Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Office Finally Gets iOS App
An anonymous reader writes "After years of rumors and months of bickering with Apple over revenue splits, Microsoft has finally released an official iOS app for Office 365 subscribers, allowing people to use Word, Excel and PowerPoint on their iPhones and iPads. According to a hands-on report with the software, the Office app has basic functionality, but is missing some key productivity features. 'These include: font options, text alignment, bulleted lists and, again, more color choices, all of which you can find in, say, the Google Drive app.' They say it's a fairly useful addition for current subscribers, but certainly not enough to make it worth the Office 365 subscription fee on its own. 'We can't tell if Microsoft deliberately handicapped Office Mobile for iPhone, or if it's simply saving some features for a later update. (A company rep declined to comment on what we can expect from future versions.) We're willing to believe Microsoft still has some unfinished items on its to-do list, but even so, it's a shame that iPhone users waited this long for an Office app, only to get something with such a minimal feature set. All told, Office Mobile represents a good enough start for Microsoft, and in some ways it's better than Google Drive, particularly where spreadsheets are concerned. Still, it's miles behind other office apps for iOS, including Apple iWork.'"
....allowing people to use Word, Excel and PowerPoint on their iPhones and iPads.
Now, that's really going to hurt PC sales.
Yeah, there will be some desktops for the cubicle drones who need to crunch the quarterly numbers, type the letters and briefs, etc .... but for the folks who are running the place and the rainmakers, this is great.
Oh! And we're going to see laptops get hit too now.
I have a bunch of entrepreneurs, doctors, and executive types in my family. There was one Macbook Air and the rest were iPads. An iPad does 99% of that they need.
Desktops and laptops for the worker bees - iPads for the bosses.
> missing some key productivity features. 'These include: font options, text alignment, bulleted lists
Is it a joke?
Microsoft signed up to PRISM in 2007 which gives the military access to stored data. Office 365 is their ONLINE product where your data is kept online on their servers under US jurisdiction. That gives the US military access to your commercial private data.
Go read up on the commercial spying scandals involving Echelon, and you'll see why you cannot permit your companies documents, or even your own private documents into US cloud services.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story_3.html
"There has been “continued exponential growth in tasking to Facebook and Skype,” according to the PRISM slides. With a few clicks and an affirmation that the subject is believed to be engaged in terrorism, espionage or nuclear proliferation, an analyst obtains full access to Facebook’s “extensive search and surveillance capabilities against the variety of online social networking services.”
According to a separate “User’s Guide for PRISM Skype Collection,” that service can be monitored for audio when one end of the call is a conventional telephone and for any combination of “audio, video, chat, and file transfers” when Skype users connect by computer alone. Google’s offerings include Gmail, voice and video chat, Google Drive files, photo libraries, and live surveillance of search terms."
You can barely type on most tablets. Why make a typing program (Word)? Then you can't use it unless you're a 365 subscriber, which only people who can't do math are. Then you can't even do basic formatting that an RTF editor would let you do. Wow. Maybe this is MS secretly trying to convince people tablets are actually NOT computer replacements and Windows 9 won't be touch-friendly or ridiculously laid out. Well, I can dream at least.
Hah, you must mean Citrix, right?
Not that it was "invented" by either of them, but Citrix added terminal server capabilities to NT 3.51, then Microsoft screwed them by putting in their own "terminal server" into NT 4.0, giving Citrix only the small market that needed extremely low bandwidth.
People are going to compose documents, spreadsheets, etc. on a tablet??
Maybe I need more coffee, can someone explain why anyone would want this?
Free Martian Whores!
So finally iOS users can get the free cloud backup via the NSA that Office365 users enjoy!
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
No iPad support, which is arguably the largest use case scenario.
You have to subscribe to Office 365.
You can't just buy it in the app store.
I honestly can't come up with a way they could have fucked this up any more. Once again MS snatches defeat from the jaws of victory.
No thanks; I'll carry on using (free) Google docs plus the Apple apps I already purchased, (for les than the monthly cost of Ofice360) for those very rare occassions that I want to edit 'office' docs on my iDevices.
Follows announcement that search engine for Siri will go from Google to Bing.
http://tech2.in.com/news/ios/apple-ditches-google-partners-with-bing-for-siri-search/876324
checking office docs on a phone seems prohibitive regardless of OS. Microsoft has for roughly a decade tried to "phone" as best it can and shouldnt have any incentive to participate in developing its killer app for iDevices at all. perhaps we're 'embracing' here for the sake of the game? that had we not offered anything at all, Apple would simply have thrown developers at the problem or worse, market share for office365 would have taken a hit. It also prevents C-Level iphone users from getting so angry over the absence as to say "screw it, we use a standard that works with any phone now"
i get the point from MS: if you need something to get windows work done, specifically Microsoft Office or Sharepoint, it might well be worth your while to look into a microsoft phone instead. Its vastly cheaper than an iPhone and while not as "cool" its still more effective than the ported app for any other platform.
Good people go to bed earlier.
They could easily release an iPad app without paying Apple the 30% - they just make the app require an Office 365 account. Done. Sign up for the account online, go back to the app, done.
They only have to pay Apple the 30% _IF_ users can sign up for the account _IN_ the app. If they do so via a web browser, on their own, it allows the developer to avoid the 30% cut to Apple.
Please do try to understand how the process works before offering your opinion on it.
A few weeks ago Microsoft released an ad on TV comparing the iPad and the Surface. One "selling point" was the iPad lacks Office. (I mean, bashing a competitor because you didn't port your software to their platform of all things?)
Then, Microsoft releases Office for iOS? Such disorganization.
iOS Finally Gets Microsoft Office App
FTFY.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Microsoft releases a half-baked Office for iOS while Apple is going to release a near-complete version of iWork for Web browsers? Even if iWork "Web Edition" doesn't offer everything the OS X version does, I'm pretty sure it will have things like text alignment, fonts, colors and frickin' bullet lists.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
So, the software is underwhelming. However I can see it being very useful to have a good number of my most important reference docs and presentations, and a few basic spreadsheets always with me. In fact that is why I mainly use Apple's iWork software on the iPad. Very useful. And I can imagine that in the case of the Microsoft written suite, the file compatibility should be excellent (iWork's import of Powerpoint presentations sometimes has a few rough edges)
It's pretty obvious what Microsoft are doing here:
1. release a very limited version of Office for iOS
2. dumb users will badmouth iOS/iDevices because "it can't even handle a full version of Office"
3. the Office file formats get to survive a little longer because "it's even compatible with Apple devices"
Very sneaky, but what do you expect from Microsoft?
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
I don't get this. When I buy a copy of MS Office at Best Buy, they get a little cut, and so does the supplier that Best Buy purchases from. I'm not sure what the usual split is between Microsoft, the supplier and the retailer, but I'm sure it's not that far off from 30%. I don't see why it should work any different if I set up a software store that only sells licenses and not disks.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
From my understanding signing up within the App isn't an issue as well. The question is, can the user use the App at all without paying?
I have a mobile App that has our own private "cloud" storage. The user can use the App to their hearts desire. But, if they want our "cloud" they must subscribe via our Web portal.
But, if they don't care about that - they can use the App indefinitely. I don't think there is a steadfast rule to it, all Apple seems to care about is if the App can be used (functional). Where, Netflix as an example fails at that end, because you can't use the App without having a paid Netflix account.
...and the bosses switch back to their PC at lunch while the iPad recharges.
Since it would need to have most of the battery draining options on (like wifi).
Quote by Bill Gates, of Microsoft, when asked if he would develop software for the NeXT computer: "Develop for it? I'll piss on it."
http://library.thinkquest.org/22522/quotes.html
(For those who don't recall their computer history, Apple's iOS comes from OPENSTEP, which Apple got when it bought NeXT, and OPENSTEP was the upgrade from NeXTstep which implemented the OPENSTEP standard for NeXT Computers.)
Hopefully this means we'll see a version of OneNote for Mac OS X --- it'd be a nice gesture if they'd bring back Apple's MacBASIC which BG bought for the princely sum of $1 so he could bury it --- http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=MacBasic.txt .
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
Pretty sure MS makes their money when Best Buy gets the product from them (also not sure that there's a middle-man supplier to Best Buy but if there is, wow is that crappy supply chain management).
I don't understand how this is a big deal.
I have installed Officesuite Pro on both a tablet and smartphone.
I can create and edit documents quite easily and no subscription is needed. I paid £9.99 and more than happy with it.
It's also "Office" compatible (e.g. excel and word)
Not to mention the other officesuites out there too (e.g. King office is even free)
It all works really well with a bluetooth keyboard linked to a tablet too.
I imagine corporate types are asking for Microsoft Office for IOS - beyond that no big deal.
Same as the old boss.
So Microsoft is reducing the feature set of its iOS MsOffice products. It is understandable and is quite logical. It has to have some differentiation and some small amount of sand in the gears to justify charging hundreds of dollars for its if "full" version. They want to check off that bullet point "iOS support: done". But at the same time it can not charge full money to the iOS suite, Apple is waiting there, waiting with its butcher knife to cleave its 30% commission. So it is going to give away or charge something minimal for the iOS suite. Doing it and maintaining a large price differential for its "full" product needs such tricks.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
People like to complain. The whole sale price of Office to Best Buy or the like is more than a 30% discount from what Best Buy sells it at.
They should have kept it a Windows / WindowsPhone exclusive.
People are going to compose documents, spreadsheets, etc. on a tablet??
Why not? Attach a keyboard if needed. Just because you don't do it now doesn't mean it can't do a perfectly acceptable job given appropriate software.
Maybe I need more coffee, can someone explain why anyone would want this?
Because a tablet is underneath basically exactly the same thing as a laptop, just with an interface optimized in a different way. There is no fundamental reason why you can't attach a keyboard to a tablet and do word processing on it. A tablet certainly has sufficient CPU power for that task. As long as the software is designed with the tablet interface in mind it should work fine. In fact I'm confident (bordering on certain) that tablets will converge with what we now call a laptop over the next few years. Windows 8 is essentially an effort to do just this and Apple and Google are working towards merging the two.
So basically, the market penetration on this will be zero, because Office 365
Meanwhile, in reality: One million subscriptions in 3.5 months.
The title of this pos is backwards. It should read "iOS finally gets offical MS Office App".
The question is, can the user use the App at all without paying?
That's up to the App developer isn't it? Here are the ways Apple will take their cut: 1) 30% of price of app and 2) 30% of subscriptions generated within app. If MS charges nothing for the app and if all subscriptions are created externally (through microsoft.com), Apple can't charge.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
font options, text alignment, bulleted lists
You know how they always say "80% of the users only use 20% of the features". Well, those features look like they belong solidly in that 20% that they should have focused on. I'm pretty sure that even 1980s vintage copies of WordPerfect running on DOS supported those features.
But there are a lot of retailers and etailers and there's competition around their margin.. You can buy Office at Staples, Office Depot, Walmart, Fry's, Microcenter or buy it online from a whole ton of places. With Apple, every consumer is chained only to the app store.
This space for rent.
I don't get this. When I buy a copy of MS Office at Best Buy, they get a little cut, and so does the supplier that Best Buy purchases from. I'm not sure what the usual split is between Microsoft, the supplier and the retailer, but I'm sure it's not that far off from 30%. I don't see why it should work any different if I set up a software store that only sells licenses and not disks.
because it's 30% that goes to a player that is only relevant in the transaction because they made it so that you couldn't install sw without them?
that's what ms was/is aiming for with metro as well. in low value sw it doesn't matter as much, but buy a photoshop and then have the thought that "hmm, I just paid the price of the machine I'm using this sw on to the machine manufacturer just to run some sw from a 3rd party on this" and you might be a little peeved about it.
really the point is that the only one and only official appstore scenario is one where there is no possible competition by retailers and is going to be more expensive than buying direct(the higher the cost the more screwed the consumer is as the transaction costs are fixed but the tax from the sw market depends on the price).
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
The question is, can the user use the App at all without paying?
That's up to the App developer isn't it? Here are the ways Apple will take their cut: 1) 30% of price of app and 2) 30% of subscriptions generated within app. If MS charges nothing for the app and if all subscriptions are created externally (through microsoft.com), Apple can't charge.
But they can reject the app. If you're listing a "free" app that doesn't do anything (without a separate paid subscription) you will be rejected for having a useless app.
E pluribus unum
The mobile app market is an endless greased-up cash grab by stupid people who do not understand the concept of the "wrong tool for the job."
Doing real "work" on a mobile phone is like assembling a car engine with your teeth. It is completely retarded.
Are people who bought an Apple product lamenting that they don't have a Microsoft product available to them?
I should think that for most people, this would be a big giant "who gives a damn?" kinda thing.
But, who knows ... maybe half of all iPhone users have been saying "gee, if I only had Office, this experience would be complete". Then again, I guess some people need to read excel documents at 2am on their phone -- but I wouldn't be one of them.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
What? That sounds ludicrous. Do you have actual examples of this or are you listing hypothetical that may or may not have happened?
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
There is no Office for iPad.
Atleast read the post titles of the top two posts before rushing to post your two cents you think are worth millions.
He didn't say there was an Office for iPad. He said there was an Office for iOS. The last time I checked, you can run an iOS app in the iPad even if it was made for iPhone/iPod Touch. It may not optimized for an iPad's screen but it will run.
Also, read the part of the summary where it says Apple's forced 30% cut was keeping Office for iPad on hold, so Apple deserves part of the blame for that and the ad is justified in flaunting Office on Windows RT and Windows 8.
You complain of others not understanding an issue but you misstated the problem yourself in so many ways. Apple's 30% cut comes from two sources: 1) 30% of the price of the app or 2) 30% of any subscription revenue generated within the app. Microsoft is under no obligations to do either. If they offered the app for free they don't have to pay Apple. If a user cannot create a subscription within the app, they don't have to pay Apple. This is the same for everyone not specially created for MS. MS wanted Apple to change the rules for them and how is that Apple's fault if they said no?
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/netflix/id363590051?mt=8
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/hulu-plus/id376510438?mt=8
This is the same for everyone not specially created for MS. MS wanted Apple to change the rules for them and how is that Apple's fault if they said no?
Because Office is not the same as every other 99c fart app on the App store.
Which app on the iPad among the million apps following the "rules" is going get more business sales in companies for the iPad apart from Office? That's a ton of $$$ if you count the huge margins on iPads. Thus, MS is in a way stronger negotiating position than the developer of a fart sounds app. If you can't understand that simple logic, I have nothing more to say to you.
Also, the ads didn't say it was Apple's fault. They said there is no Office for the iPad. If Apple was more greedy, then, as I said it's "partly Apple's fault".
This space for rent.
Because Office is not the same as every other 99c fart app on the App store.
The Office app needs special rules because you and MS say it's special. Yeah, that's not a reason. So all the subscription based apps like the WSJ app can do whatever they want because they are special too?.
Which app on the iPad among the million apps following the "rules" is going get more business sales in companies for the iPad apart from Office?
Funny how you defined "business sales" because if you want to talk millions in sales to consumers you have to ignore Pandora, Kindle, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, etc.
Thus, MS is in a way stronger negotiating position than the developer of a fart sounds app. If you can't understand that simple logic, I have nothing more to say to you.
Pandora, Kindle, Angry Birds, etc. are not fart apps. It's not logic on your part; it's willful blindness as you appear to be a MS apologist.
If you went to any business in this world and you wanted them to make exceptions for you, you would say it's partially their fault if they say no? What kind of warped sense of entitlement do you have? Can you say to a potential landlord that you want to pay less rent than he's offering and then blame him because he didn't say yes? That the landlord is partially to blame that you were without an apartment. The delay was all MS. They wanted Apple to change the rules. Apple said no. End of story.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
But they can reject the app. If you're listing a "free" app that doesn't do anything (without a separate paid subscription) you will be rejected for having a useless app.
They can do anything they want, but that's not one of them.
With Apple, every consumer is chained only to the app store.
iOS users overwhelmingly like having a one-stop-shop with all the apps in. That's one of the things they chose that platform for.
It wasn't sprung on them as a change from previous practice. Indeed before the Apple Store, the mobile app market was tiny. Apple's one-stop-shop popularised phone apps.
With Apple, every consumer is chained only to the app store.
iOS users overwhelmingly like having a one-stop-shop with all the apps in. That's one of the things they chose that platform for.
It wasn't sprung on them as a change from previous practice. Indeed before the Apple Store, the mobile app market was tiny. Apple's one-stop-shop popularised phone apps.
And you're pulling this data from where exactly? Your intuition?
Is that why so millions of people fall over themselves to jailbreak the phones?
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/latest-jailbreak-statistics-jaw-dropping-154024296.html
http://www.geek.com/apple/stats-reveal-evasi0n-ios-6-1-jailbreak-1538656/
Looks like you're falling victim to ex post facto reasoning and attributing Stockholm syndrome to iOS users.
This space for rent.
Because Office is not the same as every other 99c fart app on the App store.
The Office app needs special rules because you and MS say it's special. Yeah, that's not a reason. So all the subscription based apps like the WSJ app can do whatever they want because they are special too?.
Which app on the iPad among the million apps following the "rules" is going get more business sales in companies for the iPad apart from Office?
Funny how you defined "business sales" because if you want to talk millions in sales to consumers you have to ignore Pandora, Kindle, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, etc.
Thus, MS is in a way stronger negotiating position than the developer of a fart sounds app. If you can't understand that simple logic, I have nothing more to say to you.
Lets say Apple demanded 100% instead of 30%, does this mean it's all MS's fault? Who is to say 30% is the "right" amount? You, the MS hater?
If you went to any business in this world and you wanted them to make exceptions for you, you would say it's partially their fault if they say no? What kind of warped sense of entitlement do you have? Can you say to a potential landlord that you want to pay less rent than he's offering and then blame him because he didn't say yes? That the landlord is partially to blame that you were without an apartment.
If I were renting a thousand apartments, yes I would ask the landlord for a discount. That is not a warped sense of entitlement, it's getting a good deal for your company. If you didn't, and paid one of your biggest rival companies extra money you didn't need to, you would be called an unknowing fool and would be fired from any half decent company for wasting money like an idiot. You fail at Negotiating 101. Good that you aren't responsible for big companies' business decisions.
You want to see how Apple might bend rules? Look at this email where an Apple exec was proposing an exception to Amazon books. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57589185-37/apples-eddy-cue-yep-we-caused-e-book-pricing-to-rise/
I honestly can't make out if you're that dense, or your abject MS hate is clouding your logic. I hope it's the latter. And Slashdot moderation shows how it's more about MS hate than insightful comments, no wonder the site is dying as people flee from theirrational hating circlejerk.
This space for rent.
With Apple, every consumer is chained only to the app store.
iOS users overwhelmingly like having a one-stop-shop with all the apps in. That's one of the things they chose that platform for.
It wasn't sprung on them as a change from previous practice. Indeed before the Apple Store, the mobile app market was tiny. Apple's one-stop-shop popularised phone apps.
That's like saying that because lot of people are buying cactii, they must like getting poked in the ass with cactus thorns.
It sad to see people on a site that used to stand for software freedom cheering on Apple and it's implementation of Palladium DRM for an OS, and developer abuse by taking forced cuts of app sales, just because MS is on the other end of the story. Or maybe you're just an Apple fanboy that hates software freedom and what it stands for.
It sad to see people on a site that used to stand for software freedom cheering on Apple and it's implementation of Palladium DRM for an OS, and developer abuse by taking forced cuts of app sales, just because MS is on the other end of the story. Or maybe you're just an Apple fanboy that hates software freedom and what it stands for.
What do you mean forced cut? It's their store. If you don't like the terms of the App store you don't have to develop for iOS. You could go to MS--oh wait--they take the same cut. Or Android store--oh wait--it's the same cut. Do you have a point or do you just hate Apple?
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Lets say Apple demanded 100% instead of 30%, does this mean it's all MS's fault?
Let's say Apple killed your dog and your mother while framing you for tax evasion, whose fault is it? You are listing hypotheticals that aren't close to reality because you don't have a real argument. The cut is 30% for everyone. And the thing you don't understand is that MS doesn't have to pay as long as they play by the same rules everyone follows. Netflix and Hulu don't get charged 30%. HBO doesn't get charged 30%.
Who is to say 30% is the "right" amount? You, the MS hater?
Apparently both Google and MS think 30% is the "right" amount as they charge the same percentage for their app store? You do understand the idea of ownership, right? It's Apple store, not yours. You are not entitled that they change terms just for you.
If I were renting a thousand apartments, yes I would ask the landlord for a discount. That is not a warped sense of entitlement, it's getting a good deal for your company.
Nowhere in the vast realm of reality does a landlord have to rent to you if you want cheaper rent. If you are renting a thousand or one apartment, if you don't want to pay the rent he wants, he doesn't have to rent to you. Period. It's his decision. Maybe he just doesn't like you. Maybe your offer is way too low. Maybe he already has a thousand people lined up willing to pay more. Where your sense of entitlement is that somehow it's his fault that you didn't get an apartment for a few months because you held out for lower rent. In business every day people walk away from deals. It's business; it's not personal. No one owes you a deal.
If you didn't, and paid one of your biggest rival companies extra money you didn't need to, you would be called an unknowing fool and would be fired from any half decent company for wasting money like an idiot.
And you fail to understand basic ownership rights. No one has to agree to your terms. Now, do you know what terms MS wanted? What if they only wanted Apple to take 5% which doesn't cover their costs. We don't know. Apple doesn't have to agree to change their terms. Are you one of those people that goes into a dollar store and wants to pay $0.25 for everything while the clerk is trying to point to you the name of the store.
You fail at Negotiating 101. Good that you aren't responsible for big companies' business decisions.
And you don't understand Business. Apple makes more money than you and I than both of us in our lifetimes. But if you had any business sense, you'd understand Apple makes the bulk of their money on hardware sales. App sales is a tiny fraction of their revenue and profits. So Apple's competitor (MS) wants a larger cut to further their monopoly hold of Office users? Apple might, maybe, get a few bucks more in the deal. [sarcasm]Yeah, sure that makes total sense that Apple would agree to that.[/sarcasm] Or they have MS follow the same rules everyone else has to follow.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Their store? Sure take cuts, but what about providing options for people that want to use other stores or install apps directly?
If you don't like don't develop? That's like saying if you didn't like MS' monopoly on computers, become a hermit. On Android, you can host the APK on your own site or submit it to alternative stores like Amazon's. So there is competition for the 30% cut. You can start an Android store and charge only a 5% cut if you wanted to, to compete with Google Store, and if you provide a better service, devs and users will start using your store. Also, MS has far fewer restrictions on in app purchases. You can implement your own payment methods inside the app itself, unlike Apple that wants to charge a toll on all in app purchases. It's not about Apple hate, it's about the slow erosion of software freedoms, and how Apple could make it acceptable in the public sphere(thus leading to restrictions in the other "app stores) because of people like you cheering them on just because it is Apple.
Their store? Sure take cuts, but what about providing options for people that want to use other stores or install apps directly?
When I bought my car, how come I can't install parts from a competing manufacturer? You're missing the whole point. If you want to develop for iOS or use an iOS device, there are limitations. This is the same for WP store by the way. If you don't like it, don't buy the device. Don't develop for it. No one said that you are entitled to everything your way.
If you don't like don't develop? That's like saying if you didn't like MS' monopoly on computers, become a hermit.
Where you around during the 90s or were you a hermit? The problem was not that MS had/has a monopoly. The problem was how MS maintained that monopoly. The behaviors that they demonstrated by threatening competitors and partners in furtherance of the monopoly was the issue.
Incidentally, people here like to boast how Android has a larger marketshare than iPhone so how can Apple have a monopoly when they don't even have the largest marketshare? How can they have a monopoly when it is easy to get an Android phone if you want?
So there is competition for the 30% cut. You can start an Android store and charge only a 5% cut if you wanted to, to compete with Google Store, and if you provide a better service, devs and users will start using your store.
You missed the point. Google still has the right just like MS and Apple to charge 30%. Just because you created your own store doesn't mean you get to dictate to others. But let's explore your 5% cut. Do you think you can maintain a store that handles billions of apps and media every quarter that services hundreds of millions of customers for 5%. Also your store has to deal with the content side like dealing with developers and all the uploads/updates. There is also the payment system which handles worldwide currencies and taxes. All that for 5%. Good luck to you. I would think that you would be in the red at 5%. There is a reason it's 30%. It's enough for all of them to cover their costs with some profit.
Also, MS has far fewer restrictions on in app purchases. You can implement your own payment methods inside the app itself, unlike Apple that wants to charge a toll on all in app purchases.
If you like MS so much, develop for it. Or for Android. No one is forcing you to develop for Apple. Now with MS, you don't have as many potential customers. But you have to make that decision.
It's not about Apple hate, it's about the slow erosion of software freedoms, and how Apple could make it acceptable in the public sphere(thus leading to restrictions in the other "app stores) because of people like you cheering them on just because it is Apple.
If you want software freedoms, develop and buy Android. When did I cheer them on? I explained exactly what the Apple's policy is. If you don't like it, don't buy their stuff. Don't develop for it. You are not entitled to everything you want in life.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
But let's explore your 5% cut. Do you think you can maintain a store that handles billions of apps and media every quarter that services hundreds of millions of customers for 5%. Also your store has to deal with the content side like dealing with developers and all the uploads/updates. There is also the payment system which handles worldwide currencies and taxes. All that for 5%. Good luck to you. I would think that you would be in the red at 5%. There is a reason it's 30%. It's enough for all of them to cover their costs with some profit.
Let the market decide that instead of Apple. That's what innovation is all about, reducing costs, making it easy for developers and users. But no, Apple(and MS following in its footsteps) don't want to risk that, so they artificially restrict it using DRM.
If you want software freedoms, develop and buy Android. When did I cheer them on? I explained exactly what the Apple's policy is. If you don't like it, don't buy their stuff. Don't develop for it. You are not entitled to everything you want in life.
Wait, so one can't criticize Apple or complain about them?
Why do you spend so much time criticizing Microsoft, even going to the trouble of submitting stories with spinned and biased summaries etc. when it is the easiest ever to avoid MS products right now? Just stop complaining and use OS X, Google Docs/iWork, Google Drive/Dropbox, iPhone, Gmail, iPad, PS4, Apple TV etc.
You are not entitled to everything you want in life, if you don't like MS, just use alternatives and don't post anything criticizing them.
Well my information about the market before the iPhone comes from the fact I've been a mobile developer since the 1990s. The iOS information comes from the fact that people know there's a one-stop-shop before they buy, and being in the iOS community I have a reasonable grasp on the feelings about that. Are you an iOS user?
There's no post-facto about it. I've been a part of every moment of the smartphone industry. And the Stockholm syndrome meme is just moronic abuse of popular science; a slashdot meme. Stockholm Syndrome is a phenomenon that may be exhibited by people kept physically captive, not about something as trivial as what product platform they use.
As to your 14 million figure, that amounts to 5% of iPhones. Which is smaller than the proportion of dedicated pirates most platforms have. So it's not doing anything to disprove my point.
Then the original point is like saying people who are buying cactuses are disadvantaged because their plants don't need watering every day.
Let the market decide that instead of Apple. That's what innovation is all about, reducing costs, making it easy for developers and users. But no, Apple(and MS following in its footsteps) don't want to risk that, so they artificially restrict it using DRM.
Is your complaint that there is DRM? You realize that developers want to be paid for each copy right? Without DRM they can't do that. It's not artificially restricted. Now if you don't want to charge for our app, then you don't have to list a price. But thousands of other developers want their money. It's the same with other media.
Wait, so one can't criticize Apple or complain about them?
You can complain all you want. But you are not entitled to anything. I can complain that I can't date a supermodel but I'm not entitled to a supermodel girlfriend.
Why do you spend so much time criticizing Microsoft, even going to the trouble of submitting stories with spinned and biased summaries etc. when it is the easiest ever to avoid MS products right now?
MS is opening retail stores within Best Buy stores. Their current stores don't appear to be very populated. I don't see that this new venture would be any more successful. This is just my opinion. What is the spin and bias?
Just stop complaining and use OS X, Google Docs/iWork, Google Drive/Dropbox, iPhone, Gmail, iPad, PS4, Apple TV etc.
I use what I deem to be the right tool. It's why I have a Linux server and desktops at home. It's why I don't have any consoles nor an AppleTV (or a Roku). It's why I use Libre Office. I know why I use things. I don't feel the need to push my agenda on other people.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Advertising the Surface based on Microsoft's effective monopoly in office software is going to get them slapped down hard by the EU at least. It's a textbook case of illegally using a monopoly.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes