Apple ’s newly announced subscription policy for App Store offerings has triggered a rhythm of griping from companies that sell contentedness or subscriptions from their peregrine apps . But a closer aspect at Apple ’s fresh charge per unit and terms suggest that the company ’s insurance policy is n’t that different from what rival services extend — and in some case , Apple ’s terms aremorefavorable .
Before this week , publishers were capable to give away their apps in the depot for spare , but ruffle users out to Mobile Safari when it get time to really purchase capacity for that app . That shift Tuesday , when Apple update its rules . Now , any subject matter uncommitted outside of an app must now also be made usable via in - app purchase , with Apple taking a 30 percent cut of any revenue . Users can still buy that subject matter on - equipment via Mobile Safari or even their desktop computers , but Apple want its prospect at take a leak money from content that is grease one’s palms and used for its mobile platform .
decent on pool cue , Apple ’s insurance policy came under fire from pundit and publishers . In a statement , music subscription service Rhapsody promise Apple ’s new normal “ economically untenable ” and intimate it would cultivate with other publishers to follow up with “ an appropriate legal and byplay response to this latest development . ” Apost at the tech patronage web log VentureBeatasked “ how far can Apple labor developer ? ” Some law professor speaking to theWall Street Journaleven upraise the possibility ofantitrust probesagainst Apple .
Interestingly , however , Apple ’s rule do n’t seem that out of air when compared to what rivals are offering . Admittedly , it ’s a small field of competitors — Android , Windows Phone 7 , and BlackBerry platforms do not yet support subscription for app subject matter . Barnes & Noble strikes deals with publishers for subject matter on its Nook due east - referee , though the society would n’t comment toMacworldon how it cleave subscription tax revenue with publishing firm in its Nook shop . ( Its ego - print book rate , on the other hand , are publicly available . )
That leaves Amazon and its assortment of Kindle offerings , including theKindle eastward - reading machine . Like Apple , Amazon seduce a democratic gadget for subject consumption , serves as the sole ( legitimate ) gatekeeper for getting the huge majority of capacity onto it , and issue the fee it charges for subject matter manner of speaking . Both large publication likeNew York Timesand item-by-item blogger like you and me are able to print content directly to the Kindle . But if we require to do so , we have to harmonise to Amazon ’s revenue terms .
In a nutshell , Amazon used to give publishers only about 30 percentof the revenue collect from subscriptions sold through Kindle . In December 2010 , Amazon increased that amount to pit Apple ’s be 70 - 30 split with developers . But a publisher will only get that charge per unit from Amazon if it meets sure qualification , such as submit its content in a formatting that can be read across all Kindle twist and apps . Furthermore , ego - published bloggers still only get 30 percentage of the fee Amazon charges Kindle customers .
Regardless of which gross rate publisher characterize for , Amazon also charges a pocket-size fee for delivering cognitive content over its 3 G Whispernet service , placard at 15 cent per Bachelor of Medicine . Remember , with each3G - enabled Kindle , Amazon include lifespan wireless service to download contentedness for barren , but passes on 70 percent of the content delivery costs to publishers .
To apply Amazon ’s beneficial case revenue split and price formula—(revenue – bringing costs ) * 70 per centum — a monthly publication delivered wirelessly that cost $ 10 and weighs 9 Bachelor of Medicine will end up netting the publisher $ 6.05 per reader . With Apple ’s terms and a aboriginal app in the App Store , that 30 pct gash would give the publisher $ 7 .
Barnes & Noble only air its ego - publish rates for books , but they ’re deserving mentioning . If your book costs $ 3 to $ 10 , you ’ll get 60 pct of your price ( minus wireless delivery costs ) . If your book costs $ 11 to $ 200 , you ’ll get only 40 percent of your damage .
One day after Apple announced its App Store subscriptions feature film and fresh rules , Google tossed its hat into the ringing by announcingOne Pass , a young defrayal system that allows publishers to charge for digital message . Designed primarily as a web browser - base payment dick that ’s attached to readers ’ Google calculate ( and billed through Google Checkout ) , One Pass allow publishers to charge content subscription , day passes , rank discounts , or even per - article fee . substance abuser can login via the browser app on just about any modern gadget and will call for an cyberspace connexion to read their paid depicted object , but Google will take only a 10 percent commission — undercutting what Apple and Amazon direction . Of course , Google ’s service is web browser app - based and not necessarily tied into a ironware gadget , which probably had an gist on the portion of publisher taxation Google decided to claim .
Of course , the real power point of contention around Apple ’s novel subscription have rears its head when a publishing house wants to sell content on iOS devicesthrougha competing store such as Amazon ’s Kindle app or Zinio ’s digital magazine stand . Though Apple has so far been felicitous to O.K. quite a few third - party stores in the App Store , its young terms are clearly not succeed the society much clapping from them right now . Not only are security deposit already thin for some of these party , but they ’re also used to avoiding Apple ’s cut of in - app purchases by redirecting consumers to a web browser app - found store for purchases . Under Apple ’s fresh principle , they ’ll have to pop paying Apple and agree to consumer - friendly terms like making it easy to scratch a subscription and protect personal info .
Again , though , a comparison to rival devices is revealing . Amazon offer up no access to third - political party stores on the Kindle , and even though the Nook is based on Android , Barnes & Noble has locked its reader down by off access to Google ’s Android Marketplace and porting only a handful of apps that it chooses to the Nook .
However , like the iPad , these devices do offer a content use alternative to their built - in stores — a web browser app . The Kindle ’s browser app may be technologically limit in some ways when equate to the iPad and the Nook , but all three devices have a browser app that is not cut back from visiting any land site . More to the point , it does n’t cost anyone 30 percent of anything to use those internet browser .
There are also some open questions about which types of content and service will be affected by Apple ’s raw rules . Some of the speech communication Apple use in its terms suggest that content delivery services — such as cartridge publications and book stores — will fall under the fresh linguistic rule , while rain cats and dogs subscription services — like Netflix and Rhapsody — might not . Macworldhas asked Apple for clarification and will update once we experience a comment .
It ’s up to the content providers to consider whether 30 percent is too eminent a cost to give for memory access to the throng of App Store client , but it is also up to Apple to clarify some of the boundaries of these raw rules . For now , when compare to the competition , what Apple is visit does n’t seem as out of line as the initial uproar might have you believe .
