Apple releases FaceTime on Mac App Store for 99 cents - Page 3

I'm not trying to justify or rationalize anything. Many have attributed this charge to malice or greed on Apple's part. That was my initial reaction too. But the reason why Apple is charging the fee for this software has to do with accounting for Macintosh hardware sales.

As i said, i don't like the fee (it rubs me the wrong way), and i personally intend to avoid it. But i now understand why Apple is doing this. And i personally don't fault them for it, even though i don't like it. They're just trying to protect themselves from regulators and lawyers.



As i've already said: Personally, i don't feel this makes FaceTime part of Mac OS X. But it is an argument which could be made, and is possible could prevail in a court of law.


Just because an app can only run on the Mac, doesn't make it part of the Macintosh hardware product. Therein is the acid test. Mac OS X is considered part of the Mac hardware product.

The App Store is clearly a standalone app, just like Safari. And just like Safari, it's being released standalone before Apple bundles it with Mac OS X. As such, neither can be construed as part of Mac OS X, per se. Independent product, so it has no impact on Mac accounting.


No. I'm saying because the App Store isn't tied to Mac hardware the way Mac OS X is, Apple is unencumbered by the GAAP in its regard. However, because Facetime could be construed to be part of Mac OS X, Apple perceives itself as encumbered by GAAP and is therefore charging a nominal fee for it.


No. It was always free.


You're missing the point. Safari was never encumbered by the GAAP, because it was always a free standalone app. It was never tied to the Mac hardware per se.

FaceTime's not tied to Apple hardware, either. Apple could easily release a version for Windows, so I'm a little confused at your reasoning.

Not unless you can figure out a way that a Windows Facetime app could be construed as part of the Macinotsh hardware product.

I doubt Apple would be interested in producing a Windows client, however. Too much work to support the various hardware configurations, and not that important to driving the adoption of the Facetime standard. It's iOS devices which will drive it (or not). The Mac client is just a way to add more value to the Mac platform.

That's already been addressed. Short recap: Facetime app construed as part of Mac OS X because it has a background process. Therefore it's considered as "adding a major new feature" to the Mac hardware product. Therefore it's subject to GAAP.

I tend to agree that it's one heck of a weak "major new feature." But it's a grey area which could be argued either way. Apple is simply trying to protect its ass from the regulators and lawyers by not taking any chances.


Bingo! Thank you very much you greedy bastards at Enron, Tyco, WorldCom et al for bringing the SarbanesOxley Act upon us!


Actually, the law was changed. Well, the GAAP was changed, and that's what this is all about. It's the same issue which prompted Apple to charge for iOS updates for the iPod Touch, but not the very same updates on the iPhone. The two devices were accounted for differently. Apple lobbied to have the GAAP changed, it was, and Apple restated their accounting as a result (and at some expense).

Same issue here. Apple has two choices: Restate all their Mac hardware sales accounting, at considerable expense, or just charge a nominal fee until Lion comes out. Apple isn't going to do the former. Even if they wanted to, they couldn't accomplish the task before Lion ships anyhow. So you have two choices: Pay the 99¢, or wait until Lion. I'm opting for the latter, myself. Your mileage may vary.