On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 17:08:56 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:

> On 9/2/2011 9:32 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 20:49:27 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>
>>> But, that isn't the issue. The issue what that, to use the "in-app"
>>> purchase, Amazon would take a 30% cut, but then Apple would take
>>> another 30%, since you where buying via *their* app store. So, in
>>> actuality, you would be paying like 60% extra, not 30%.
>>
>> Except that, of course, you're not buying via *their* app store -
>> because Kindle/Nook/etc do in-app purchases through *their* store. 
>> Apple isn't providing anything but the hardware the purchase is being
>> made on.
>>
> No, Kindle/Nook use a web page that "looks" like an "in-app" store,
> because Apple's patent is on using "in-app" purchasing, and thus they
> would have had to go through "Apple" to sell to the customer. Its
> basically the whole "Amazon patented being able to click on button, to
> buy shit on the website", all over again.

Yes, that's the way it is now.  Until Apple decided they wanted 30% of 
"in app content purchases", they had it implemented in the app itself 
rather than just going through a web connection.

Jim

Post a reply to this message