Why .mac makes sense.

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
I've seen a lot of bashing of the introduction of .mac, and i admit that i was very hesitant at first to embrace such a change, but looking beyond my own greed I was able to understandd why .mac would work for apple.



It costs apple and arm and a leg to provide the storage space and bandwidth for itools members that used the disk storage, email account etc..



I think what part of what drove apple to .mac is having freeloaders who were using multiple itools accounts, just because they could.



.mac was not only a solution from a financial standpoint, but it also addressed the issue of people abusing the system.



The introduction of .mac certainly spells out the end of joe schmoe using multiple itools accounts just because it was cool to have multiple mac.com email addresses, as well as using them all as his own personal storage for backing up his whole computer.



.mac has now become geared more towards those who are serious about using the tools that .mac offers. From a developer/designer standpoint I would not hesitate to pay the $100/year for this service. I have a place to backup my projects, a place i can upload a project to and view/show clients in a real time web perspective from another computer what their project looks like. I also get an email address that i could use for my business, or as a contact point for clients.



I don't have to go searching around the web for a web hosting site, or for a place that offers pop email accounts etc.. all i have to do is logon to my mac, signup by clicking on .mac and bam. It's a simple cost effective solution for someone just starting out, and for the budget minded who aren't able to afford all the bells and whistles, nor have the time to spend looking for hosting/email services. Apple is already established as well, which gives me faith that they just won't up and fold in a blink of an eye, and suddenly leave me helpless.



And only for 8$ a month. and to think i was hesitant!



Now, on to the freeloaders, and those who used itools just for email. I sympathize with you. But if you really wants best for apple and what's best for consumers as a whole then you'll understand this approach.



Apple is able to trim the fat so to speak, either people are going to use .mac because they're serious about using all the features, or they won't sign up for it because they just used it for email.



As i said earlier, it cost apple and arm and a leg to provide the itools services to the masses. Now they've found a way to trim the fat, a way to cut back the amount of money they have to shell out to provide these services just for johnny email, and still make the people that utilized all the services happy by offering them at such a low price.



If johnny email doesn't signup, apple saves money by not having to provide services to a person who just wants to use them for email.



If someone signs up, at least apple will recoup some of its losses by charging for these services, but they set it at a price that still seems very attractive for the consumer who takes advantages of a majority of these services.



that's my .02
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 46
    mac's girlmac's girl Posts: 556member
    you make a good argument, and i do se both sides of the debate. i just emailed apple and said i would be willing to pay on a sliding scale based on iDisk storage size. if $100 will get us 100mb, then i'd pay a buck per MB based on what i needed. 20mb would be more than enough for my needs, and i'd shell out the $20 per year for it. (and they can take the virus software back.)
  • Reply 2 of 46
    I agree with Mac's Girl. A tiered pricing system or a la carte is the way to go. I have little need for Virex or the backup utility or iCards. I just want to send email and use Homepage to post family photos. I'd pay $30 a year for that, but $100 seems a bit excessive.
  • Reply 3 of 46
    popmetalpopmetal Posts: 95member
    liquidh2o, I think that your argument was irrelevant since most people are not mad because Apple is charging. They are mad because of how much they are charging and they are mad because Apple is not being flexible. It's great that .mac suits your business. But does it suit a student? Does it suit a family of three or four? I don't think so! mac's girl's idea sounds very good. They should have done something like that.
  • Reply 4 of 46
    Agreed. The problem is not paying, it's the sudden reversal of Apple's position on charging, and the inflexibility of the .mac plan (all or nothing). In a strange sort of way, I feel like I got backstabbed.



    Apple should have telegraphed the move further in advance, should have offered tiered service, and should have allowed a very basic and free service to remain, e.g., as Hotmail does.



    I don't mind Apple making a profit, but I do mind the way they're going about it with .mac.
  • Reply 5 of 46
    The way i justified my purchase was actually from both a health and an economic standpoint



    I know i eat fast food at times even when i have the option of staying in and eating a meal that's already paid for.



    Paying for .mac each month just means that that's one less trip i take to Wendy's it's a win win situation for me



    I believe the reason that Apple doesn't currently offer a tier/sliding based service is because of the initial costs that are involved in providing these services, and at what point the account would(if ever) become profitable to them. Lowering the price for the consumer while still maintaining similiar initial costs would just mean apple is putting themselves further into the hole. And this isn't taking into account bandwidth limitations. If apple were to introduce a tiered service, i think these would also come with very strict bandwidth guidelines, and i think that would only enrage the community more.



    And might i add, this is a very deep hole.



    I understand(and agree) that hotmail does still offer a free service. But don't think hotmail isn't making any money off of that "free" service they're providing. Through the use of popups and adware they're generating at least some income.



    and to popmetal, I'm a student and have a family, and on top of that i'm in the military(very low income.) Maybe being in the military has taught me to be thrifty, but that 8$ a month to me is just a few cheeseburgers or cokes i can do without.



    [quote]Originally posted by popmetal:

    <strong>liquidh2o, I think that your argument was irrelevant since most people are not mad because Apple is charging. They are mad because of how much they are charging and they are mad because Apple is not being flexible. It's great that .mac suits your business. But does it suit a student? Does it suit a family of three or four? I don't think so! mac's girl's idea sounds very good. They should have done something like that.</strong><hr></blockquote>
  • Reply 6 of 46
    popmetalpopmetal Posts: 95member
    [quote]Originally posted by liquidh2o:

    <strong>The way i justified my purchase was actually from both a health and an economic standpoint



    I know i eat fast food at times even when i have the option of staying in and eating a meal that's already paid for.



    Paying for .mac each month just means that that's one less trip i take to Wendy's it's a win win situation for me



    I believe the reason that Apple doesn't currently offer a tier/sliding based service is because of the initial costs that are involved in providing these services, and at what point the account would(if ever) become profitable to them. Lowering the price for the consumer while still maintaining similiar initial costs would just mean apple is putting themselves further into the hole. And this isn't taking into account bandwidth limitations. If apple were to introduce a tiered service, i think these would also come with very strict bandwidth guidelines, and i think that would only enrage the community more.



    And might i add, this is a very deep hole.



    I understand(and agree) that hotmail does still offer a free service. But don't think hotmail isn't making any money off of that "free" service they're providing. Through the use of popups and adware they're generating at least some income.



    and to popmetal, I'm a student and have a family, and on top of that i'm in the military(very low income.) Maybe being in the military has taught me to be thrifty, but that 8$ a month to me is just a few cheeseburgers or cokes i can do without.



    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    That's great .Mac is the perfect service for you. Unfortunately, judging from the response to .Mac, it doesn't make sense for an overwhelming majority of Apple users. If Apple wants to make an optimal profit, they have to accommodate the needs of their customers. You and a 100000 mac users paying $90 a year would mean a smaller profit for Apple than 1million mac users paying different rates between $20 and $99 only for the services they need.
  • Reply 7 of 46
    salmonstksalmonstk Posts: 560member
    Some of you people contradict yourselves. you say its a great service but one you don't want to pay for. or you don't want to pay 100 bucks for. things that are popular cost money.



    Apple is not stupid.



    Perhaps it costs 100 bucks or close to that to run the service. If you dont need it that bad then you save Apple money by leaving. If you need it that bad or even would be willing to pay more than both you and apple benefit.



    We Mac fans act like Apple owes us something.
  • Reply 8 of 46
    mrmistermrmister Posts: 1,095member
    I'm getting sick of people being called "freeloaders". For God's sake, it was a free service--and in fact, that's what it was sold as. If you recall, a lot of hay was made about how mac.com addresses would be free for life. Steve said so repeatedly when iTools showed up, and that's why I started using mine.



    I want to know if all the schools in Maine, with all their iBooks and the students who were encouraged to sign up for iTools and on the digital lifestyle Apple speaks so highly of were surprised when they realized they all owe Apple $50 to keep doing their school projects on the web?



    It's a dicey thing, transitioning free services to paid, and Apple isn't doing a very good job so far.
  • Reply 9 of 46
    That's how I understood iTools when I bought my Mac; that it is a part of my Mac purchase. "Mac.com email address for life". A short life it was! I feel betrayed. It can't cost Apple $100 per user of iTools. But if the entire user base, or even half that, signed up, that would be what, around $15,000,000,000 per year, or $15 Billion per year. I think the Apple execs who made this decision were blinded by all the dollar signs in their eyes.



    [ 07-18-2002: Message edited by: Scooterboy ]</p>
  • Reply 10 of 46
    popmetalpopmetal Posts: 95member
    good post mrmister
  • Reply 11 of 46
    salmonstksalmonstk Posts: 560member
    [quote]Originally posted by Scooterboy:

    <strong>That's how I understood iTools when I bought my Mac; that it is a part of my Mac purchase. "Mac.com email address for life". A short life it was! I feel betrayed. It can't cost Apple $100 per user of iTools. But if the entire user base, or even half that, signed up, that would be what, around $15,000,000,000 per year, or $15 Billion per year. I think the Apple execs who made this decision were blinded by all the dollar signs in their eyes.



    [ 07-18-2002: Message edited by: Scooterboy ]</strong><hr></blockquote>





    I dont wish to be mean. But do you really think .mac could bring in 15 billion or that Apple believes that. Since when are there 150 million mac users?



    If free itools only has 2.4 million users why would 150 million sign up when it costs 100 bucks?



    Please think before you post.
  • Reply 12 of 46
    salmonstksalmonstk Posts: 560member
    [quote]Originally posted by mrmister:

    <strong>I'm getting sick of people being called "freeloaders". For God's sake, it was a free service--and in fact, that's what it was sold as. If you recall, a lot of hay was made about how mac.com addresses would be free for life. Steve said so repeatedly when iTools showed up, and that's why I started using mine.



    I want to know if all the schools in Maine, with all their iBooks and the students who were encouraged to sign up for iTools and on the digital lifestyle Apple speaks so highly of were surprised when they realized they all owe Apple $50 to keep doing their school projects on the web?



    It's a dicey thing, transitioning free services to paid, and Apple isn't doing a very good job so far.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I agree that they may have done the transition better. And we were not freeloaders. Apple offered something for free. We took it. Now it cost money. Again we have the choice to take it or leave it.
  • Reply 13 of 46
    mrmistermrmister Posts: 1,095member
    "I agree that they may have done the transition better. And we were not freeloaders. Apple offered something for free. We took it. Now it cost money. Again we have the choice to take it or leave it."



    Don't forget the important addendums--Apple offered something for free that they promised would be free for life. We trusted Apple in that promise, with our email directing and our digital lifestyle (Homepage pics, etc.) Apple has chosen to hold those elements hostage AFTER people have invested in them.



    It is natural and expected that people would feel shafted, especially without a tiered system of payments.
  • Reply 14 of 46
    I agree with mrmister...a tiered system is a necessity!



    I don't use iDisk, web hosting, iCards, and I already have backup capability and I already own Virex.



    So now I am expected to pay for stuff I already have, and other stuff I won't use.



    Essentially what Apple is doing is forcing me to choose between--



    1) Go through the hassle of changing email address (trying to notify everyone, unsubscribe/resubscribe to newsletters, etc.)



    or 2) Pay us $100 per year to avoid that.



    I thought "bait and switch" was illegal!

    ----------

    Welcome to Apple$oft. Where are we taking you today?



    (To the cleaners)
  • Reply 15 of 46
    patchoulipatchouli Posts: 402member
    Of course .mac makes sense for Apple. That's a given and I don't think anyone is disputing that. Is this a good idea because it's good for Apple? The problem is, they are not giving the users a choice to just keep their eMail addresses for a much lower price. Or, maybe offer another plan for a slightly higher price for an eMail address as well as a few MB for a homepage.



    What Apple is saying now is, either you buy the whole package or you get nothing at all. It's also making all the current users who signed up for a (presumably) free eMail account now pay $50 for it, or they loose it. You have to admit, it does leave a bad taste in your mouth.



    One way to remedy this is to offer a few plans with various options and prices so it fits an individual's personal needs. If someone wants the max, they'll order it. Not only will this make the users happier, but it will also cut excess bandwidth and make Apple the cash they are seeking as well (without having a negative cloud over them).
  • Reply 16 of 46
    ast3r3xast3r3x Posts: 5,012member
    I take back this post, too much math involved for me, somone should figure out how much it would really cost apple if everyone switched, and how much if half the people switched.



    [ 07-19-2002: Message edited by: ast3r3x ]</p>
  • Reply 17 of 46
    salmonstksalmonstk Posts: 560member
    I must agree I was a bit upset by the new charges. But if I were Steve and somebody showed me that I could charge 100 bucks for iTools, loose half of the subscribers, save a couple million by getting rid of them, then raise 120 million a year by charging 100 bucks to those remaining, i would ask two questions, "Will anyone leave the platform over this, do any of the switchers come to the platform for this free service."



    The guy or gay would go find the answer to these questions and if they were both no I would say charge away!



    Steve aint dumb he asked the question and the fact it now cost 100 bucks tells us the answer.
  • Reply 18 of 46
    People will come around on .Mac



    The fact is that it provides a usefull service and software that the consumer can use for a few bucks a month. Everyone is bitchy because the free ride is over, yet apple kept it going longer than anyone else... I gave up hotmail recently as many others have because unless you pay, its rediculously useless AND even if you pay its crap.



    Look at .mac compared to the hotmail fee service.... see what you get for $30... you get jack-schmidt. Pay the fiddy/hunny dollars and get SOMETHING!
  • Reply 19 of 46
    stevesteve Posts: 523member
    [quote]Originally posted by Derrick 61:

    <strong>I agree with mrmister...a tiered system is a necessity!</strong><hr></blockquote>



    You really don't know where .Mac is going, do you? .Mac is going to be the service foundation under Jaguar and even future iterations of Mac OS X. Instead of some lame pick-and-choose method that you want, there should be a universal fee--it's simpler, especially when there start to get plugs into almost every application and component in the operating system in the future.



    Don't tell me you want to pick and choose. $5/year for iCal sharing. $2/year for slideshow sharing. What happens if you later decide you want something? Where does the billing pick up? Your whole plan makes no sense. In the tradition of simplicity, Apple is creating one-fee method of paying for .Mac. Right now, .Mac may be little more than iTools 1.1, but in the future, it will be a necessity for every Mac user, I can assure you. At that point, your tiered system will make very little sense.



    You people are still thinking of .Mac as just an email service; it's time to look at the big picture.
  • Reply 20 of 46
    popmetalpopmetal Posts: 95member
    [quote]Originally posted by Jon Rubinstein:

    <strong>



    You really don't know where .Mac is going, do you? .Mac is going to be the service foundation under Jaguar and even future iterations of Mac OS X </strong><hr></blockquote>





    If that's so, then it will only be fair that .Mac be included with Mac OS X - even if it means an increase in Mac OS X's price.



    If the two are so interdependent, then they should be sold together as one product. Otherwise, you're selling people short on Mac OS X and you're selling people short on .Mac since neither is a complete in itself. That's probably why people are so unhappy.



    And even if Apple keeps the current price for the reasons you stated, the service should be more family-friendly and take care of a family of three or four without charging more. The way it is now, a family of 4 would have to pay $400 per year (because the additional email-only accounts don't provide access to " the service foundation under Jaguar" you speak of ). That's more than AOL charges for services and actual internet access! THAT'S PREPOSTEROUS!
Sign In or Register to comment.