we get screwed again!!! (iTouch)

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
ipod touch users will have to pay once again to get 2.0!
«1

Comments

  • surfratsurfrat Posts: 341member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shady104 View Post


    ipod touch users will have to pay once again to get 2.0!



    Yeah, that's definitely too bad. But don't think us iPhone owners aren't paying either. It comes right out of our monthly phone bill, and you aren't paying a dime for that.



    So really there's nothing to complain about.
  • pt123pt123 Posts: 696member
    The Playstation 3 upgraded their firmware a few time, adding increased functionality and they don't charge.
  • brandon639brandon639 Posts: 34member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pt123 View Post


    The Playstation 3 upgraded their firmware a few time, adding increased functionality and they don't charge.



    So does the Wii if were talking about gaming systems
  • gordygordy Posts: 933member
    Blame your Congressmen, not Apple.
  • graemesangelsgraemesangels Posts: 3member
    Just think of it this way. You paid for a device at a set price and it does everything it was advertised to do at the time you bought it. Now instead of having to buy a new device in order to upgrade, like you would have to do with essentially every other mp3 player on the market, you can simply pay a nominal fee to gain amazing new funtionality through a simple software update. Sounds like a pretty good deal to me.
  • dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by graemesangels View Post


    Just think of it this way. You paid for a device at a set price and it does everything it was advertised to do at the time you bought it. Now instead of having to buy a new device in order to upgrade, like you would have to do with essentially every other mp3 player on the market, you can simply pay a nominal fee to gain amazing new funtionality through a simple software update. Sounds like a pretty good deal to me.



    The point is that Apple doesn't charge for Mac OS X updates that add functionality nor do they charge for iLife/iWork applications that add features via a free software update.



    So what exactly makes Mac OS X so different accounting-wise than the iPod Touch OS X?
  • dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gordy View Post


    Blame your Congressmen, not Apple.



    Congressman aren't telling Apple to charge $20 for the update.
  • pt123pt123 Posts: 696member
    I am just glad I am not one of those that has to get the device when it comes out. I am happy to wait for price to go down and features to go up before I buy. Or until that thing can play videos on nfl.com (flash I think).
  • flounderflounder Posts: 2,674member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post


    The point is that Apple doesn't charge for Mac OS X updates that add functionality nor do they charge for iLife/iWork applications that add features via a free software update.



    So what exactly makes Mac OS X so different accounting-wise than the iPod Touch OS X?



    I think the point is that this is a much larger update.
  • graemesangelsgraemesangels Posts: 3member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post


    The point is that Apple doesn't charge for Mac OS X updates that add functionality nor do they charge for iLife/iWork applications that add features via a free software update.



    So what exactly makes Mac OS X so different accounting-wise than the iPod Touch OS X?



    They don't charge for updates in OSX in the same sense that they haven't charged for the basic updates to the touch platforms.



    What they do charge you for though in both OSX and Mobile OSX is for the initial program whether it be the 5 apps made available in January, The App Store application coming in June or iLife/iWork for Macs.



    I'm not familiar with their accounting practices but in my opinion the choice as to whether or not to charge for an update (aside from bug fixes etc.) is entirely up to Apple. If they feel that they can afford to give it away for free then great but if they have substantial costs to recuperate from the development process then so be it.



    I suppose they could increase the MSRP to include the potential costs of future updates; but seeing as they can't determine exactly how much those updates are going to cost to develop they just charge for them later and leave the choice of whether or not to update/upgrade up to the customer instead of forcing them to pay for something they might not want.
  • gordygordy Posts: 933member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post


    Congressman aren't telling Apple to charge $20 for the update.



    Actually, yes they did...sort of:



    http://www.macworld.com/article/1319...ipodtouch.html

    Quote:

    “It’s an accounting requirement that if you upgrade a device that’s not on a subscription, you have to charge,” Needham and Company financial analyst Charles Wolf said. “Apple has a choice of what to charge, but they have to charge.”



    AppleTV and iPhone are under a subscription accounting method. This made news a year or so ago, but most people thought the term "subscription" referred to music subscriptions back then.
  • shady104shady104 Posts: 332member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gordy View Post


    Actually, yes they did...sort of:



    http://www.macworld.com/article/1319...ipodtouch.html





    AppleTV and iPhone are under a subscription accounting method. This made news a year or so ago, but most people thought the term "subscription" referred to music subscriptions back then.



    ok the iphone yes is under a subscription to at&t but appleTV isnt. you really dont have to buy anything from itunes in order to use appleTV.
  • gordygordy Posts: 933member
    They both are...and it has nothing to do with AT&T! That's why the AppleTV update was free, even though it was released a year ago. I don't make this stuff up...I promise.
  • shady104shady104 Posts: 332member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gordy View Post


    They both are...and it has nothing to do with AT&T! That's why the AppleTV update was free, even though it was released a year ago. I don't make this stuff up...I promise.



    ok so then what subscription service are they attatched to?
  • areseearesee Posts: 776member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shady104 View Post


    ok the iphone yes is under a subscription to at&t but appleTV isnt. you really dont have to buy anything from itunes in order to use appleTV.



    You're making the same mistake that gordy was referring to. This type of subscription has nothing to do with ATT subscriptions, your cable TV subscription or even a magazine subscription. It is an accounting term that has to do with how Apple accounts for the income derived from the selling of these items. For most of what Apple sells it accounts for all the cash at the time of the sell. But for the iPhone and the Apple TV Apple spreads the cash out over a period of time. So for example (I don't know the details so don't hold me to them), Apple sells the iPhone. But it doesn't immediately credit it books with the full income from that sell. Instead it spreads the income over, say 24 months. Thus a subscription.



    Thank to the accounting scandals awhile back, congress go into the act and said that you can't add value to an already purchased product without getting value back in return. So for a normally accounted for item like the Touch and the MacBook Apple has to charge the purchaser when they add value to that product. Whereas for an item accounted for by subscription, Apple has not completed the purchase and is free to add value to that product.



    * I am not an accountant and I may be wrong in what I just said, but this is how I understand the issue.
  • icfireballicfireball Posts: 2,594member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aresee View Post


    You're making the same mistake that gordy was referring to. This type of subscription has nothing to do with ATT subscriptions, your cable TV subscription or even a magazine subscription. It is an accounting term that has to do with how Apple accounts for the income derived from the selling of these items. For most of what Apple sells it accounts for all the cash at the time of the sell. But for the iPhone and the Apple TV Apple spreads the cash out over a period of time. So for example (I don't know the details so don't hold me to them), Apple sells the iPhone. But it doesn't immediately credit it books with the full income from that sell. Instead it spreads the income over, say 24 months. Thus a subscription.



    Thank to the accounting scandals awhile back, congress go into the act and said that you can't add value to an already purchased product without getting value back in return. So for a normally accounted for item like the Touch and the MacBook Apple has to charge the purchaser when they add value to that product. Whereas for an item accounted for by subscription, Apple has not completed the purchase and is free to add value to that product.



    * I am not an accountant and I may be wrong in what I just said, but this is how I understand the issue.



    And the reason why they can give free software updates, i.e. Aperture 1.5 or Mac OS X 10.5.1 is because you are licensing the software... you don't actually own it. With the iPod Touch, they can't use this logic because the Touch's software is not licensed separately from the device. Adding to what you said about the iPhone, because Apple continually gets revenue through AT&T data plans, Apple can account for the entire cost of the device at time of purchase and still provide free software updates at any point within an iPhone users' contract (or future contract as well).
  • gongon Posts: 2,437member
    Does this mean that the Playstation3 has to be under "subscription" accounting as well?
  • areseearesee Posts: 776member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by icfireball View Post


    Adding to what you said about the iPhone, because Apple continually gets revenue through AT&T data plans, Apple can account for the entire cost of the device at time of purchase and still provide free software updates at any point within an iPhone users' contract (or future contract as well).



    Maybe they could, but they don't. Apple has repeatedly said that they account for the revenue from the iPhone purchases by the subscription method.
  • icfireballicfireball Posts: 2,594member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aresee View Post


    Maybe they could, but they don't. Apple has repeatedly said that they account for the revenue from the iPhone purchases by the subscription method.



    Right, but what I'm saying is, Apple could pocket the $399 per iPhone and leave the accounting open as a "subscription" model BECAUSE they get revenue via 2-year contacts from AT&T. And in fact, that is what I would guess they do.
  • jbljbl Posts: 555member
    Does anyone know if Apple will be giving the 2.0 upgrade free to people who buy an iPod Touch now? I would expect them to start this policy sometime to prevent people from waiting.
Sign In or Register to comment.