The Purposeful Luddite – Windows Weekly 683

Share post

Conversation 1 comments

• nbplopes

  01 August, 2020 - 7:09 pm

  <p>You don’t need to be one player to have major control.</p><p><br></p><p>Here is the thing Leo, most business are going digital, Some are going full digital. ThinK about education, remote health support, psychologists, lawyers, libraries … you name it, all at a distance using digital surfaces. This is way beyond what Apple did, does or will do. One in two Americans using smartphones or tablets have an Phone or iPad, so you have one company governing the Policy that dictates how 50% of the US mobile population has access to your digital business services. And for the previlige your need to share 30% of your revenue with Apple o get properly payed through these devices.</p><p><br></p><p>Now I know what your are going to say Leo, “Oh you have an option not to put an you app in the App Store” Right. Here i s the thing Leo, you don’t control your customers devices. Look at your business. Do you control any of the devices accessing your digital service? Of course not, you need to be wherever they are the best you can. It jjust happens you have one company saying … giving me 30% of the revenue of your business to access your customer using their devices (they have bought the devices). Do you see how those billions come by? Nothing to due with App Store service, its has more to do with the iPhone market share and the fact that digital business have no control over which device they customers use. So what is the choice you so like here? Oh, just don’t do app do web right? You see here, one company governing how you business can reach your customers on Internet? This is unprecedented in any OS.</p><p><br></p><p>Tell me Leo. Your business, in what way Apple helped you business more than any other company, say your ISP? Imagine your ISP … give me 30% of your business … say ATT … heck for what reason? I understand that Your business model is based on sponsors, advertising etc etc. Ok. But other businesses are based on a subscription model, or pay by consultations or whatever. Say you decide to open a subscription model to you content, whatever, in what way Apple would help you as much as requiring 30% of your revenue?</p><p><br></p><p>Finally, Leo remark has of somehow if the EU says to an American company “hey you cannot do that here” it’s Anti American is out of this world. What is that all about? So if you turn to your friend, “look you cannot smoke in my car” … somehow you are anti-friend? Geezz. Get a grip.</p><p><br></p><p>So what’s the solution? Start by saying to the company, either level your price according to other web/app hosting services in the market or drop the one Store policy. Because its one Store over one in two Americans using Smartphones and for all digital services, with the exceptions at your own will it’s Anti-American. The company its effectively collecting 30% of others revenue from efforts they have no right to collect from due to Policy only. For unprecedented modus operandi, unprecendented measure don’t you think? What is at stake here is the very notion of property and rights to ones property. Not only business property but also customers property! The digital surface dilutes this in deep ways. Ford, an American company, after selling a Car cannot simply remotely block any of its operation that I have payed for and ask me for more money to unblock it, or ask Gas stations for 30% of their revenue filling up Fords. This measure would be insane, somehow in the digital service is alright. Crazy. Americans property, consumer property is being ripped of by these kinds of approaches to business. </p><p><br></p><p>Not saying that this is the intention of Apple, they are trying to protect what they think its their property, but is leaking beyond … for sure is a side effect. The very notion of private property, the fabric of the American way, is being challenged here in not so subtle ways. No company should own their customers this way, good service should be the key, not Policy.</p>

  Log in to Reply