Since Apple introduced theiPad last year, publishers have poured millions of dollars into apps in the hopes that the device could revolutionize the industry by changing the way magazines are read and sold to consumers.
But at the same time, the industry is discovering a lesson already learned by music labels and Hollywood studios: Apple may offer new opportunities with its devices, but it exacts a heavy toll.
Man that’s an old article from 2011. I know some things have changed, as there’s now subscriptions via newsstand even if some publications don’t use it to avoid Apple’s 30% cut of all in-app purchases.
There’s also new smaller magazines like, The Magazine and other online publications have serialized their content via newsstand as well, like the Awl. The older publishing houses might still be stuck using bulky Adobe software, but the tone of this article in 2013 is misleading.
So who else is reading the liveblogs of the Apple event today?
On Watch Rumors
And here, in a single image, is why we have no idea what Apple may or may not be working on, why it is useless to speculate about it, and why almost anything we can think it might be act or look like is likely wrong.
If you’re not paying attention (and I’m paying maybe too much) there’s rumors about an Apple “smart watch” or iWatch. But this slide does show why usually whatever we think of ahead of time will be wrong…
The Apple Rocketship
Random thoughts on capital expenditures and space travel.
Horace Dediu, on Apple’s PP&E:
This means that Apple intended to spend $8 billion, actually spent $8.3 billion and realized a net asset gain (after depreciation) of $7.7 billion.
Coincidentally, according to Claude Lafleur of The Space Review:
The US has spent $486 billion over 57 years on human spaceflight, an average of $8.3 billion a year.
In real dollars, the Apollo program cost about $109 billion over 15 years. A billion dollars less per year.
Is Apple Refurbished a Good Deal?
Speaks for itself.
Priceonomics intern Daniel investigates. In a word, yes! If the product you want to buy is available refurbished, you should buy it. If not, you can save on average 17% buying it used, but that is a lot more work.
Read the full report: The Apple (Used) Premium?
To buy used, or not to buy used — that is the question. The answer, with Apple products, is yes.
This looks cool. There’s not even a need to put, “Actually for a Microsoft product” or something in front of it. Not sure how well it’ll do, but the Liquid Magnesium manufacturing process and the Touch Cover keyboard are nifty features that I wish could be sampled by Apple or some of the third parties to come on over to their stuff. I hope this strategy works for them.
But now I’m wondering about all those people who held up Microsoft and Windows as the reason why Open (for manufacturing) always wins? It looks like they’re clearly no longer correct and that integrated products appear to be the way to go (see also: Motorola/Google).
But I do wonder one thing: There’s no cellular data component in this. Microsoft had no carrier partners up on stage with them, at all. So that is one thing that they’re currently missing in version 1.