Right you are ... people need to realize nothing on from Google is truly free ... it all comes with big hooks attached, if invisible ones.
Sure, but we're not talking about a standalone free product or even one that makes you the product, like with nearly everything Google offers, but a way to help facilitate more HW sales and congeal an OS like it is with iOS which makes it cheaper and better for developers which in turn makes it better for consumers.
I'm sure there are some people that think that OS X has taken a dive since they dropped the price from $129 but I think it's gotten much better. Each major update is effectively changing less but they are updating each and every year.
Leopard (and earlier)
$129 for Single User
$199 for Family Pack
$499 for Server
Snow Leopard
$29 for Single User
$49 for Family Pack
$499 for Server
Lion
$29.99 for Mac App Store*
$69 for USB Thumb Drive
$49.99 for Server
Mountain Lion
$19.99 for Mac App Store*
$19.99 for Server
Mavericks
$XX.XX for Mac App Store*
$XX.XX for Server
Good point when it comes to the phone. But most people access the time from a wristwatch (unless they are actually sitting at a computer screen). Most people wear a wristwatch in preference to pulling out their phone to access time. And these same "most people" need a quick, though approximate, answer to the question, "What time is it?"
You are correct though, few people will look at the little clock on their home screen to access the time.
Could you imagine OSX and iWork being free? That'd be interesting to say the least.
I'd much rather some solid improvements.
Keynote could be the defining standard in presentations. It would be absolutely a knock-out if they could allow variables to be passed to Quartz Composer. Then people could develop all sorts of real time effects and plugins.
"FREE" must be paid for in some manner. Either they would open source it to a community (and then those people get PAID as consultants to keep things "FREE"), or they end up shifting the costs to other costs of entry like accessing or advertising.
Making Garageband FREE and then charging for instruments and libraries makes a lot of sense from a marketing standpoint. There are already companies that make money creating libraries -- they'd probably start adapting these to IAP for Garageband.
Even more brilliant would be some upgrade and compatibility path from Garageband to Logic Pro. With interchangeable libraries.
So my vote would be "free" Garageband and "Free" web accessible iWork -- and "pay to run on standalone on desktop" for iWork and pay for premium Libraries and content for Garageband. Which makes it more cross platform and accessible, but still maintains a revenue model so they can upgrade and support. Too much "FREE" stuff and you get what you pay for...
How is Apple going to save money by giving away OS X?
I've already explained the very simple methods in which offering a product that directly costs the customer less can result increased profits. If you don't think that is possible then you are saying that Apple offering OS X for more than $100 less than it used to and offering iOS for iPod Touch and iCloud over MobileMe for free in no way benefits their bottom line by increasing HW sales. You are therefore claim Apple is being altruistic when they lower a price which I assure you is not the case.
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span><div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>akqies</strong> <a href="/t/160264/apple-profiles-free-iwork-ilife-apps-with-ios-7-style-icons-depicts-free-garage-band-with-iap-u/40#post_2421008"><img src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" class="inlineimg" alt="View Post"/></a><br/><br/><br />
I've already explained the very simple methods in which offering a product that directly costs the customer less can result increased profits. If you don't think that is possible then you are saying that Apple offering OS X for more than $100 less than it used to and offering iOS for iPod Touch and iCloud over MobileMe for free in no way benefits their bottom line by increasing HW sales. You are therefore claim Apple is being altruistic when they lower a price which I assure you is not the case.</div></div><p> </p>
You said Apple would save money. Increasing profit or making more is not saving money.
You are therefore claim Apple is being altruistic
I didn't claim anything.
Mac OS X could become free as a way of saving Apple money
where offering OS X for free could save Apple money (read: make them more money) than selling it,
read: making more money is not saving money
Again I ask...
How is Apple going to save money (read: lower their costs) by giving away OS X?
Besides, $20 is pretty much giving it away. I seriously doubt lowering that cost, would increase the # of people upgrading by any substantial number.
And if you get a new computer, the OS is included, so installing a new OS for free would not drive hardware sales.
If their current computer could not run the new OS, they would need to get new hardware (which includes the OS so they wouldn't care about the price of the OS upgrade).
You said Apple would save money. Increasing profit or making more is not saving money.
save - keep and store up (something, esp. money) for future use. As previously noted, I choose save over profit for a very specific reason. Getting more people on the same version of the OS saves them from spending money in support areas (cost savings) as well as incurs increases sales (profits) from the value added of lower cost OS for the reasonable life of the product.
How is Apple going to save money (read: lower their costs) by giving away OS X?
How many times do I need to spell it out? If you aren't going to read or understand basic economics the first few times it's presented then how is it being stated yet again going to help you?
Besides, $20 is pretty much giving it away. I seriously doubt lowering that cost, would increase the # of people upgrading by any substantial number.
And if you get a new computer, the OS is included, so installing a new OS for free would not drive hardware sales.
If their current computer could not run the new OS, they would need to get new hardware (which includes the OS so they wouldn't care about the price of the OS upgrade).
If $20 is "pretty much giving it away" (your words) and it's $109 less than it was a few years ago then you're claiming Apple is losing $109 of pure profit on every Mac or do you think there is a financial benefit to offering OS X at a "pretty much giving it away" price over these last few years?
Ask yourself why Apple would alter the iPod and Apple TV accounting methods to offer updates for free when they previously charged for iPod Touch updates Ask yourself why iWork and iLife apps are now going to be free for new devices. Ask yourself why iCloud is free when before they charged for MobileMe and .Mac. If you can't see the intrinsic benefits already outlines above then I don't know what to tell you.
[quote]save - keep and store up (something, esp. money) for future use[/quote] Since it costs money to develop & distribute, how are they "keeping and storing" money? In fact while they may gain sales (doubtful, since OS upgrades must be installed on already purchased hardware) they lose money specifically on OS development if they do not sell it, even of minimal cost. They aren't "saving" money by giving it away for free, no matter what you call it. [quote]I choose save over profit for a very specific reason. Getting more people on the same version of the OS saves them from spending money in support areas as well as incurs increases sales from the value added of lower cost OS for the reasonable life of the product.[/quote] What sales are they increasing? The user is installing a free OS on an already purchased computer... [quote]How many times do I need to spell it out?[/quote] At least once would be nice. How is Apple going to [save money (read: lower their costs) by giving away OS X?
Since it costs money to develop & distribute, how are they "keeping and storing" money?
In fact while they may gain sales (doubtful, since OS upgrades must be installed on already purchased hardware) they lose money specifically on OS development if they do not sell it, even of minimal cost.
You still haven't explained why you think there was no financial benefit for lowering the cost of the OS X by over $100. You still haven't explained why there was no financial benefit to making iOS for iPod Touch free of charge. You still haven't explained why would even make iOS for the iPhone free of charge since you see no financial benefit to it being free. You still haven't explained why iCloud is free when MobileMe and .Mac cost money. You still haevn't explained why they would make iWork and iLife apps free when they were already, as you put it, "pretty much giving it away."
Another thing I just noticed... The GarageBand icon mentions, "...record up to 32 tracks...", which would definitely be new for iOS. If this instead refers to the desktop version, I've never tried to use that many tracks to record.
Desktop does 64 already, I think. I just hope the OS X iLife update makes it 64-bit. I’m sick of having GarageBand crash when I’m working with a 4GB+ file.
One thing about the new iOS 7 icons: they’re not designed to be mesmerizingly detailed with beautiful intricate details. They’re designed to function as icons.
The purpose of an icon is not to be a beautiful canvas for a work of art that captures the attention of your eye and holds on to it. It is to provide a readily apparent "iconic" representation that allows you to rapidly distinguish between them.
Except that the iOS 7 icons don't do that. They all use the same colors and shape styles, so there's very little differentiation.
You probably would not. But the majority of the world conceptualizes analog time more quickly (even though digital is more accurate). That's why most watches are analog.
I'm an exception. I cannot conceptualize analog time clocks with any amount of speed and accuracy. I understand how they work but my neurology has problems seeing it as an instant symbol.
However: It's not true at all that they're EASIER or more efficient than digital for anyone.
You do not speak for humanity, Mr. Airplane Pilot. You're making it clear that you're missing a piece of brain hardware that Sir Jony's got.
And you're making it clear that you know nothing about human-machine interfacing or readability, and that you have some kind of inappropriate reverence for Ive, despite the clear fact (to those of us not blinded by glitz and glam) that he has no idea what the hell he's doing with interface design.
Comments
I'll mourn the day OSX is iOS-7inzed.
Some mourning on your side... some cheering on my side....
then we continue doing business as usual.
My guess is, that I will be a little better off on my side.
Right you are ... people need to realize nothing on from Google is truly free ... it all comes with big hooks attached, if invisible ones.
Sure, but we're not talking about a standalone free product or even one that makes you the product, like with nearly everything Google offers, but a way to help facilitate more HW sales and congeal an OS like it is with iOS which makes it cheaper and better for developers which in turn makes it better for consumers.
I'm sure there are some people that think that OS X has taken a dive since they dropped the price from $129 but I think it's gotten much better. Each major update is effectively changing less but they are updating each and every year.
Leopard (and earlier)
$129 for Single User
$199 for Family Pack
$499 for Server
Snow Leopard
$29 for Single User
$49 for Family Pack
$499 for Server
Lion
$29.99 for Mac App Store*
$69 for USB Thumb Drive
$49.99 for Server
Mountain Lion
$19.99 for Mac App Store*
$19.99 for Server
Mavericks
$XX.XX for Mac App Store*
$XX.XX for Server
* Effectively an unlimited Family Pack
Good point when it comes to the phone. But most people access the time from a wristwatch (unless they are actually sitting at a computer screen). Most people wear a wristwatch in preference to pulling out their phone to access time. And these same "most people" need a quick, though approximate, answer to the question, "What time is it?"
You are correct though, few people will look at the little clock on their home screen to access the time.
Could you imagine OSX and iWork being free? That'd be interesting to say the least.
I'd much rather some solid improvements.
Keynote could be the defining standard in presentations. It would be absolutely a knock-out if they could allow variables to be passed to Quartz Composer. Then people could develop all sorts of real time effects and plugins.
"FREE" must be paid for in some manner. Either they would open source it to a community (and then those people get PAID as consultants to keep things "FREE"), or they end up shifting the costs to other costs of entry like accessing or advertising.
Making Garageband FREE and then charging for instruments and libraries makes a lot of sense from a marketing standpoint. There are already companies that make money creating libraries -- they'd probably start adapting these to IAP for Garageband.
Even more brilliant would be some upgrade and compatibility path from Garageband to Logic Pro. With interchangeable libraries.
So my vote would be "free" Garageband and "Free" web accessible iWork -- and "pay to run on standalone on desktop" for iWork and pay for premium Libraries and content for Garageband. Which makes it more cross platform and accessible, but still maintains a revenue model so they can upgrade and support. Too much "FREE" stuff and you get what you pay for...
Not a smoking gun but certainly an indication that Mac OS X could become free as a way of saving Apple money.
???How is Apple going to save money by giving away OS X?
I've already explained the very simple methods in which offering a product that directly costs the customer less can result increased profits. If you don't think that is possible then you are saying that Apple offering OS X for more than $100 less than it used to and offering iOS for iPod Touch and iCloud over MobileMe for free in no way benefits their bottom line by increasing HW sales. You are therefore claim Apple is being altruistic when they lower a price which I assure you is not the case.
I've already explained the very simple methods in which offering a product that directly costs the customer less can result increased profits. If you don't think that is possible then you are saying that Apple offering OS X for more than $100 less than it used to and offering iOS for iPod Touch and iCloud over MobileMe for free in no way benefits their bottom line by increasing HW sales. You are therefore claim Apple is being altruistic when they lower a price which I assure you is not the case.</div></div><p> </p>
You said Apple would save money. Increasing profit or making more is not saving money. I didn't claim anything. read: making more money is not saving money
Again I ask...
How is Apple going to save money (read: lower their costs) by giving away OS X?
Besides, $20 is pretty much giving it away. I seriously doubt lowering that cost, would increase the # of people upgrading by any substantial number.
And if you get a new computer, the OS is included, so installing a new OS for free would not drive hardware sales.
If their current computer could not run the new OS, they would need to get new hardware (which includes the OS so they wouldn't care about the price of the OS upgrade).
save - keep and store up (something, esp. money) for future use. As previously noted, I choose save over profit for a very specific reason. Getting more people on the same version of the OS saves them from spending money in support areas (cost savings) as well as incurs increases sales (profits) from the value added of lower cost OS for the reasonable life of the product.
How many times do I need to spell it out? If you aren't going to read or understand basic economics the first few times it's presented then how is it being stated yet again going to help you?
If $20 is "pretty much giving it away" (your words) and it's $109 less than it was a few years ago then you're claiming Apple is losing $109 of pure profit on every Mac or do you think there is a financial benefit to offering OS X at a "pretty much giving it away" price over these last few years?
Ask yourself why Apple would alter the iPod and Apple TV accounting methods to offer updates for free when they previously charged for iPod Touch updates Ask yourself why iWork and iLife apps are now going to be free for new devices. Ask yourself why iCloud is free when before they charged for MobileMe and .Mac. If you can't see the intrinsic benefits already outlines above then I don't know what to tell you.
Since it costs money to develop & distribute, how are they "keeping and storing" money?
In fact while they may gain sales (doubtful, since OS upgrades must be installed on already purchased hardware) they lose money specifically on OS development if they do not sell it, even of minimal cost.
They aren't "saving" money by giving it away for free, no matter what you call it.
[quote]I choose save over profit for a very specific reason. Getting more people on the same version of the OS saves them from spending money in support areas as well as incurs increases sales from the value added of lower cost OS for the reasonable life of the product.[/quote]
What sales are they increasing? The user is installing a free OS on an already purchased computer...
[quote]How many times do I need to spell it out?[/quote]
At least once would be nice.
How is Apple going to [save money (read: lower their costs) by giving away OS X?
What is this, the 5th or 6th time?
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160264/apple-profiles-free-iwork-ilife-apps-with-ios-7-style-icons-depicts-free-garage-band-with-iap-u#post_2420718
As long as they don’t artificially limit hardware to three OS’, forcing you to buy new if you want anything beyond it.
My Mac Pro’s four going on five OS’, and hopefully it will work with 10.10.
You still haven't explained why you think there was no financial benefit for lowering the cost of the OS X by over $100. You still haven't explained why there was no financial benefit to making iOS for iPod Touch free of charge. You still haven't explained why would even make iOS for the iPhone free of charge since you see no financial benefit to it being free. You still haven't explained why iCloud is free when MobileMe and .Mac cost money. You still haevn't explained why they would make iWork and iLife apps free when they were already, as you put it, "pretty much giving it away."
These yearly updates seem to have been good for the Mac Pro. Waiting 3 years between a major OS update just felt limiting in comparison.
Another thing I just noticed...
The new GarageBand icon states "...record up to 32 tracks...", which would definitely be new for iOS.
If this instead refers to the desktop version, I've never tried to record that many tracks before.
Desktop does 64 already, I think. I just hope the OS X iLife update makes it 64-bit. I’m sick of having GarageBand crash when I’m working with a 4GB+ file.
Except that the iOS 7 icons don't do that. They all use the same colors and shape styles, so there's very little differentiation.
I'm an exception. I cannot conceptualize analog time clocks with any amount of speed and accuracy. I understand how they work but my neurology has problems seeing it as an instant symbol.
However: It's not true at all that they're EASIER or more efficient than digital for anyone.
And you're making it clear that you know nothing about human-machine interfacing or readability, and that you have some kind of inappropriate reverence for Ive, despite the clear fact (to those of us not blinded by glitz and glam) that he has no idea what the hell he's doing with interface design.