Amazon Routes Around Apple With HTML 5 Kindle App
from the good-for-them dept
We've been pointing out for a while now how many app makers can easily route around Apple's draconian app store rules by embracing HTML 5 and offering their apps through alternative means. While there are still some features that HTML 5 can't do, it can handle an awful lot (and many "native" apps were really created in HTML 5 in the first place anyway. Still, it seems like Apple's draconian gatekeeper-ism, and the ridiculously high 30% fee for in-app purchases, means that some big companies are finally discovering the HTML 5 opportunity. We already noted that the Financial Times' app went HTML 5 to avoid Apple, and now Amazon has made a big splash by releasing its Kindle app as an HTML 5 web app rather than through Apple's app store. Hopefully such high profile names help drive more companies to realize they have more than a single option. And maybe, just maybe, it'll convince Apple to be just a smidge more open.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: app store, html 5, ios, iphone, kindle, walled garden
Companies: amazon, apple
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
That made me laugh. Mike, you missed your calling as a comedian.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The more likely scenario is it will convince Apple to reconsider HTML 5 compatibility standards in their Safari browser if it starts eating into the bottom line.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's easy to forget where you come from when money is involved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
...
Apple owes its entire existence to Microsoft. Let me rephrase that, it owes its entire existence to the fact that Microsoft products suck, and there was nothing better.
When apple began they were the only game in town. The open PC bus happened and they faced competition and failed. MS bailed them out. Now everyone hates Microsoft, people were previously running towards apple products, and are now going android.
It is simple social evolution in action. People want to be free of overbearing rules.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you really have a law degree (as you've said), either it's worthless or you're posting with both hemispheres tied behind your back.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"Steve Jobs and Apple Inc" - Firstly this refers to a specific person and a company that he control[ed]s , and is the subject of the ssentence. Pretty simple and seems you understood up to this part.
"used to have Open minds" - by using the paste tense 'used' this contextually states that once upon a time the subject in question had the ability to be open minded. Which is by definition "having a mind receptive to new ideas, arguments, etc.; unprejudiced" [ http://www.thefreedictionary.com/open-minded ]
then their brains kept falling out so they closed them.. - This concluding part brings in two opinions that state how I feel that the subject (Apple Inc et. al) at some time in the not too distant past, but after first having "open minds" became foolish (ie: brainless) and closed their minds becoming intolerant to any new ideas, arguments to the point of being stubborn.
Now my question is, if you have, as you allude to, brilliant skills of comprehension and the ability to factualise, where does "Open Source" come into my comment in any way, shape, or form, other than the use of the word open?
As for myself holding a Law Degree (LLB), or a BComp, or a Masters in some esoteric field like Digital Forensics (not to mention numerous SANS and other certifications) is beside the point when you have clearly shown to all and sundry that being a Brainless Intellect Free Fool (BIFF) suits you. ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More Cornell reasoning...
There, just wanted to get it over with. Carry on with your fallacious page-view whoring. Thank god Apple is here to be your tar baby, otherwise you'd have to write something substantial.
Btw, since Apple has been promoting HTML 5 as an alternative to native apps from the very beginning of the iPhone, isn't it possible, just a little bit, that Amazon is doing what Apple wants them to do? Isn't it possible that this affirms what Apple is doing, rather than being a counterexample? In what way is Amazon's move to HTML 5 detrimental to whatever Apple's plans are? You seem to have left out that part.
Nevermind, relax in the safety of your own delusions...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More Cornell reasoning...
Solipsistic much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: More Cornell reasoning...
So would you like to engage my argument? I put it in the last paragraph just to see if you could make it through all those hard, hard words and still remember your name.
(If you think I type a lot, Kim du Toit would probably blow your mind. And don't get me started about Glenn Greenwald.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: More Cornell reasoning...
When the hell did Mike have a hard on for apples? I know people need to eat healthier nowadays, but it's getting kind of ridiculous that you know his entire diet...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: More Cornell reasoning...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: More Cornell reasoning...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: More Cornell reasoning...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More Cornell reasoning...
How do you steal an idea?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More Cornell reasoning...
I love blanket statements like your first. I'm so suprised to learn that apple stole everything from Xerox and Doug! They must have been incredible geniuses to invent the iPhone and iPad years before Apple.
Wake up troll. Everyone that uses electricity should be shut down by your reasoning and all credit given to Mr. Tesla for his original invention of AC current. Just because people borrow ideas does not invalidate the originality of their final product. Your statement makes no sense.
In what way is HTML 5 detrimental? Let me see... applying the bare minimum brainpower I can follow Mike's argument that:
1. Apple retains a large portion of revenue from in-app purchases
2. HTML5 allows you to bypass in-app purchases
3. HTML5 might be detrimental to Apple's bottom line
Of course, since Xerox invented HTML5, the internet, smartphones, multi-touch technology, and everything else (apparently?) perhaps this is Apple's just reward!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: More Cornell reasoning...
And secondly, your argument is faulty. HTML always allowed vendors to bypass the store. Your narrow-minded thinking is just as reasonable as thinking that "piracy = bad", when as a reader of this site, you should know by HEART that piracy does not necessarily mean bad, just like HTML does not necessarily mean bad for Apple.
And just like Biff said, since Apple has been pushing for web apps from the start alongside native apps (iPhone 1st gen was only purely web apps, and you can create apps on your home screen that go straight to a webpage without the safari overlay), you can definitely be sure that Apple has understood the concept that HTML as a side partner to native apps can be a good thing as a whole for the iPhone ecosystem, and thus therefore good for Apple as a whole. Chasing after in-app revenues would be like chasing after pennies while losing the dollars.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: More Cornell reasoning...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More Cornell reasoning...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: More Cornell reasoning...
Both, actually. The app store only exists because devs insisted that HTML5 wasn't ready. They even had to put Snow Leopard (the Mac OS upgrade) on hold while they reworked iOS to even be able to use native apps. Part of the reason the app store is so draconian is that they didn't think native apps should be there in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Obligatory XKCD:
http://xkcd.com/859/
(yes, it's a typo nitpick softened up by a XKCD reference...so sue me)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
) )
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ) )
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ) )
Though I have lethth problemth with thmileyth, like tho: :-)
For some reason my brain doesn't go into meltdown, but when someone leaves an opening bracket, I have to mentally give it a closing bracket as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: XKCD
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I called it...
I for one am thankful to see HTML 5 start taking off. Now we can do away with all the phone specific apps, or most of them, and have HTML 5 apps. Developers should like it as well because now they can write one app and run on every smartphone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I called it...
Whoever you are, I'm filing for divorce.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They didn't release this instead of using the app store. It is an alternate app. They already have a Kindle app in the app store.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HTML5
Has Apple kick-started the HTML5 revolution it wanted by imposing a riculously high fee?
I'd be tempted to think that SJ is a genius and this was the plan all along were it not for the fact that Apple will lose the ability to censor its devices contents. (Thankfully)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
A 30% fee on apps they sell isn't ridiculous at all.
What's ridiculous is that they also demand a 30% fee on all products sold through the app, that their app-store has nothing to do with. For instance, if you sell an e-book reader and allow customers to purchase books, you have to pay 30% of those sales to Apple. That is nuts, and that is Amazon is routing around.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
If you've done or read any sort of studies on this, you'd know that getting users to do ANYTHING is hard enough. Making them do more stuff to do something like buying a product is next to impossible.
30% for a boost in customer willingness isn't all that bad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Misses the Mark
I see Apple saying here - if you want your users to have the best experience, if you want the exposure and distribution of the App Store, AND you want to sell out of that experience, you have to cut us in. But hey, if that doesn't matter, then go about your business, and here is this other alternative.
Some say that the HTML5 apps are as good as iOS apps. That is wrong, and also ignores the fact that the app store is free distribution and advertising. More people will get that app than will add the HTML5 app.
This isn't open vs. closed. This is paying for distribution and a premium user experience. It's a fairly simple business proposition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perhaps you could use the same logic on this story:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110811/10245715476/what-if-tim-berners-lee-had-patented -web.shtml
and figure out where you appear to once again be flip flopping around.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Going around a market app is not the same as going around patents.
One is just using the open web to get your content out there and use the web as it is intended. And the other is just illegal in the eyes of many patent holders.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Amazon could easily have sat and looked at the section of fence that was stopping them, and sadly waiting for someone else to take it down. Instead, they looked around, noted that the fence was only one section long, and went around it.
So now either you can route around trouble, or you cannot not. If Mike suggesting that Amazon is somehow smarter than all those network programmers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Most things aren't binary. If I beat you almost to death, that doesn't mean you're healthy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Remember, patents aren't about the path one takes from point A to point B any more. They're just about getting from point A to B. It doesn't matter what path you take, your still in violation for making the trip.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
When it comes to misrepresenting the situation, Mike has done a masterful job. More importantly, he has staked out a position that cannot easily be taken apart, because it required "negative proof", which is pretty hard to create. My hat's off to him, even reasonably smart people here have fallen for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
And Amazon isn't innovating anything. The app was newer technology then the HTML5 version. The HTML5 version is taking a step backwards.
Your argument is just wrong from every single direction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Patents are supposed to block others from being able to find ways to not pay you, if that doesn't happen what is the value of a patent?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It wasn't until later, when the world demanded a marketplace of sorts that Apple relented and devised the now hated marketplace processes.
But I could be wrong on that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://html5arena.blogspot.com/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]