Macworld Forums: Remains of the Day: Trials and tribulations - Macworld Forums

Post your comments for Remains of the Day: Trials and tribulations here

Baidu Bing! I love it!

Yes, I'm sure B&N goes along with anything that allows them to sell their "Nook books" at only $2 less than a hardback book. Of course, even Apple is guilty of selling electronic books (no printing, storage, distribution) at the same price as a hardback book. It isn't until some months later that a book drops in price to an amount close to paperback book costs (in spite of there still being no printing, etc. costs).

rmossman, on 07 June 2012 - 06:10 PM, said:

I don't know what things at your local B&N are like, but I don't see a lot of $12 hardbacks at any of mine unless they're on clearance, and I see a lot of $9-$10 Nook books available. Are you sure you don't mean paperbacks?

Quote

It has been explained many times that the actual printing costs comprise only a very small percentage of the cost of a book produced by a major publisher. There are a lot of people who do a lot of work in the publishing industry (editors, agents, marketers, graphic designers, etc., as well as the bean counters that manage the entire infrastructure, and of course, you know, the writers themselves) that happens outside of the actual printing, moving, and storage of the books, and all of those people have salaries that have to come from somewhere. Additionally, it's not like data storage and delivery are free. These electronic files are housed in large data centers that are expensive both to build and to operate, and the pipes used to get the data out of there and out to you cost money that has to be paid as well.

This post has been edited by himbo: 08 June 2012 - 12:54 AM

jschaffe, on 07 June 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:

I hear the rim shot, too!

"However, it's been settled that Rogue Amoeba did not use any private APIs or misuse any public APIs—instead, Apple disallowed the app because, well, it said so."

As noted in the comments on that blog post, the iOS app store guidelines also indicate that an app can be pulled or rejected if despite technically conforming to the rules they deem it abusive in some way. There's still the question of that encrypted stream. Regardless of where or how they got the means to deal with the encryption, I think you can make a fair argument that they're abusing something they shouldn't.

Wow! One of Apple's patent disputes is dismissed and at the same time they receive a new patent that will undoubtedly give rise to many more. Intel says the new ultra books are not MacBook Air clones - now they, or their OEMs, will have to prove it in court. It's a great time to be a patent attorney!