SkyDrive 3.0: Microsoft Gave Up Fighting Apple's 30% Cut 121
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft on Wednesday released SkyDrive 3.0 for iOS out of the blue. Last time the app was in the news, Apple was stopping Microsoft from pushing out an update in the App Store because the company doesn't pay a 30 percent cut of the subscription revenue it generates. Now we've learned how Microsoft managed to update its iOS app today. 'We worked with Apple to create a solution that benefited our mutual customers,' a Microsoft spokesperson told TNW. 'The SkyDrive app for iOS is slightly different than other SkyDrive apps in that people interested in buying additional storage will do so via the web versus in the app.' Does this set a precedent for an iOS version of Microsoft Office?"
Uhhhh . . . (Score:4, Insightful)
No, it means I'm now officially tired of both companies. I hadn't realized that computers had just become red-tape machines instead of facilitators.
Re:Maybe I'm not reading this right, but (Score:5, Insightful)
No, Apple wins. Because there is competition between apps, and some app publishers will decide pay the 30% tax and make it easier for customers, and they might get more paying users that way.
It's like those immensely profitable companies bleating that their money is "trapped" overseas and they can't use it to "invest" in the USA. No it isn't trapped at all, just pay the taxes.
Re:Maybe I'm not reading this right, but (Score:2, Insightful)
Exact opposite for me, it ensures I'll never use iBooks, no matter how many times it prompts me to install it. I can ready my Kindle catalogue across all my devices, and buy pretty much all f my books on there. Weird how things have changed - I'll root for any company against Apple now. They're just a greedy shell with no innovations, leeching as much as they can from customers and devs alike. Fuck em.
Re:Maybe I'm not reading this right, but (Score:2, Insightful)
Exactly right. Apple charges for providing the in-app and app-store purchasing infrastructure,marketing, consistent user experience with high adoption rates, etc., for which they charge 30%.
No, they charge $99 a year for that, which is why you pay that fee regardless of whether your app is free or paid.
Companies have been free to choose not to use it, and do try to drive people to web sites for purchasing for as long as there have been iOS apps.
In recent times they switched their policy on this matter to prevent you from even including a link to an external payment system.
It's a simple decision, really.
It should be, use Apple's payment system and pay 30% for the privilege, implement your own in-app payment system or link users to your own external payment system. Apple now artificially prevents the latter two.