Signs that app store can crash asap and so will apps for pc's

The Atlantic Wire published a review by Rebecca Greenfield, "The Beginning of the End for the Apple App Store", in which she identifies and analyzes five main factors that have a negative impact on the application store Apple.
Symptom One. Amazon and Walmart caused Apple to duel

Rebecca Greenfield believes that in Cupertino absolutely in vain rely on endless devotion to users. Yes, the ability to receive applications for an iPad from one source is attractive enough, but not to the extent that users hold on to it under any circumstances. Amazon and Walmart have challenged Apple by introducing their Kindle Cloud Reader services and the Walmart Vudu streaming website. A few weeks ago, Apple changed the subscription rules from applications distributed through the App Store and now deductions in favor of Cupertino from sales directly from E-Reader account for 30%. First Amazon, and then Barnes and Noble removed their links from the App Store, not wanting to pay so much. You can check this guide: https://garagebandforpc.org/

we found on the internet in order to get garageband on your pc working

For content providers, this is beneficial, but users are depressed by the need to do a few extra moves to get themselves something to read at night. In addition, the company's refusal to sell through applications is not only a benefit. Wanting to sell their content to iPad owners, companies have to either pay a solid share of their revenue to Apple, or lose the most lazy readers. Thus, the App Store becomes an indispensable link in the content delivery chain from the publisher to the reader. But this phenomenon is temporary. Cloud publishers' shops, discussed above, will allow readers to purchase additional content no less simply than in the App Store. Thus publishers can completely leave to themselves the gain. In this way, publishers are gradually "luring" readers from the App Store to their services and the application store Apple is losing the status of a "single library" of all kinds of content for the iPad. This issue was analyzed in detail in Rebecca Greenfield's article "Everyone Loses in Apple's App Store E-Reader Battle" (July 26, 2011), published by The Atlantic Wire.

Symptom Two. Competitors relieve users of attachment to the infrastructure of Apple

These new cloud services, discussed above, not only save publishers 30% of revenue, but also save them from the habit of tying to the Epplep ecosystem. Both sites became the answer to the tough conditions dictated by Cupertino. Instead of paying Apple for the opportunity to put direct links in the App Store, Walmart created an additional source of streaming content Vudu. For users, it is not harder than the App Store. As the general manager of Vudu, Edward Lichty, told Reuters Alistair Barr (Alastair Barr):

This is not an app. It works entirely in the browser. But you get access in a similar way.

(The quote is based on the materials of Alistair Barr's article "Wal-Mart's Vudu launches on iPad without an app" ("Vudu from Wal-Mart runs on an iPad without an application") dated August 10, 2011, published by Reuters)

In addition, it is expected that by October this year Amazon will please the general public with a tablet device that will become a direct competitor to the Apple iPad. This topic was considered in the note "Amazon to Offer iPad Rival by October" ("Amazon will present competitor iPad by October") dated July 13, 2011, published by the resource Atlantic Wire. Yesterday, these rumors received additional confirmation in the form of buying Amazon domains and the topic was discussed in the article "Amazon buys domains and is preparing to compete seriously with Apple . "

Symptom Three. Web services make applications unnecessary

Access to Vudu is carried out through the icon on the desktop, which looks like an application. In fact, it passes through the site to the streaming service site. Thus, for the user there is no difference between the application and the service running in the browser. And the publisher wins twice. First, it saves 30% on the failed deductions in favor of Apple, and then gradually accustoms the user to their service.

Access to the "cloud" site of the Kindle Cloud Reader is similar. The service, like the Kindle application, gives the user the opportunity to purchase books and save them in the iPad's memory. This explanation was given by MG Siegler in a short note "Amazon's Answer to Apple's Terms: A Web-Based Kindle Cloud Reader - Brilliant On PC, Better On iPad" ("Amazon's response to Apple's rules: Kindle Cloud Reader web service is a brilliant solution for PC, the best solution for the iPad "). Here it is necessary to quote the opinion of MG Siegler, which best sheds light on the possibilities of the new service and its advantages for users:

 

This is the web version of their Kindle eBook reader application. It allows you to read your books "from the clouds" or download your books for reading offline, thanks to the magical capabilities of HTML 5 (or extension to the Chrome browser). It looks great and works perfectly.

It's very simple: the new content (web service) is wrapped in the usual form (a separate application) and the software store becomes unnecessary, together with the problems that are associated with it. Rebecca Greenfield believes that if the efforts of Amazon and Walmart succeed, other content providers can follow suit. In reviewing this thesis, Rebecca Greenfield relied on Caitlin Dickson's "Apps Are Your Newest Royal Wedding Tschotkes" (April 11, 2011, published by The Atlantic Wire).

Symptom Four. Publishers break out of the Web of Cupertino

This new approach will not only allow companies to break out of the bundle with the App Store, but will also force users to quickly forget that they recently needed an Apple infrastructure. Since these services both look and work almost exactly as well as the usual applications, users will be able to quickly get used to them. If before they made purchases through a web browser, now they can do the same, but in a simpler way.

The very idea of individual applications is excellent, but since it is fairly easy to implement in the form of web services, you can be sure that publishers will take advantage of this opportunity.

Web services can not compete with applications for functionality yet

In any barrel of sweet honey, there is a spoonful of bitter tar. All this sounds great, but after all the App Store has become attractive to users not at all from scratch. By abandoning the App Store, users are losing a number of notable benefits. As Charlie Sorrel of Gadget Lab explains in his article "Kindle Cloud Reader Skips App Store Rules" dated August 10, 2011, published by Wired, Web applications can not work just as well as the "native" software products of Apple:

While reading the book, paging can be slow (if you are reading at a constant speed, the application has time to cache the next page and the transition happens instantly). And he (the web service) lacks some essential functions.

Siegler adds critical comments to web applications, reminding that the reader will not have constant unlimited access to all books. This is an inconvenience, which either has to reconcile or use a separate application:

One thing to note is that the number of cloud versions (and obviously downloadable versions) of Kindle books is still limited to devices. So, if you downloaded your books to your Kindle, iPad, iPhone, etc., you can exceed the limit and not be able to read them "in the clouds."

The site Walmart Vudu, too, creates a user some annoying interference, which spoil the pleasure of work. It works more like an ordinary website and can not be considered a streaming service in the conventional sense. Explanation on this issue gives Richard Lawler (Richard Lawler) from Endgadget:

But, unfortunately, until now the same is observed for PCs, the standard resolution is limited and there is not a single Disney frame due to licensing problems.

Rebecca Greenfield summarizes his review with the following conclusion:

Even with shortcomings, these attempts will bring Apple anxiety. Previously, they simply lost potential revenue. If more companies follow this example, users can decide that the light does not come together with a wedge at the application store, without which it is supposedly impossible to do without.

Thus, even if you take into account all the shortcomings of web services, they are a very alarming signal for Apple. To date, it is not so much the specific success of web applications that is noticeable, but the fact that publishers are beginning to make attempts to play by their own rules, rather than those dictated by Cupertino.

Reflection on the fate of the App Store

Before the loyal reader of Apple pushes his angry criticism on this review, one should try to think a little about the material for reflection, which Rebecca Greenfield generously shared with the broader English-speaking community. To begin with, the review is somewhat pessimistic and reflects only one side, the advantages of own web applications for content providers. It is assumed that publishers will be able to easily convince readers and viewers to abandon the familiar interface of the App Store. But this is hardly possible, if only because users are rather conservative in their habits.

What do you need today to access a wide range of applications and content? Just go to the App Store and in a matter of minutes find everything you need and immediately download it in a convenient way. In a model in which each content provider will provide access to its resources, there is a significant flaw. Users are unlikely to want to waste their valuable time searching. And, ultimately, the winners will be those companies that will continue to work with the App Store. Exception can really become such large players of the market, as Amazon and Walmart, having the constant audience. For most developers, projects like the App Store are generally the only way to deliver their products to the general public. On their own, they will never be able to launch an advertising campaign,

As for the iPad and the iPhone, their huge appeal is largely due to the huge selection of applications through a single convenient App Store. It is highly unlikely that users willingly abandoned this advantage and began again, as it was before, to roam the Internet in search of a new game. And yet, the rational grain in Rebecca Greenfield's reasoning still exists. From the App Store large publishers can go, and after all they allow the application store to generate a significant part of the revenue. Time will tell what future the Apple app store for iOS is waiting for, but it is already obvious that talking about its collapse would be premature. The App Store will retain its appeal until an even more user-friendly solution is available.