Upgrade fee sees few iPod touch users updating to 3.0 software

13567

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 136
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,419member
    Absolutely LOVE the glaring "leap to conclusion" logical fallacy that it "must" be the $10 upgrade fee that has chuffed iPod Touch users so badly that they are skipping the update.



    Not a shred of substantive and supporting evidence that price is the primary factor.
  • Reply 42 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rei_vilo View Post


    I paid the USD 10 for the update (well, EUR8) on my iPod touch 2G.

    Bluetooth is poorly implemented. Exciting new features like the voice command is not featured on the iPod \.



    My iPod touch seems slower and is going hot now .



    To say bluetooth is poorly implemented is gross understatement! It is flat out terrible .. I have tried 3 different sets of blutooth headphones, and one set of speakers, and the ipod will not remain connected to them for more than about 30 seconds.



    This was a WASTE of $10.
  • Reply 43 of 136
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hattig View Post


    Did you read the article in any manner?



    YES i did. The big words confused me so my 8 yr old said daddy daddy goggle wiki wiki wiki. He talks like that he's 8 .





    >>>>>Therefore, should Apple be compelled to treat iPod touches like iPhones and Apple TVs, it may need to make a similar disclosure to the one it made for the aforementioned two products back in 2007. >>>>>



    Are YOU saying that to save apple an accounting thingy they must make the itouch un-gaap-able. Again why do the Itouch have to pay when the iphonies do not. Apple could issue a ten dollar itunes credit or something.



    enjoy your weekend all



    peace



    9

    PS I am now in teckstud training . two week course
  • Reply 44 of 136
    leonardleonard Posts: 528member
    I don't have an iPod Touch yet, but am thinking of getting one when they update them. While I'd probably pay the $10 to get the upgrade, I can really see how this paid upgrade pisses off the iPod Touch user. After all, I have a Mac Pro and a Mac Book Pro, and I don't pay anything for the dozens of updates that they receive via Software Update, why should I have to pay for an update that iPhone users don't pay for. As many here say, it sounds like an Apple cash grab to me. Even with the stupid law that requires them to, like others have said, why is it $10, why couldn't it be $1 or $2?
  • Reply 45 of 136
    dagamer34dagamer34 Posts: 494member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post


    Wait, why the heck have only half the iPhone users upgraded??? It's free and it makes your iPhone do everything noticeably faster - not to mention all the added features.



    iPhone 3.0 jailbreak wasn't out until mid-Friday and the unlock until mid-Tuesday. And smart people usually wait a couple of days for bugs the dev team just can't catch.



    So no, the numbers are pretty reasonable.
  • Reply 46 of 136
    dopikdopik Posts: 1member
    Guys:



    The revenue accounting treatment for iPhone & AppleTV vs. iPod has nothing to do with SOx.



    It is due to US GAAP on the following:



    SAB 104 vs SOP 97.2



    To make it simple, Revenue can only be recognized once the service has been performed. if one has to provide software update down the road, it means that at the time of purchase, the product was not fully delivered to the buyer thus revenue should not be recognized. US GAAP allowed to recognized a certain percentage if the seller is able to forecast a percentage of completion.



    By recognizing the revenue on a subscription basis, Apple is saying that the product is not fully delivered at the time of sell. it is to simplify their accounting.
  • Reply 47 of 136
    bigmc6000bigmc6000 Posts: 767member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dagamer34 View Post


    iPhone 3.0 jailbreak wasn't out until mid-Friday and the unlock until mid-Tuesday. And smart people usually wait a couple of days for bugs the dev team just can't catch.



    So no, the numbers are pretty reasonable.



    I know there's a lot of talk about jailbreaking and such but, let's just be honest here, the % of the community that has a jailbroken phone has to be less than (at most) 10% so I really don't think it plays that significant of a factor in terms of 3.0 adoption.
  • Reply 48 of 136
    Depends on what people do with their Touchs.



    If its used primarily for music (a truly poor expenditure of money for what has to be the worst ergonomic-al iPod made) then why upgrade. I use my Touch as a PDA. Its the best PDA I've ever owned and I've had dozens of them. No it won't do excel spreadsheets, crash while editing 4 meg photos or load a multitude of frustratingly poor apps. What it can do is work.



    To me, the landscape keyboard alone was worth the $10. The apps that offer this utility are worthless and crash. Apple's approach works. And its that continuing development that I'm willing to pay for. Apple makes a boatload of recurring fee money on the phone. Its fair and appropriate that Touch users should have a choice of paying for enhancements they will use or choosing not to.
  • Reply 49 of 136
    If you know where to look the 3.0 firmware update is available to download for free legally, from Apple's own site. You then just need to force a restore in iTunes and select the .ipfw file you just downloaded. All perfectly legal and above board. The fact that Apple makes it so easy to get the firmware for free from its own servers is a strong indicator that the $10 charge is forced on them by law and not just a money grabbing excercise.
  • Reply 50 of 136
    I'm one of those in the minority that did decide to spend the $10 and upgrade the firmware on two 1st generation iPod Touch models--an 8GB unit belonging to my dad and a 32GB unit that I bought at a serious closeout price cut the last time new iPod Touch models came out.



    I haven't really noticed much of a difference on the iPod Touch hardware that I have. iPod Touch firmware 2.2.1 behaved pretty well identically, and I know that in places I had access to a landscape keyboard. (It showed up during Safari use at least.) Of course, it can't take advantage of some of the most touted features, so that's not entirely surprising. But operating speed for everything I do (browse the web with Safari, watch transcoded videos from DVD, run a very few apps) really seems to be unchanged. I upgraded because of security fixes in 3.0, something that I thought to be at least somewhat important.



    The $10 fee kind of bugs me, although the fact that I can apply the upgrade to all the iPod Touch units I have is more than fair enough. I don't know what Apple actually does with the fee, but I like to think that the developers saw at least a little bit of that money.
  • Reply 51 of 136
    maxmannmaxmann Posts: 85member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post


    A simple and well reasoned post. I agree 100%.



    the problem is really bigger than a simple idea that apple is doing this to make money. In fact, apple, being a Consumer Electronics Company, has every intention of selling hardware and giving the software (tools) to sell it away. So, the SEC legal rumblings are not untrue - but rather complicated. The stock price alone, might be 50% higher at this moment if wall street recognized the true earnings of the company. Don't forget, ATT is paying them up front the 350.00 plus per phone and it could be recognized in the quarter report instead of amortized over 720 days. As hard to believe as it is - wall street does not recognize all that cash as profit until it is shown as actual profit divided out over the life (720 days) of the phone. This is not ideal for apple, investors or ipod touch users. However, you can't skin a cat two ways in this case - as the relationship with ATT is with a subscription model. Apple did not invent it - and in fact started out selling their phones for full price without it. However, the phone business requires the subscription model to be successful (see competition). So, can anyone bitching about the $10.00 stop and realize you can't have a subscription model with the phone (software free) and then give it away with the touch for free without a subscription model. it isn't rocket science. it is business and following the complex legal requirements of the SEC and public markets we invest in. AS it is, the SEC has enough corruption and cheating to go around for everyone. Do you think Apple should just not follow the law to keep your little hearts happy? Well, they are not following the law to make $10!!!



    The $10 has to show fair value for what is set up in the subscription model for upgrades. it is called a standard. it has to be reasonable and not subject to question. In fact, it is much harder to justify $10 than $20 and not the other way around with giving it away for a dollar as some suggest here as solutions (see you in jail). AGAIN.. Apple did not invent the subscription model. If any other company comes out with a two product line up - phone and touch example, they will have to do some very fancy accounting to avoid what is already a standard in accounting practices with similar circumstances to what Apple has encountered. AGAIN.. APPLE DIDN'T COME UP WITH THIS PLAN ON PURPOSE - THEY CAME UP WITH IT BECAUSE THEY HAD NO CHOICE WITH A SUBSCRIPTION BUSINESS FORMAT THAT HAPPENS TO CROSS OVER INTO THE IPOD TOUCH PRODUCT USING THE SAME SOFTWARE.



    DO YOU REALLY THINK APPLE COULD GIVE A CRAP ABOUT THE $10?.. WHAT THEY WANT TO DO IS SELL HARDWARE HARDWARE HARDWARE. THE NAME AFTER APPLE IS "CONSUMER ELECTRONICS" .. ARE YOU ALL JUST STUCK IN A COMPUTER MIND SET OR CAN YOU ADAPT TO WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON NOW FOR OVER TWO YEARS?



    D
  • Reply 52 of 136
    One thing I haven't seen anyone bring up. Apple doesn't realize all the sales from the iPhone until two years after it is sold. This allows Apple to justify free updates for the iPhone. So, now that we are getting pretty close to two years for the original iPhone, does that mean that they will stop providing free software for those iPhones?
  • Reply 53 of 136
    ajitmdajitmd Posts: 365member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post


    Wait, why the heck have only half the iPhone users upgraded??? It's free and it makes your iPhone do everything noticeably faster - not to mention all the added features.



    I know some users who are not in a hurry to upgrade their iPhone software to 3.0 because it reverse their software modifications - hack - that allows them to run music and software other than iTunes downloads. I doubt it is half the iPhones are hacked.



    I think in most cases it is inertia. The current software works fine and folks are too busy to mess with downloads. I get free updates for the MacOS and I take my time to install them. Same with the Windows PCs that I use at work, especially those running specialized software. In the office I want to make sure the updates do not crash my other programs... can not afford the down time.
  • Reply 54 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Eye Forget View Post


    Depends on what people do with their Touchs.



    If its used primarily for music (a truly poor expenditure of money for what has to be the worst ergonomic-al iPod made) then why upgrade. I use my Touch as a PDA. Its the best PDA I've ever owned and I've had dozens of them. No it won't do excel spreadsheets, crash while editing 4 meg photos or load a multitude of frustratingly poor apps. What it can do is work.



    To me, the landscape keyboard alone was worth the $10. The apps that offer this utility are worthless and crash. Apple's approach works. And its that continuing development that I'm willing to pay for. Apple makes a boatload of recurring fee money on the phone. Its fair and appropriate that Touch users should have a choice of paying for enhancements they will use or choosing not to.



    I agree... and software doesn't just fall from the sky. There are obviously people getting paid to do this work. They still make money from the iPhone, so it's not "free" unless you consider paying a subscription fee "free."



    Once you bought the iPod you stopped paying for it, no monthly fees. So, for doing a lot of programming and etc. on the Apple employee's part, it seems reasonable to me to charge money for a new product.



    I also use my iPod as a PDA. With the app "Things" and the desktop equivalent (sync-able to-do lists), this thing is awesome for organization.



    Spotlight alone was was $10 to me. Being able to search my Mail, rather than scrolling through email after email, probably skipping the one I'm looking for, is awesome.
  • Reply 55 of 136
    mac31mac31 Posts: 44member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post


    Wait, why the heck have only half the iPhone users upgraded??? It's free and it makes your iPhone do everything noticeably faster - not to mention all the added features.



    Actually, my 3G was quite severely slowed from the 3.0 upgrade. I loved the added features, but because it lagged twice as badly as before, I decided to get the 3GS. That thing is snappy!!
  • Reply 56 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dopik View Post


    Guys:



    The revenue accounting treatment for iPhone & AppleTV vs. iPod has nothing to do with SOx.



    It is due to US GAAP on the following:



    SAB 104 vs SOP 97.2



    To make it simple, Revenue can only be recognized once the service has been performed. if one has to provide software update down the road, it means that at the time of purchase, the product was not fully delivered to the buyer thus revenue should not be recognized. US GAAP allowed to recognized a certain percentage if the seller is able to forecast a percentage of completion.



    By recognizing the revenue on a subscription basis, Apple is saying that the product is not fully delivered at the time of sell. it is to simplify their accounting.



    Thanks for the first sane post on this issue here.
  • Reply 57 of 136
    I think that AdMob's statistics are highly misleading, and I'm one good example of why I think that's so. As soon as the iPod 3.0 iPod Touch upgrade's availability was announced, I attempted to purchase it and download it. I have been trying for eight (8!) days to download that miserable piece of software. Several e-mails to customer support and a phone call to Apple have not helped. The last guy I talked to told me to give up trying for a week, and then, maybe, I'd be able to download it.



    So, I bought it, I paid for it, but AdMob won't find it on my iPod Touch because iTunes won't give it to me.



    Adding to my frustration, I have been able to purchase and download new programs and upgrades to existing programs during this time -- I just can't access the 3.0 software. Right now I've got four upgraded apps that won't run on my iPod Touch because I don't have the upgrade installed.



    My attempts to upgrade have been enormously unsatisfying.



    --Candace
  • Reply 58 of 136
    bwhalerbwhaler Posts: 260member
    I didn't upgrade because I plan on buying the new iPod Touch in September.



    Also, Apple isn't charging $10 so they can milk their customers. They are better served having everyone on 3.0 and making life easier for developers.



    This is US accounting laws, pure and simple. (And no, you can't charge 99 cents or a penny either under this law. It must be "fair market value as measured against complementary or like products.")



    Given Microsoft announced OS upgrades today from $229 - $449, 10 bucks is low as measured against this standard. Again, it's not your opinion of what is fair or low, but accounting rules. A mobile device is just a form of computer in the eyes of GAAP.



    Anyway, I look forward to a new iPod Touch in September. I hope we see 64gb.
  • Reply 59 of 136
    macnycmacnyc Posts: 342member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chronster View Post


    The update seems to bring a lot to the table, but 10 dollars to you and I might be a bit more valuable to someone else, know what I mean? To each his own.



    Not quite sure I understand this sentence, but If someone feels the upgrade isn't worth it, they don't have to spend $10 on it.
  • Reply 60 of 136
    virgil-tb2virgil-tb2 Posts: 1,416member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RichL View Post


    Charging for OS updates is not the norm for consumer devices.



    Let's take a look:



    Cell phones - always free

    PDAs - always free

    Consoles - always free

    Apple TV - always free

    iPod classic - always free

    iPod touch - $10 a time



    It's the iPod touch and not the iPhone that's the abnormaility.



    I paid for the v2.0 because it added a feature (the app store) that, to me, was worth the money. However, most of the v3.0 features are really only useful to iPhone users. I won't be upgrading.



    While I admit it's not a slam-dunk, i think you are being a tad disingenuous here.



    I was talking "computers" (Apple is formerly and still primarily a computer company), not "consumer devices. Cell phones (traditionally or traditional models at least), and the iPod classic are not really in this category for starters. You do have a point with the Apple TV. I didn't think of that device when I made my comments and it now makes me wonder if they are going to do some kind of content subscription model with that eventually. In any case, despite the fact that the Apple TV *is* a computer, most of it's users probably don't think of it as one.



    Things like iPods are right on the bubble in that we never used to really think of them as "computers" per se, but now (especially with the iPod touch we do. Also, having owned many many PDAs I can tell you that OS upgrades for them as a category are most definitely not always free. It's such a big category that covers so much history and so many devices that you can't rally say much about that at all, at least not in such general terms.



    The comparison between the iPod touch and an iMac that I made is (IMO) much, much closer to reality than the examples you gave, in that both of these things actually run OS-X, but with one running a modified, slightly dumbed down variety. Clearly it won't be long before the horsepower of these mobiles and the OS they run is virtually identical to the desktop machines as well.



    My argument therefore is more that since the iPod touch is the first device in a new mobile computing platform, (that doesn't use the subscription model like the iPhone), if Apple allowed the updates to be for free, it would most definitely reflect on their desktop line.



    Especially now people are getting used to lower and lower prices for OS updates (a new development being pushed almost entirely by Apple BTW), if they start giving them away for free, it won't long at all before people start to wonder why they have to pay for an OS update at all.



    Concomitant to that, I would argue that it's just rude for people to complain about this given the incredible amount of work that goes into the update, the ridiculously *low* price that Apple is charging, the fact that Apple is in fact leading the way to lower and lower prices all the time, the fact that the last time people complained the price was cut in half, the likelihood that the price might be lowered even further, and the fact that Apple purposely leaves their servers open so people can basically rip it off and distribute it for free on teh Internets (if you're that kind of person that likes to rip stuff off.



    I understand why people are confused by the whole thing, but just because a lot of stupid people cry like babies about it doesn't make me feel sympathetic.
Sign In or Register to comment.