Amazon Sidesteps App Store Business Model, Plays Back MP3s From Safari 114
Press2ToContinue writes "Amazon has found a simple way around Apple's tight-fisted App Store rules: give users a web app to buy MP3s that runs in Safari. This way, they have no need to pay 30% per tune to Apple. Freedom of choice of vendor in Apple-only territory? Is this a big breach of Apple's walled garden? I wonder if Apple with have a response to this."
Well... (Score:2, Insightful)
We'll see Apple changing the rules to ban it.
There... that wasn't hard was it.
Re: (Score:2)
So Apple are gonna ban streaming music through their own phones browser - that should make them popular...
Re: (Score:3)
Nonsense... (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple has been clear from the start on this: "Don't like the App store's policies? Make an html5 app!" In fact, it was the only way to build apps for the original iPhone -- with Apple's blessing, at that. (And it still is how unwelcome vendors, e.g. porn operators, build iOS apps.)
Re: (Score:1)
anti-trust anyone?
Re: (Score:1)
Really? Why? Does Apple take a cut of every item sold on eBay, Wal-Mart's online store? Best Buy's online store?
I don't think so. If Apple does try to ban this, they are on very shaky legal ground and will end up being sued, yet again.
Apple wouldn't be that *STUPID* - oh wait, yes they are.
Re: (Score:1)
Apple Marketers with Moderator Points out in full force this fine Saturday afternoon.
Re:Well... (Score:4, Funny)
Apple Marketers with Moderator Points out in full force this fine Saturday afternoon.
The Apple Mod Army is not to be trifled with. Their attention span is short, but their attack is vicious.
The iPhone was designed for web apps. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The iPhone was designed for web apps. (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. The question of whether this is a breach of the walled garden is stupid.
One might also note that people have been playing music from YouTube from the start. For free.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Did you notice who the submitter was?
It would be notable if it was not stupid.
Re: (Score:1)
That would require removing quicktime support or mp3 support from quicktime. There goes mp3 support in iTunes.
Hurray, that would make it an easy choice for anyone with an ample mp3 collection.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh...no. Apple could drop mp3 support merely by using QuickTime to determine the codec and not play it. I'm sure they'd also say something about dropping licenses to use MPEG 3 and how it's an old technology and that everybody should be using AAC anyway...
Re: (Score:2)
Which features would that be? In iOS 6, Apple added support for the media capture API. One if the main reasons some apps were written was because there was no way to upload pictures and video on the web.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Amazon Cloud Player may be a native app NOW, but I'm betting that Apple with remove it from the App store within a few days unless Amazon shutdown down the web music store.
And they can do that sort of thing, to protect their market share. This has nothing to do with "user experience"; it's all about Apple getting their money.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why? Amazon's been doing this since day one with the Kindle app. This article is anything but news, as people (including Amazon) have been sidestepping in-app purchases for ages.
Re: (Score:1)
How much are you betting, exactly, and where? How much will you lose if your bet is wrong? Oh, you aren't really betting at all and you're just talking shit? Carry on then. As usual the Slashdot Apple threads are full of complete dunderheads, except for the few people actually pointing out that HTML5 apps are exactly what Apple encourages outfits like Amazon to use if they can't abide by App Store policies. Some of the conspiracy theories on show here are even wackier than 9/11 or moon landing truthers. "Th
Re: (Score:2)
When the iPhone came out, there was no third-party native apps. People were expected to build web apps.
On that release yes, but if you recall Jobs's story about how the web apps were the future, etc. that was all just blowing smoke because an SDK wasn't ready.
Re: (Score:2)
And Apple still expects people to do so - they could choose to make an app, or choose to do it as a web "app". The latter is completely free from Apple's app store policies - no 30%, no restrictions, no approvals, etc.
Hell, Apple was one of the first promoters of HTML5 to do stuff - first as a Flash alternative, but also adding things like sensor support (accellerometer, compass, gyros, even GPS) so web ap
Comes down to Contract (Score:5, Insightful)
I am sure amazon does not have the same contract as the small time developer and it will come down to licensing terms. They had to pull the link from within their old app before http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/amazon-others-cave-to-apple-on-in-app-purchases-today-html5-tomorrow/53116 [zdnet.com] so it was just a matter of time that they made it easy to purchase the apps on a phone conveniently. I don't see how this should even fall under terms of their license but I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't some broad reaching terms in the contract that apple will try to use as leverage.
No Breach (Score:5, Insightful)
Web apps, due to their very nature, are not covered by these guidelines and I suspect Apple isn't bothered by this. It's no different than buying a Kindle book via a web page and then downloading & reading it within the Kindle app itself.
Re: (Score:1)
i totally agree with you.
Re:No Breach (Score:4, Informative)
Not only that. 7digital has an app that allows you to download all the songs that have been bought on their website, and so you can actually have them on the phone all the time, as opposed to streaming them.
Much ado about nothing!
Re: (Score:1)
The important thing to remember here, though, is ... it could! Duh-duh-dunnn, cue overly dramatic chipmunk.
The point is to sell the hardware... (Score:2)
Isn't the main purpose of the iTunes Music Store to sell iOS hardware? If I recall, doesn't most of the 30% of Apple's cut go into running the store?
Apple is predominantly a hardware company, and they want people to buy their hardware. If the main purpose of their music/app stores is to sell the hardware then why would it matter where people actually get their music/apps from? Amazon is just giving people another reason to get an iOS device. They now have more options for their music purchases. Win/Win
Re:The point is to sell the hardware... (Score:5, Insightful)
Isn't the main purpose of the iTunes Music Store to sell iOS hardware? If I recall, doesn't most of the 30% of Apple's cut go into running the store?
Apple is predominantly a hardware company, and they want people to buy their hardware. If the main purpose of their music/app stores is to sell the hardware then why would it matter where people actually get their music/apps from? Amazon is just giving people another reason to get an iOS device. They now have more options for their music purchases. Win/Win.
This may have been the case when it all started, but at some point, Apple realized the earning potential to monetize the entire experience. They provide the Hardware, and the mechanism to provide Apps, as well as provide the content. It is not in Apple's best interests to allow the user to acquire content through other sources. Period.
ITunes is central to Apple's system of consumption. Through this one interface, users can get all the content they would ever need. It is the easiest way to get content onto your iPhone, or Ipod. It is fairly trivial to get videos and songs into Itunes without purchasing it through Apple although many Users will never really do it on a large scale because it involves a couple of extra steps.
Apple can claim all day long that they are just a Hardware Company, but I haven't believed that for a long time.
Re:The point is to sell the hardware... (Score:4, Interesting)
This may have been the case when it all started, but at some point, Apple realized the earning potential to monetize the entire experience. They provide the Hardware, and the mechanism to provide Apps, as well as provide the content. It is not in Apple's best interests to allow the user to acquire content through other sources. Period.
The problem with your belief is that there are no facts to back it up. We know that Apple make lots of profit on the hardware. But there's no evidence that they make very much profit from iTunes.
Apple can claim all day long that they are just a Hardware Company, but I haven't believed that for a long time.
It's not Apple that are claiming it. It's just the conclusion that most people who watch Apple closely have come to.
Re: (Score:2)
Check the annual report. We know that Apple took in 8b in net revenue (i.e. their take) last year – of 156b in sales. Not sure how much of that is profit but I would assume it higher than Apple’s 40% gross margin – so yeah – it is a considerable chunk of change.
Re: (Score:1)
It'a actually less. 10% for music, 30% for apps.
Re: (Score:2)
hmmm - interesting - where are you getting that figure from?
Re: (Score:2)
Check the annual report... Not sure....
As I said. No evidence of profit on iTunes there.
how much of that is profit but I would assume it higher than Appleâ(TM)s 40% gross margin â" so yeah â" it is a considerable chunk of change.
Sounds like a very bad assumption. Certainly not one based on evidence.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with your belief is that there are no facts to back it up. We know that Apple make lots of profit on the hardware. But there's no evidence that they make very much profit from iTunes.
How about this? [businessinsider.com] The amount is so (relatively) tiny it's almost a rounding error.
There will be no response (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple will have no response to this, and nor should they.
This is exactly the path that Apple have been telling companies they should follow if they wish to sell media outside of the iOS app store.
Amazon are simply following Apple's own guidance.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:There will be no response (Score:5, Informative)
I don't think they have to stream the MP3s - they could be using Safari's persistent storage [apple.com].
In any case, on my Android phone I use Subsonic and get decent battery life. Subsonic streams music from your home server, but in practice it spends a few seconds downloading each song and the data connection sleeps for most of the time you are listening. I also use Pandora and find it to be acceptable.
Re: (Score:2)
5MB of persistent storage... per host. They could just setup a bunch of subdomains for each song, which typically come in at just under 5MB.
Re: (Score:2)
n/m looks like the subdomain work-around was anticipated and most browser implementations still limit the entire domain to 5MB.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't that version of Safari also crippled so that only certain types of files can be uploaded (video and photo)? It doesn't matter in this case, but it blocks some others.
Safari Broken In 3... 2... 1... (Score:1, Insightful)
And Safari will be broken In 3... 2... 1... At least that's what would happen when Steve was alive. Along with an explanation that the Amazon Web app was compromising stability and user experience. 'People don't want Amazon web app stores. People want iTunes.'
Re:Safari Broken In 3... 2... 1... (Score:5, Insightful)
That would be the same Steve that told everybody that the official way of getting apps onto the iPhone was through web apps when he first launched it?
Mobile Safari and web apps have always been a vital part of the iPhone. It changed the mobile web landscape completely, because it was the first popular mobile phone with a desktop-class web browser built in. Your revisionist history implying that Steve would happily throw Mobile Safari under the bus to hurt a competitor is at odds with history.
Presumably you are referring to mobile Flash. I think it's abundantly clear that this was actually the case and not an anti-competitive move. Even Android and Adobe dropped mobile Flash.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Actually the move to the App Store happened because developers balked at not being allowed to have native apps like Apple had on the device. Steve had no intentions to ever have a store beyond their music/movies/tv/ and eventually books. It was only when developers demanded native app space that Apple looked to get something out of allowing it.
I would bet that the SDKs for native app development were in development simultaneously with iPhone development, but not ready for prime time when the iPhone was released. As typical for Steve Jobs, if Apple can't deliver it, or not in the quality that people would expect, then you don't actually want it and Apple will never do it. Until it suddenly appears and it was always the greatest thing in the world.
Re: (Score:2)
I would bet that the SDKs for native app development were in development simultaneously with iPhone development.
Of course they were. How do you think the Apple provided native Apps were built? In fact, when the SDK was announced, it was announced as giving third party developers access to the same tools that Apple used to build their own native Apps.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If only you'd said "I just asked a stupid question - an astoundingly, brain-numbingly, dumber than the Bay of Pigs crossed with the Lindsay Lohan, stupid question!", I would have modded you up...
So they made a mobile optimized website (Score:1)
That was always one of Apple's suggested options. Heck, it was the original option.
Re: (Score:2)
30% isn't usurious. It's a pretty common cut for retail in general. It's how you make money selling stuff. Many specialty markets have higher margins; many commodity markets lower. But 30% is pretty much smack dab normal.
Amazed (Score:3)
I'll keep my CD's, thank you. Better sound quality, and I don't have to sell my soul to one of these parasitic companies just to play music. More convenient and infinitely simpler.
Re: (Score:1)
I'd rather have my FLACs on my Android phone. Same (or sometimes better) sound quality than CDs. I can listen to them anywhere without a data connection, and put them on the phone with open source tools.
Not all platforms are deliberately designed to remove the user's freedom. Google may be pushing their cloud apps with Android, but they still give you the choice to do things the traditional way and they give other companies the choice to build their own systems. unlike Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
And who are selling FLAC files? Most FLAC I've seen are from CD rips, so how do they sound better than cd's? No turning motor?
Re: (Score:3)
I'll keep my CD's, thank you. Better sound quality, and I don't have to sell my soul to one of these parasitic companies just to play music. More convenient and infinitely simpler.
By all means, keep your CDs. Since most of the mp3s come from a CD source, they DO have superior quality. But you don't have to sell your soul to anyone to play music. Most people will download from Amazon on their PC and upload to their iDevice just like they've been doing all along, and everyone else can use Amazon's actually quite good mobile site. Or, if their device is sufficiently powerful and has a good web browser, the full site. I have no problems pulling up the full Amazon site in Opera Mobile on
Re: (Score:2)
You are an idiot if you think MP3s ripped from a CD matcg the CD in quality.
You are an idiot if you can't parse my comment sufficiently to tell that the "they" I was referring to was CDs.
Re: (Score:1)
See - the MP3s are the subject in your sentence, hence "they" always refers to the subject.
One does not lead to another, hence your sentence their is logically bullshit. Furthermore, your statement that "they" always refers to the subject is bullshit. For example - "Bill asked them where they were going."
Re: (Score:2)
I'll keep my CD's, thank you.
I'm constantly amazed at the hoops people jump through to help consume media. Going to the store to purchase a round fragile piece of plastic? Having to put it into a player? Having to convert it to another format to load on their phone? This sure as hell doesn't sound convenient to me.
I don't understand how you could possibly think that is more convenient than typing what you want in the phone from wherever you are and clicking download, and while I am not a fan of Apple, the ability to download the song w
Speculative idiocy about Apple never stops (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Speculative idiocy about Apple never stops (Score:4, Informative)
Or, you simply installed Linux and moved on from the idea that you have to pay for something to get quality software....
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah I get all my "quality hardware" Linux tablets for freeeeeeeeee! Freeeeeee software, freeeeeeeeeeeee hardware!
Re: (Score:2)
Lay off the fermented carrots, Rabbit... you know how you get.. ;)
Re: (Score:1)
I am an ardent fan of free software. I pay good money for good hardware!
Re: (Score:2)
I pay good money for hardware... sometimes it's good... sometimes it disappoints. :)
I am also slightly cheap... so I pay little money for old hardware.... surprisingly, that method pays off pretty well.
Re: (Score:2)
quality software....
*sigh* I want to love Linux, I really do. But between Gnome Shell, Unity, and programs like Amarok peeing on the interface design 101 textbook, and productivity apps forever split between various stages of community angst and forks (what the hell is the difference between OpenOffice and LibreOffice again?), I really don't know what "quality" software you're talking about.
Recently I have found the only quality software for linux is the stuff that runs in a shell which user interface designers can't screw up.
Re: (Score:2)
(what the hell is the difference between OpenOffice and LibreOffice again?), I really don't know what "quality" software you're talking about.
OpenOffice is now Oracle's. Oracle hates Open Source. LibreOffice is the "unencumbered by Larry Ellison's ego" version of the Office suite.
Quality is in the eye of the beholder when you're talking about interfaces. I have not found a single app that doesn't do what I need it to straight off the repository. The beauty of OSS is that if you don't like something, you can make it your own, without having to wait for the author to fix/enhance the app. That makes it worthwhile for me... of course YMMV...
I use Flu
Re: (Score:2)
OSS is that if you don't like something, you can make it your own
I keep hearing this but it simply isn't true. For 99.9999% of the people out there the best they could crunch out of a computer is "Hello World!". This oft repeated ideal appeals to very few people and very few companies too.
I have to say while open source software is functional most programs are generally split between options and settings overload, and simplifying to the point of being unusable.
I have said it for years, what FOSS needs is some paid GUI designers (not like the ones that Microsoft and Ubunt
Re: (Score:2)
or a 20yo someone who has no concept of freedom on their computing devices because walled gardens have always been a part of their life, school inet, mobile, home PC (Win8?) they know not any other way, hence the question ?
Yeah, right, a 20yo someone who has no concept of using the web and buying something on the web. Care to try again?
Re: (Score:2)
Not entirely correct. You can't link from your app to your web store directly unless you also offer in-app purchases. Amazon can't, for example, put a link in their Kindle app to their web site where you can buy books because they don't support in-app purchases because Apple would want 30% of those.
What it boils down to is an inferior experience for iOS users. Android, Blackberry and WP users can all buy direct from apps where iOS users can't even get a link directly to the web site where they can make the
surcharge (Score:2)
why dont amazon just add a surcharge for people who want to buy things using apples app store.
Of course Apple will respond (Score:1)
They will claim Amazon violates their patent on Safari's rounded corners. Then they'll go to court and try to ban Amazon. (It's funny, laugh...)
Re: (Score:2)
You should really pull that stick out of your ass and enjoy life more....
Google already does this. (Score:1)
Fire up safari and go to the Google Play Music and you can buy and listen to music. Amazon isn't being innovative or anything.
The rumor is.... (Score:2)
The rumor is they are hiring Steve Ballmer to give the response.
Apple employees are hiding their Herman Miller chairs, just in case.
I've said this before... (Score:2, Informative)
Apple's %30 is less about making money from what I've seen (This is also substantiated by SEC reports) and more about customer support management. Remember, those of us here on /. are perfectly capable of knowing that when we buy app from Vendor B, and it's billing breaks, that it's not Apple's fault, but Vendor B's. For most consumers that is simply not the case though, they buy the wrong thing from Vendor B and the charge gets messed up? They're not even going to look up that company's phone number, th
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think so. When people buy ebooks via their amazon kindle app they know they are dealing with amazon. Apple shouldn't be involved in any step along the way, so why should they get 30%?
Re: (Score:2)
Apples customers are chumps.
There is value in that big a group of chumps. Same as AOL of old and facebook.
Why would Apple have a response? (Score:2)
"I wonder if Apple with have a response to this."
Sure, the same response they've always had: If you don't like our app store rules, build a web app.
People keep thinking that Apple is going to be surprised by people building web apps or taken aback. Apple's line from the beginning is that the store rules were acceptable because if you didn't like them, you could still build a web app and get around the rules.
Amazon stooge (Score:2)
Apple will not give a sh!t. You can load mp3 files onto any iDevice and Apple does not care, why should this be different? Yes, you use iTunes to do it, just as I needed to use Nokia software to load stuff onto my old Nokia phones. Bah, the OP is just drawing your attention to a new serviced, it is just and advert.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that Apple shouldn't care and I hope they don't. They also shouldn't care if I want to buy an ebook through a kindle app.
A website to buy MP3s!?!? Brilliant!!! (Score:2)
Shorter summary: Amazon creates mobile-optimized from which you can buy MP3's.
As many others have pointed out, this is what Apple has said for years companies should do if they don't want to go through the app store. Amazon didn't "find it" It's not a sneaky loophole or unique, innovative, or new. I'm puzzled why this is even a story at all, much less worthy of a Slashdot article.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just an advertisement for this new service. Add Apple hate, fan the flames and you get tons of visibility for nothing. Actually this is not so much a brilliant idea but rather smart astroturfing.
This is to be used with Amazon Cloud Player (Score:2)
What the submitter missed was the fact that the Amazon MP3 store for the mobile web is used for purchasing songs and to then play them using the Amazon Cloud Player. In fact, you can't even listen to mp3s through the website.
Basically, Amazon optimized the website to make it easier to purchase MP3s. You could do it before with their website, it just wasn't as nice. Nothing to see here, move along.
Amazon is a threat in more ways than one.. (Score:2)
First of all, Amazon has a wider selection at more sensible prices. I can buy a full physical CD at lower costs than the music on iTunes, and I have already come across a situation where I could only buy individual songs and not a whole album.
To illustrate what that means in money terms, Amazon would charge me $15 or so for the whole album as a physical CD whereas the same album in iTunes would cost over $40.
This was actually the point where I switched to Amazon. First of all, an MP3 plays everywhere (inc