That’s not what he said either. He said “Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy,” Rasmussen said.
The Nordic model relies on high taxes which funds a cradle to grave system. Most capitalists would scoff at that kind of wealth redistribution. For example healthcare and education is free for everyone. People call those same ideas of AOC and Bernie Sanders “socialist.” But when they describe the Nordic model they are not “socialist”. Which is it?
12 years. From your own link: “Her comments are in reference to a United Nations-backed climate report, published late last year, that determined the effects of climate change to be irreversible and unavoidable if carbon emissions are not reined in over the next 12 years.”
How is your characterization of what she said at best dishonest
As for how will pay for it? You did actually cite what she says. Her actual Twitter responses say much more. Why do you have to be dishonest?
If I research the rest of the links will I find them of equal dishonesty?
Just Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Belgium, The Netherlands . . . all. I think your confusion is that you understand the difference between communism and socialism.
Spotify could upload their app, but they hardly need to do that, being the owners of the company making it, and it really REALLY doesn't help sell it when the only person able to "sideload your own apps" and avoid Apple is yourself. Kinda limited customer base, there.
As an iOS developer you can sideload your own apps to your phone. This is not new.
To use Apple's App Store, they have to abide by terms of Apple. Spotify can upload their app, and users download their apps for free every single day. Apple charges NOTHING for this. If companies do not generate revenue through their apps, Apple charges NOTHING. What Apple is charging is if users pay Apple through the Spotify app. For example if I pay for HBO through HBO.com, Apple charges nothing. If I pay HBO through HBO Now app, HBO Go app, Apple takes 30%. If HBO charge $1 per app, Apple gets 30%
So, I doubt your name. It's half right: you're a fool, but you know exactly what you are doing, you are DELIBERATELY lying
Please state which of the above facts are lies or do you simply not understand the identical policies of the Apple and Google stores.
The revenue Apple makes from services is growing; however, you can’t possibly state that they make “enormous profit” on apps. If I were to guess they are getting growing revenue off ApplePay.
That was my point exactly: how can you possibly state that they make enormous profit when you can’t know unless you work in Apple accounting. Also “higher margins” is meaningless with exact numbers. 3% is higher than 2%. Also Apple stated that “services revenue” is growing. Services revenue for Apple includes everything from
media, apps, iCloud, etc.
Apple reported that its App Store generated over $26.5 billion in revenue for developers in 2017, which was up about 30% year-over-year. This means that the App Store created approximately $11.5 billion in revenue for the company. Growth of services revenue is one of the major positive points for investors since it is growing faster than the rest of the company with higher margins.
You also said:
GIven apple's enormous profit margins.. i think it costs less then you think.
Do you understand the difference between revenue and profit?
Given that you’ve never read Apple’s financials, their apps do not make them a lot of profit as many of them are free. Yet they have to maintain the infrastructure. They make the bulk of their profits on hardware. Check it for yourself.
How much would it cost you to build a web server, a content server, a payment processsing server, and the network required to scale to hundreds millions of users. If you think that is cheap or easy I don’t think you’ve spent one day working in the real world of IT.
PS let’s talk real numbers: if a development team make $1 on an app how much more work do they have to do for $100,000? If they make zero changes to the app, they do zero more work. Apple does all the heavy lifting. If the developers want to manange their own servers, their own network, their own websites, their own payment systems how many thousands of $ would they have to spend before they make $1. And then they have to scale everything as they get more customers.
You can build a web server that handles hundreds of millions of users and billions of downloads for 1% fees? What magically technology is this? Or are you false equating what you can do with what Apple actually offers. You may not think Apple is worth it but you can’t say you can build something comparable for less.
No payment prosessing service hosts the app and distributes it either as you don’t seem to acknowledge that processing payments isn’t the sole purpose of the Apple Store. The closest competitor to Apple App Store is Google Play which charges the exact same amount.
And some other developer would release an unofficial Spotify app using public Spotify APIs. As long as the other developers don’t violate rules regarding APIs, they can’t pull the app from Apple stores.
Only if servers, payment systems, and infrastructure costs nothing would you have a reasonable argument. The point you missed is that free apps cost nothing to the developer and Spotify does this currently. What Spotify wants is when their iOS users pay for their subscriptions through Apple that Apple should get no cut.
Apple is hosting the app and the updates in addition to the payment system. While you could say that payment fees shouldn’t be more than 2%, how much would you pay for a App Store to do the same?
Apple doesn’t charge 30% for free apps. Apple doesn’t charge 30% for subscription users to use Spotify. They do charge 30% if users pay Spotify through Apple’s store.
Okay, how much would you pay as a developer to create a worldwide App Store that handles payments from hundreds of countries as well as distributes the app and updates. Also bear in mind Apple’s App Store is used by hundreds of million of people. You could develop your own infrastructure but I don’t think it would be less than your 30% fee.
Not quite. MS didn’t get in trouble for just bundling IE. They got in trouble for going out of their way to harm competitors. For example threatening OEMs not to install Netscape lest their licensing increase, threatening Intel not to release a Java VM that was optimized for Intel chips, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
That’s not what he said either. He said “Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy,” Rasmussen said.
The Nordic model relies on high taxes which funds a cradle to grave system. Most capitalists would scoff at that kind of wealth redistribution. For example healthcare and education is free for everyone. People call those same ideas of AOC and Bernie Sanders “socialist.” But when they describe the Nordic model they are not “socialist”. Which is it?
12 years. From your own link: “Her comments are in reference to a United Nations-backed climate report, published late last year, that determined the effects of climate change to be irreversible and unavoidable if carbon emissions are not reined in over the next 12 years.”
How is your characterization of what she said at best dishonest
As for how will pay for it? You did actually cite what she says. Her actual Twitter responses say much more. Why do you have to be dishonest?
If I research the rest of the links will I find them of equal dishonesty?
If you can’t actually cite anything then why should I believe you.
You need to cite what she actually said and not paraphrase what you interpret. Should I go on?
Just Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Belgium, The Netherlands . . . all. I think your confusion is that you understand the difference between communism and socialism.
Like?
You do understand that no country is pure socialist or pure capitalist? Or are you trying to trying to ignore facts?
Practically all of of the 27 EU countries would disagree with you but what are facts?
Spotify could upload their app, but they hardly need to do that, being the owners of the company making it, and it really REALLY doesn't help sell it when the only person able to "sideload your own apps" and avoid Apple is yourself. Kinda limited customer base, there.
As an iOS developer you can sideload your own apps to your phone. This is not new.
To use Apple's App Store, they have to abide by terms of Apple. Spotify can upload their app, and users download their apps for free every single day. Apple charges NOTHING for this. If companies do not generate revenue through their apps, Apple charges NOTHING. What Apple is charging is if users pay Apple through the Spotify app. For example if I pay for HBO through HBO.com, Apple charges nothing. If I pay HBO through HBO Now app, HBO Go app, Apple takes 30%. If HBO charge $1 per app, Apple gets 30%
So, I doubt your name. It's half right: you're a fool, but you know exactly what you are doing, you are DELIBERATELY lying
Please state which of the above facts are lies or do you simply not understand the identical policies of the Apple and Google stores.
The revenue Apple makes from services is growing; however, you can’t possibly state that they make “enormous profit” on apps. If I were to guess they are getting growing revenue off ApplePay.
That was my point exactly: how can you possibly state that they make enormous profit when you can’t know unless you work in Apple accounting. Also “higher margins” is meaningless with exact numbers. 3% is higher than 2%. Also Apple stated that “services revenue” is growing. Services revenue for Apple includes everything from media, apps, iCloud, etc.
Apple reported that its App Store generated over $26.5 billion in revenue for developers in 2017, which was up about 30% year-over-year. This means that the App Store created approximately $11.5 billion in revenue for the company. Growth of services revenue is one of the major positive points for investors since it is growing faster than the rest of the company with higher margins.
You also said:
GIven apple's enormous profit margins.. i think it costs less then you think.
Do you understand the difference between revenue and profit?
Given that you’ve never read Apple’s financials, their apps do not make them a lot of profit as many of them are free. Yet they have to maintain the infrastructure. They make the bulk of their profits on hardware. Check it for yourself.
How much would it cost you to build a web server, a content server, a payment processsing server, and the network required to scale to hundreds millions of users. If you think that is cheap or easy I don’t think you’ve spent one day working in the real world of IT.
PS let’s talk real numbers: if a development team make $1 on an app how much more work do they have to do for $100,000? If they make zero changes to the app, they do zero more work. Apple does all the heavy lifting. If the developers want to manange their own servers, their own network, their own websites, their own payment systems how many thousands of $ would they have to spend before they make $1. And then they have to scale everything as they get more customers.
You can sideload your own apps. Also if your app is free you as developer pay no fees. Apple and Google are almost identical in their store terms.
You can build a web server that handles hundreds of millions of users and billions of downloads for 1% fees? What magically technology is this? Or are you false equating what you can do with what Apple actually offers. You may not think Apple is worth it but you can’t say you can build something comparable for less.
No payment prosessing service hosts the app and distributes it either as you don’t seem to acknowledge that processing payments isn’t the sole purpose of the Apple Store. The closest competitor to Apple App Store is Google Play which charges the exact same amount.
And some other developer would release an unofficial Spotify app using public Spotify APIs. As long as the other developers don’t violate rules regarding APIs, they can’t pull the app from Apple stores.
Only if servers, payment systems, and infrastructure costs nothing would you have a reasonable argument. The point you missed is that free apps cost nothing to the developer and Spotify does this currently. What Spotify wants is when their iOS users pay for their subscriptions through Apple that Apple should get no cut.
iOS allows side loading of your own apps and limited side loading for enterprise licenses.
Apple is hosting the app and the updates in addition to the payment system. While you could say that payment fees shouldn’t be more than 2%, how much would you pay for a App Store to do the same?
Apple doesn’t charge 30% for free apps. Apple doesn’t charge 30% for subscription users to use Spotify. They do charge 30% if users pay Spotify through Apple’s store.
Okay, how much would you pay as a developer to create a worldwide App Store that handles payments from hundreds of countries as well as distributes the app and updates. Also bear in mind Apple’s App Store is used by hundreds of million of people. You could develop your own infrastructure but I don’t think it would be less than your 30% fee.
Not quite. MS didn’t get in trouble for just bundling IE. They got in trouble for going out of their way to harm competitors. For example threatening OEMs not to install Netscape lest their licensing increase, threatening Intel not to release a Java VM that was optimized for Intel chips, etc.