Will Apple’s Death-Grip IOS Backfire?

There has been a flurry of rumors recently that Apple is in talks with several major communications companies to reach an agreement to distribute rich content, iPad-optimized versions of publications, on a subscription-based basis, through of a native application of the iOS platform. The service would work similarly to iBooks, Apple’s book-reading app that lets you buy and read e-books on the iOS platform. In addition to these rumours, there have been various reports, from The Wall Street Journal, PC World and B-Net (a subsidiary of CBS News), that the future of such an offering is complicated by conflicts between publishers and Apple over the terms of such an agreement. One particularly contentious issue is the level of control Apple wants to maintain over the content distributed through the app, the publisher subscriptions available through the app, and the valuable subscriber data that could help publishers generate revenue through the app. of ads.

According to a report in the San Jose Mercury News, Apple’s proposed deal would allow them to pocket 30 percent of all subscription earnings and a significant 40 percent cut of all ad revenue. Now, it’s true that the publishing industry has been inundated for some time now, but that doesn’t mean they’ll settle for a raw deal, like the one Apple seems to be spreading. Furthermore, as the Sports Illustrated case demonstrated, the framework for developing iOS editorials needs some critical improvements before publishers can justify the cost of production and distribution through the app store.

But, regarding the current negotiations in the broader context of mobile development, you have to wonder at what point Apple’s control-obsessed policies will affect the progress of its iOS walled garden. Sure, we get that they’re obsessed with quality control and preserving a consistent user experience across the entire iOS family of devices, but could their regulation neurosis and iOS micromanagement hinder innovation and development on the platform?

Indeed, one need look no further than Apple’s iAd platform to understand how its meticulous overhead management has hindered the progress of innovative breakthroughs. When iAds was first announced, Apple announced that it was working with several major brands, including Best Buy, Target, and GEICO (and several others), to develop rich media banner ads in the app. But as eMarketer Daily’s Noah Elkins recently pointed out, the evidence of these collaborations remains to be seen: how many ads like the ones Apple advertised have we found? Not many. Meanwhile, speculation is circulating that iAd launches have been stalled by the deadly control Apple seems to have over the terms and regulations of ads on its platform.

While iAds might have fallen into limbo, at this point anyway, could the iNewspaper app for publishing suffer the same fate if Apple doesn’t loosen the reins and cede some control to publishers? Perhaps this dispute will instead serve as a reality check for Apple, or at least prompt them to reconsider what they’re sacrificing by running such a tight ship. Of course, only time will tell, and frankly, Apple isn’t known for making compromises. But, for the sake of innovation on the iOS platform, we certainly hope that Apple will come down from its perch and allow its platform to advance mobile technology, not hinder its progress.