Comments on: Wait… $20 for 5 Apps!?

By: TekkieMom

TekkieMom — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 03:30:32 +0000

Ok at first I thought “Rats, I just got this for Christmas and not even a month later I have to pay to upgrade it”. Whoa! These apps rock! I have everything I need now — I would have paid twice that much just to have email without a data package contract — and how much is a GPS unit? My Treo buddies are SO jealous!

By: sheckiot

sheckiot — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 02:38:25 +0000

that is a great idea $20 for 5 news applications is like free

By: Umberto

Umberto — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 03:29:18 +0000

@Mac Lim: Read the comments above yours. The iPhone and Apple TV are on a subscription model. The iPod Touch is not. People really ought to spend a little time to read previous comments before posting their own.

By: Mac Lim

Mac Lim — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 03:26:03 +0000

Smart Geoff,
So why didn’t they needed to pay for similar iPhone version update?
Mind you volunteer to pay for iPhone please!

It’s not an upgrade it’s an update dude!
Apple must have deliberately excluded that for future income.

If the new applications are stuff like apps for movie/music download (where Apple could dig your wallet) bet they’d never charge you the apps.

By: Geoff

Geoff — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 01:17:34 +0000

One of the BIG downfalls of this site for me is that the reviews seem to be written by kids who think things should be free. As a business owner and person that uses Apple products everyday to generate income I’m down for paying things. Anyone know of a place that reviews Mac based on value of product instead of cost?

By: Mac Lim

Mac Lim — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 23:56:32 +0000

sign petition here if you think it isn’t fair as iPhone user wasn’t charged.
http://www.petitiononline.com/freeappi/petition.html

Apple seems to be so money-minded.
Eg, they ditched the iPod Camera Connector compatibility with new iPod due to minor issue, but instead focusing on movie streaming, playback, etc because they’re making money from movies but not photos.

& for the Accounting people discussed here,
come on… iPhone wasn’t being charged dude!

By: Mac Lim

Mac Lim — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 23:55:53 +0000

sign petition here if you think it isn’t fair as iPhone user wasn’t

charged.
http://www.petitiononline.com/freeappi/petition.html

Apple seems to be so money-minded.
Eg, they ditched the iPod Camera Connector compatibility with new iPod

due to minor issue, but instead focusing on movie streaming, playback,

etc because they’re making money from movies but not photos.

& for the Accounting people discussed here,
come on… iPhone wasn’t being charged dude!

By: Dubben

Dubben — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:52:07 +0000

I don’t know about some of you, but I’ve not only received free software and feature updates for my expensive electronics in the past, I’ve grown ACCUSTOMED to receiving them. The fact that it’s an “accounting” issue only shows that Apple’s accountants are far less creative than its designers.
$20 or 20 cents, it doesn’t matter – these apps should be a free upgrade.

By: F1sh

F1sh — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:30:02 +0000

+1 to elle.

By: Austen

Austen — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:20:25 +0000

It’s $20, guys! $20 extra for every feature of the iphone except for a phone???? I think it’s a good deal. Apple isn’t wrong to make people pay for the upgrade, it’s worth it.

By: elle

elle — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:13:12 +0000

i purchased a 16GB iPod touch as soon as it became available in france. i downloaded/ran ijailbreak and basically have been using these apps (mail, weather, notes, stocks, maps) and MANY MORE (including cal with the ability to edit entries) for more than 3 months now. everything works flawlessly. with additional apps like customize and smdpreferences i now have whichever photo i pick as the background image in the main interface. all this for free.

to people that complain about price – i suggest they run ijailbreak. it doesn’t brick the ipod touch because it doesn’t mess with its hard drive. and you can always reset it to factory settings with a simple click in itunes.

my two cents…

By: John

John — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:19:30 +0000

It’s not the purchases made for the device that is considered revenue. It’s how the initial purchase is reflected in the books.

Apple has already stated that the iPhone and AppleTV will see feature updates after being sold to the public at no additional cost. In order to do this, they have to recognize the sales differently from an iPod. Arjun Muralidharan said it best above.

Again, this has nothing to do with what the device can do. It’s about reporting finances.

By: Jonathan Wilson

Jonathan Wilson — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:02:01 +0000

How is the revenue any different on a Apple TV from a iPod? They both support adding your own media (free) and from the iTunes store?

By: Raffers

Raffers — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:48:08 +0000

The problem I have with this update is that 1.1.3 without the applications package only updated the look of the taskbar. You say that these are PDA features, but the one critical iPod feature: displaying lyrics, only worked after paying the $20!

By: Todd

Todd — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:29:47 +0000

One more thing – the idea that people who want PDA functions will choose an iPhone is off. In Canada, where I live, we can’t get the iPhone (yet) because we have a dinosaur-minded carrier as our only GSM network (Rogers). Adding these apps makes using a Touch much more palatable in that environment until the iPhone has a Canadian carrier. Hopefully you can see now that this isn’t as much of a ripoff as it was answering a demand. You know, that listen to customers and they will give you money thing.

By: Todd

Todd — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:26:26 +0000

Sorry, but this is a poor analysis and seems more about getting readers’ ire worked up than anything. As a package, these apps deliver quite a bit of value. I would have paid $20 more on buying the ipod touch originally just to get Mail, Notes and Maps. That I get Stocks and Weather (which I don’t use) doesn’t really factor into my decision. I have a hard time believing that any 3rd party developer could have delivered a Mail, Maps OR Notes app of the same quality for as low of a price, and given how much I like them, I’m very happy to shell out 20 bones.

That’s my perspective, which isn’t everyone’s of course, but I do tend to agree – if you don’t like the price, don’t buy it.

By: Arjun Muralidharan

Arjun Muralidharan — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 14:32:25 +0000

As has been pointed out, it has to do with Accounting. In a nutshell:

Apple cannot increase the value of sold goods manifold over a period of time – the books would still have an entered worth of the original price.

The books will thus reflect a false reality. And since the iPods are not accounted on a subscription-basis (like the iPhone AND Apple TV are), they have to charge for this update.

In other words, Apple’s Income from iPhone, OS X or Apple TV are spread out over the course of a year or two, or some time period they fix. iPods are not, there revenue is booked as they are sold. This is one reason why Apple’s iPhone sales figures will take affect on the quarterly statements only later in the year, or next year.

The question is, do they have to charge $20 for it? Well, I guess they just grabbed the opportunity.

Remember the 802.11n upgrade for Airport? Same thing.

By: John

John — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 14:30:26 +0000

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act is about financial reporting. The iPhone and AppleTV both have revenue from sales recognized over a 12-24 month timeframe instead of all at once, like the iPod Touch. By recognizing the revenue differently, Apple is able to provide updates without charging the customer.

However, since all the revenue from the iPod Touch (like all the computers) was recognized up front, any major upgrades that would provide additional features will see a charge. Security updates and big fixes will continue to remain free (i.e. Leopard upgrade vs. security update).

By: Greg Healy

Greg Healy — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 14:07:46 +0000

Actually reading into it a little further, there doesn’t seem to be anything in the Sarbanes Oxley act that says they have to charge for upgrades…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarbanes-Oxley_Act

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:53:17 +0000

I’ve read elsewhere that the iPod Touch will not get the full benefit of the 1.1.3 upgrade unless the applications are also purchased. Also, I’ve noticed its called the ‘January’ update. Does this mean there will be monthly software updates all charged at $20?

By: Jim

Jim — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:45:58 +0000

By law, Apple has to charge an upgrade fee to existing users. It’s some stupid accounting law required by the SEC. I’ve read that they’re lowering the price of existing iPod Touch units left in stores by $20 until they sell out of them (which will probably take all of a few days at most).

By: Serge

Serge — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:57:19 +0000

…or you could find a friend with an iPhone or who had already paid for the apps and simply copy them to your jailbroken touch.

By: Matthieu Aubry

Matthieu Aubry — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:52:26 +0000

(Apologies for my english)

In my opinion, the matter is not to know if those apps worth the price (which I believe they do).

I believe that most of the iPod Touch users (at least me) fear having to pay 20$ every month to get the best from them iPod.

By: wphj

wphj — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:50:46 +0000

The only real consideration is whether or not the appsa re worth $20 to the person buying it.
They bought that iPod touch with the features that it had, and now Apple is offering them the option of making the device better without buying a new one.
The iPod price drop was much larger and not really comparable to this situation.

By: Jonathan Wilson

Jonathan Wilson — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:47:41 +0000

Sarbanes-Oxley makes no sense…look at the Apple TV. Free upgrade and price lowered.

By: Greg Healy

Greg Healy — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:27:56 +0000

I think that there was something about a law that Apple had to charge for new features. Sarbanes-Oxley or something to that effect…

By: Christopher

Christopher — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:27:21 +0000

Here’s a suggestion for you…..

If you think $20 is too much for 5 apps, then don’t buy them.

Quite simple really!