TinyGrab declines to sell subscriptions through the App Store
Add another name to the list of developers who are choosing to opt-out of Apple's subscription restrictions lately. Rhapsody and Readability were the first two we posted about, although Readability didn't so much opt-out as get rejected and decide not to play the subscription game. Now, a service called TinyGrab has posted that it won't be developing for the App Store because of "Apple's new greedy model." The company says that it was looking forward to providing its premium subscription-based file sharing service through the iOS and Mac App Store platforms, but Apple's restrictions on sharing user data and accounts that expire after a certain time are untenable for their business. The company is willing to pay the 30 percent cut, but unwilling to deal with Apple's terms that disallow any paid upgrades or features added to the app via outside subscriptions.
The company still plans to develop for the Mac and, in fact, is about to release a new version of its software this week. But TinyGrab says that Apple has effectively "locked us out" of the App Stores by asking far too much in terms of the restrictions.
Granted, none of these companies publicly fighting the restrictions are all that big, and we've already heard of plenty of companies who feel the rules are perfectly reasonable (and indeed, have already started making subscriptions available). Despite TinyGrab's objections, Apple is completely within its rights to make these requirements as long as they don't violate any antitrust laws. Still, there's definitely a growing number of developers unhappy with the deal they're being offered on in-app subscription purchases. Perhaps if Apple lowered the percent cut for services that happen to have content as a functional component of the service (as opposed to pure content plays like Kindle, Netflix, PopSci, The Daily, etc.) they would be more amenable to Apple's terms? TinyGrab will, at least, still be available as a standalone Mac application.
Share
Add another name to the list of developers who are choosing to opt-out of Apple's subscription restrictions lately. Rhapsody and...
Add a Comment
"we've already heard of plenty of companies who feel the rules are perfectly reasonable ..."
I would say that there are plenty more - overwhelmingy so - who don't think the rules are reasonable.
A lot of the complaints seem to be related to the fact that Apple don't pass the user data onto the app developer... how is this bad?
People seem to forget that the subscription model is really there for publishing content, such as magazines (Wired, Empire etc) and newspapers. Apple are trying to protect their users privacy. In the "old world" of physical subscriptions, you would pass on your details to the publishing house who - apart from using it for their standard audits - would make money from your "lucrative information" by selling it onto third parties... you then proceed to receive lots of unwanted spam. Sure you could "opt-out" if you remembered to, but some companies would get around this by ensuring that you would need to opt-out again after a certain period of time or you would be opted-in again.
With this subscription system, Apple are saying "look the subscriber has paid, that's enough; you don't need to know the payee's home address, age, credit card number, etc". Of course some of the "old world" publishers are up in arms about this as it cuts their revenue; they will only make money from the subscriptions and not from the more lucrative selling of personal information.
I do wish people would see some sense here. I admit that a 30% cut may be too high, but for people to honestly complain that Apple withhold personal information from other companies? That's just idiotic.
@camelsnot - you are right - Apple is protecting their profits - but, if I read you post right, not for the reasons you think.
Apple is still a hardware company. The cash they make from the iphone / ipad / ipod / Mac line ups are much much more than they make from the app store. The best way to sell more products is to have happy users. I think Apple feels that most companies will accept the 30% cut (remember 30% is how much Amazon and a lot of other other retailers charge when they sell your products on their website) and users will be happier if they can subscribe / buy products via the app rather than being kicked out to an external webpage to do it. Getting the content you want with 1 click is one reason that the iphone, itunes and the app store have become so popular with people who usually don't like computers.
And the same logic applies with regards to making companies offer it for the same price - I am sure people will be unhappy if they buy a subscription through the app only to find out that they could have got it for less somewhere else.
I am not saying that 30% is a fair cut - but Apple is not doing it just to screw over the developers, and I don't think that people are just defending Apple because they are "fangirls". I honestly think that there are good arguments both for and against the type of model Apple is offering and, like the app store, I am sure Apple will watch how this model is working and tweak it in the future - it will be interesting to see how things develop.
just realized this affects me too!
netflix, why should apple get 30%!!! of my netflix subscription when I enjoy this content primarily through a web browser and not my tiny iphone? .... ugh
not cool
i hope prices are not raised again at netflix
I just wanted to say that I love Tinygrab, such a fantastic service, and it hasn't flaked out like Grabup did.
February 21 2011 at 11:21 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyWow. These companies wouldn't even have nearly the visibility they get from the app store, and even blogs like tuaw, if it wasn't for what apple built. Tiny can either evolve their strategy or go back to relative obscurity.
February 21 2011 at 10:00 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyI am not sure why people are tripping about the whole thing. Personally as an iOS developer, I like the new subscription service. I will be implementing it in one of my apps and I'll get monthly revenue from users without dealing with setup of my own payment system.
Oh god now everyone with a silly little app is going to try to get publicity out of this.
Who pays £10 for a screenshot grabber, which comes free with every system? And if you want social just post it on facebook.
Please TUAW filter these wannabes looking for free advertising space off you and Or just charge them 30% on sales made because the article.
Keep news focused on how the ones that really matter are reacting.
I believe when the App store was introduced, people were surprised that Apple was taking 30%. Why? Because competing mobile application development licenses were FAR more onerous. Charging either more per purchase or charging a huge fee per year which priced a lot of companies out of the space. Even Amazon's cut was way larger than Apple's (before Apple entered the ebook space),
Of course, in Internet time that was forever ago and, with no context, 30% sounds INSANE!! I'm sure companies like Gameloft are plenty happy that Apple forced mobile development into the realm of "less insanity".
Chris,
You are getting some free publicity out of this, but not the good kind.
> We have no objection to Apple taking ANY kind of cut at all from our app, that's not the issue.
It sure is according to your blog:
> And the final infringements are, of course, about the IAP revenue split
> Apple wants a slice of that pie and we can’t give it to them
The bottom line is that Apple hasn't prevented you from doing anything. You are complaining because you don't understand the guidelines. Just add in-app purchasing to your app and submit it. It will be fine.
Or rather, it would have been fine. Unfortunately, now you have violated one of Apple's "plain talk" guidelines by trashing them in the press. That isn't going to help.
Deals of the Day
more deals- Acoustic Research Digital Photo Frame with iPod Dock for $50 + free shipping
- Targus Truss Case for iPad and iPad 2 for $15 + free shipping
- Apple iPhone 4 8GB for Verizon, AT&T, or Sprint for $50 + pickup at Best Buy
- Unlocked iPhone 4S 16GB for GSM (AT&T, T-Mobile) for $619 + free shipping
- Apple iMac Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz 27" w/ 24GB RAM, 2TB HDD for $2,677 + $29 s&h
- Used Apple Magic Mouse for $36 + $4 s&h
Software Updates
more updatesFeatured Stories
more stories
Popular Stories
TUAW (or The Unofficial Apple Weblog) is a website devoted to tips, reviews, news, analysis and opinion on everything Apple.
37 Comments