Re:New company called Eelo will give you de-Google-ized Andr...
by s73ver_ on Sunday December 24, 2017 @01:34PM
(#16000637)
"No one would have purchased the original iPhone were it not heavily subsidized by AT&T. No one."
The original iPhone was not subsidized by AT&T at all. It cost about $500, had lines of people waiting to buy it, and went on to sell about 6 million units, making it one of the best selling phones of it's time.
Re:New company called Eelo will give you de-Google-ized Andr...
by foolrush on Sunday December 24, 2017 @02:11PM
(#16000826)
I should have been clearer: it required a contract that AT&T offered lower data rates on the actual phone. This recovered the money they were paying to Apple IIRC. Still subsidized, but perhaps not explicitly on the phone itself.
Not entirely fair to Google here.
No one would have purchased the original iPhone were it not heavily subsidized by AT&T. No one. One could argue that the same forces apply today regarding most phone purchasers.
> and god knows what else when if much rather just pay like $49 for a properly made application with a permanent license.
Except the numbers of downloads show that this approach isn't gaining traction. In fact, look at how many applications switched to a subscription model the moment Apple permitted it?
On the side of development, subscriptions make sense. Software development isn't a one-off fee to make software these days, as 99.995% of the people here realize.
Isn't subscription the only sustainable model?