My tweet on the matter may have been too subtle:

In other news, most restaurants still don’t want you bringing in food from other restaurants to eat there.

And obviously over-simplified. But the core concept is intact. If you’re going to consume content on their device, Apple would prefer that you buy that content from them and not from a competitor.

Or if you do buy want to buy it from the competitor, that’s okay, but then there’s a corkage fee. Only you don’t pay the corkage fee, the competitor does. (Well, unless they pass off the extra cost to you.)

Can you read iBooks on the Kindle? What about Sony’s books? Nope.

It’s neither complicated nor evil. It’s business.

  1. pcmodz reblogged this from parislemon
  2. project-ellies reblogged this from parislemon
  3. winston-echternach reblogged this from sgtstretch
  4. quatermain reblogged this from parislemon and added:
    For those of us who aren’t 100% based on iOS, we’d be quite happy to let you read your Apple-supplied iBooks on our...
  5. hedgewytch reblogged this from sgtstretch
  6. sgtstretch reblogged this from nikf and added:
    This shouldn’t be a hard concept to understand, but it seems to be for some people.
  7. luis-sosa reblogged this from nikf and added:
    I disagree with MG Siegler's point. The whole idea behind the iPad is that it isn't a single use device. Comparing it to...
  8. parislemon posted this