http://lavatoryreader.typepad.com/the-lavatory-reader/2009/10/the-danger-of-eating-apples.html

what apps are downloaded via Edge/3G -VS- apps that are downloaded via WiFi and/or installed during sync.

Does the car dealer get to use the road for nothing? Or does he help pay for it like everybody else.

But Apple already does help pay for the road like everyone else. Do they also owe the sources providing traffic more money every time they sell an app from iTunes, or a Mac, or an iPod from their web site, just because they're more successful than others? The TiPb Store pays for their traffic... do they owe their "highway" more money from each item they sell?

Yes, I get your point about the difference in size here, and I considered it also. But no other huge businesses, with huge traffic, that sell products online give a cut of their sales to those who supply the traffic. eBay and its users certainly don't pay extortion money just because they use twenty lanes of highway.

And I'd go even further by saying that their gripe probably has nothing to do with the amount of traffic, anyway... but rather what Dev said above about the bitterness they have for their own failied greed.

If carriers do have any point at all in this, it's that they do market and sell phones for Apple (which indirectly sells apps), but even that's a stretch, in my opinion. Surely, carriers must realize that Apple could sell iPhone apps (to be installed easily) from iTunes without them if they're bullied enough for a percentage.

It'll be interesting to see what happens with this.

Does the car dealer get to use the road for nothing? Or does he help pay for it like everybody else.

When any big box retail establishment goes up they usually get tapped for some of the new exit ramps, access road, and other improvements before the project gets going. Then they continue to contribute tax revenue thereafter.

Apple opened a Shopping Center on a country highway.

They left the job of turning it into a six lane and adding mass transit, policing, water sewer etc to the county and its tax payers, the majority of which don't even shop there.

Apple can't thump its chest and claim world dominance in Wireless data penetration AND AT THE SAME TIME claim it is not responsible for any of the impact.

Not saying I totally believe this argument myself, just throwing it out there ....

@Andy: Google is your friend.

Carriers think Apple is greedy because Apple is making money with the app store concept, where carriers uniformly failed with their own store (eg VZAppZone) offerings.

Symbian thinks Google is evil because Android swept in and took their market and mindshare among phone manufacturers.

Those grapes could hardly get any more sour.

2: I don't know much about Symbian but when this guy pushes "openness," and then directs that statement to carriers and manufacturers, what I hear is "look how easy it will be to lock down my OS so your customers will have no control over what is on their phone."

Totally agree. Giving ATT a cut of the App store revenue would be like giving my ISP (also ATT) a cut of software I buy on the internet for my PC. Makes no sense.

My company also sells physical products over the web. Do ATT and other carriers deserve a cut of that revenue? I think not. How about this, people can call our phone center and order a product. Does ATT deserve a cut of that revenue?

With regard to the OP, Apple is at least as evil as Google and MSFT. Greedy is kind of a silly and arbitrary term. How much is too much? Its ok to want to make a lot of money. The moral issue is what you're willing to do to get it. Like keeping customers from fully accessing the hardware they own, or by tying software (iTunes) to the hardware.

AT&T doesn't get a cut of what I sell in MY stores, nor do they even ask me, nor do they ask any of the millions of other online merchants who use their services. Why should Apple's store be any different?

I think you nailed it.

This guy is watching his lunch being eaten by Google.

Fragmentation is NOT what is happening. Just because everybody put a new coat of look and feel on the same platform does not make it fragmented. It makes it interesting.

Android makers may indeed be fighting for the same slice of pie, (as well as RIM's pie, and Nokia's Pie, but at this point in time the Pie is growing exponentially. Its not a zero sum game. There are huge, monstrously HUGE numbers of regular old cell phone users that will be switching to smart phones in the next 5 years.

And virtually NONE of those will be switching to Simbian, because he just had his last BIG leg cut out from under him when Nokia announced the N900 (Linux). Nobody is planning to go back to Simbian.

Google Evil? I've been waiting for Clear Signs, but haven't seen any yet. They have been pretty above board in what they do, even if they are bent on playing in All the sandboxes at once.

If Greed were Apple's only problem it would be a lot easier to swallow.

It just might not seem that way, because Google has access to much more sensitive information.

Fragmentation of Android means all the Droid handset makers will be fighting over the same slice of the pie. That slice will get bigger as WinMo's and Palm's and yes, Symbian's slices get smaller. It will be interesting to see what happens if/when Nokia acquires Palm...

Symbian - as it stands now, is difficult to use and boring.