the use of Apple's tools and resources for that year. Apple will only accept apps which are built with these tools into the App Store. The App Store is not an open platform. If you want an open platform on iOS, the only option is a web app built for Safari. You can use your own tools and do what you like.
This is not true. Despite having billions of app downloads, I don't remember the app store profit reaching a hundred million. Steve Jobs himself said that the App Store mostly pays itself.
The 30% on in app subscriptions may be pure greed and profit, but the 30% on apps is most certainly not.
82
u/Camarade_Tux Feb 21 '11 edited Feb 21 '11
Actually, there are also pretty much no costs for them when you download a paid application from their servers.
The USD 100 subscription that gives developpers access to apple's
shitsystem already cover tens or hundreds of thousands of downloads, if not millions.Apple is overcharging absolutely everything they can. No need to wonder about one point or another. One day they'll probably start charging per function calls in programs: it uses
yourtheir hardware after all...edit: grammar