iPod touch $20 for apps: conspiracy theory time.

[em500]

Here's a theory on why they're asking $20 for the Touch apps. (Yes, I know about the standard explanation of accounting rule requirements. But it's more fun to come up with your own theories.)

Third party apps are amost upon us, and it's likely that they'll be delivered in the same manner as these 5 apps, using the same security measures. By releasing these as paid apps, Apple can test drive the delivery as well as the security system. The $20 fee will give hackers an incentive to try to crack them and distribute them as warez. This will give Apple a month to observe how fast cracks are developed and what weaknesses they exploit, so they can develop better defenses for the big SDK/3rd party app rollout. It's a very clever ruse to lure out the crackers!

 

[Don't panic]

🙂
as good as any theory out there.

even if it wasn't a driving purpose, could be a side effect.

 

[AdeFowler]

I like your theory a lot, but it would have worked just as well if the apps had been $5 😉

 

[sunfast]

That's a very interesting theory indeed - a great way to test content delivery for the SDK apps.

I only hope that people who wish to develop freeware apps for the iPhone/Touch, can.

 

[Cromulent]

I like your theory a lot, but it would have worked just as well if the apps had been $5 😉

Yeah but they wouldn't have made so much then would they? 🙂

 

[dagored]

em500 - You do not know how dead on you are! It is also a view of what the market is willing to buy. Remember, Apple knows how many Touches were sold and how many App packs were sold.

Your a pretty smart person.

 

[phytonix]

What makes the BS about accounting reasons to be "standard"?

 

[lofight]

I believe : They do this partly to pay skyhook and because decided in the beginning that software updates on the touch should cost money. I also believe that there will be coming alot of these updates, because in the ITS this cost update for the 5 apps on your touch is named "january update" and maybe, just maybe this will be a monthly thing, where you pay for new software, also from 3rd parties when the SDK comes out.

 

[dejo]

I like your theory a lot, but it would have worked just as well if the apps had been $5 😉

Maybe Apple is also planning on charging $4 per app.

 

[maxcady]

....This will give Apple a month to observe how fast cracks are developed and what weaknesses they exploit, so they can develop better defenses for the big SDK/3rd party app rollout. It's a very clever ruse to lure out the crackers!

That's an interesting perspective and maybe this contributed to the $20 charge. I think this would be clever if looking at the small picture but in the big picture this would be dumb. Defending against crackers is sort of a game of leapfrog. Apple can figure out an defense an intial round of attacks but then crackers would find a way to beat that defense. Whatever defense Apple implements will be short lived. I hope Apple doesn't think its worth it to anger many ipod touch customers just for this short term defense.

I think the explanation is simpler. Apple is in a position to act as a monopolist in this market and so they'll push the envelope for how much money they can squeeze out of us. They'll also slack off on product development as evidenced by last fall's round of ipods (except maybe the nano w/ video).

Hopefully consumers won't continue to reward Apple for this behavior.

 

[craigatkinson]

I don't care why apple did it. I'm not going to complain. I didn't initially purchase the iPod touch because it didn't have these applications on it. When they said that they would provide the apps I immediately went out and purchase the discounted iPod touch and without blinking bought the $20 update. I think complaining about this type of behavior will discourage apple from providing these glorious updates. Lets not discourage this behavior but encourage it. I'll pay apple to continue to make my awesome gadget even greater. In a word, you bought the iPod knowing the applications were not on it, you got what you paid for; you want more? then don't complain about paying for it.

 

[ucfgrad93]

Here's a theory on why they're asking $20 for the Touch apps. (Yes, I know about the standard explanation of accounting rule requirements. But it's more fun to come up with your own theories.)

Third party apps are amost upon us, and it's likely that they'll be delivered in the same manner as these 5 apps, using the same security measures. By releasing these as paid apps, Apple can test drive the delivery as well as the security system. The $20 fee will give hackers an incentive to try to crack them and distribute them as warez. This will give Apple a month to observe how fast cracks are developed and what weaknesses they exploit, so they can develop better defenses for the big SDK/3rd party app rollout. It's a very clever ruse to lure out the crackers!

When I saw the title of this thread, I thought "Great, another nut job seeing little green men and black helicopters everywhere!". But after reading your post, it makes a lot of sense.

 

[speakerwizard]

i dont think we will see free apps as apple will probably be hosting these and want paying to do so (as they want this all quite secure they wont just link like with widgets or podcasts) just a thought, so i think there will be a minimum cost.

 

[maxcady]

blinking bought the $20 update. I think complaining about this type of behavior will discourage apple from providing these glorious updates. Lets not discourage this behavior but encourage it. I'll pay apple to continue to make

Wow.

my awesome gadget even greater. In a word, you bought the iPod knowing the applications were not on it, you got what you paid for; you want more? then don't complain about paying for it.

Actually I didn't. I bought mine the first day it was available. None were on display yet. The picture on the box doesn't show the home screen. Also, I didn't really consider this being an early adopter as the iPhone has already been developed and this would not be a significantly different product. I was disappointed from the start and almost returned it. The only reason why I didn't return it and get an iPod classic instead was that Apple did an even worse job with the classic. I decided to stick with the touch and enjoy it as much as I could in spite of Apple's weak efforts.

How much do you pay for iTunes? Its free for all of us but since you think Apple needs your money to continue to make great products I assume that you send a check whenever you update.

 

[PMB]

Maybe Apple is also planning on charging $4 per app.

if they charge 4 an app, back to jailbreaking for me. im cheap, but i wouldn't pay 30 cents for an app. im cheap, and used to open source apps

 

[maxcady]

if they charge 4 an app, back to jailbreaking for me. im cheap, but i wouldn't pay 30 cents for an app. im cheap, and used to open source apps

I agree with you. $20 for this update doesn't fit the application software marketplace. Of course in this case Apple owns the whole marketplace and so the charge. If at some point they get serious competition in this area then this type of behavior will come back to bite them just as it has Microsoft. Years ago, there were plenty of MS fans happy to pay for Windows 95 Plus! paks.

 

[craigatkinson]

Wow.



Actually I didn't. I bought mine the first day it was available. None were on display yet. The picture on the box doesn't show the home screen. Also, I didn't really consider this being an early adopter as the iPhone has already been developed and this would not be a significantly different product. I was disappointed from the start and almost returned it. The only reason why I didn't return it and get an iPod classic instead was that Apple did an even worse job with the classic. I decided to stick with the touch and enjoy it as much as I could in spite of Apple's weak efforts.

How much do you pay for iTunes? Its free for all of us but since you think Apple needs your money to continue to make great products I assume that you send a check whenever you update.

iTunes is different, Apple makes money off iTunes because of the iTunes store. Its to Apple's advantage to distribute iTunes to everyone at no charge. Actually its not hard to think of numerous ways that Apple has more of an advantage of making iTunes free rather than charging people for it.
Your situation is different, you seem to be complaining that Apple duped you. Assuming that that's true (and that you didn't dupe yourself by buying before you were completely informed) it has no bearing on what I was discussing. Apple is a business who's sole purpose is to make money. They provide free updates to make sure that the item you paid for works as you expected it would, but when it comes to making the item do more than it was originally intended to do, then I think its reasonable for Apple to expect you to pay for it. If you think Apple duped you then that's one thing, but most people now know that the early iPod touches did not come with these Apps and they purchased it anyway. Those were the people I was speaking to.

 

[janitorC7]

I;m going to go with its to cover the licensing for the psudo GPS

JC7

 

[em500]

I think Apple will let the developer set its own price within certain limits (say $0.99 - $49) and take a percentage of the revenue. Which is pretty fair if you consider that they handle all the administration, bandwith and payment collection.

Now a minimum price means no freeware, but I don't think is too bad if it's set low enough. I mean, one buck is less that a cup of coffee at McDonald's. How useful can an app or util be if you're not willing to spend that amount? Now it might suck a little if there won't be any freeware at all (though there are still web-apps 🙂), but that's hardly going to hinder the success of the iPhone/Touch. After all, they've already sold extremely well in the past months without any extra apps.

 

[Cleverboy]

Mm. Theories that can never be truly proven or disproven are irksome.

I believe : They do this partly to pay skyhook and because decided in the beginning that software updates on the touch should cost money. I also believe that there will be coming alot of these updates, because in the ITS this cost update for the 5 apps on your touch is named "january update" and maybe, just maybe this will be a monthly thing, where you pay for new software, also from 3rd parties when the SDK comes out.

That's most likely everything worth saying. Funny theories about "luring out" hackers are all fine and good, butApple has more pressing concerns than preying on "happy accidents" they can use for their advantage. Personally I think attempts to keep painting Apple as doing anything but looking out for their customers and stockholders is increasingly ludicrous. Like thinking Apple intentionally BRICKED the phone you damaged with hacking.

1. I sell you a phone
2. I find out you're hacking it.
3. I look at what you did.
4. I say, "Don't do that, my next update
may have serious problems with it"
5. I release my update and put a warning on it.
6. You use the update and your phone stops working.
7. It's all my fault.

Now, this explanation is:
1. I sell you a device.
2. I want to increasing the value of my product and boost sales.
3. I develop and test 5 new apps for device
4. I release new apps pre-installed with new devices.
5. I offer existing customers new features for $20.

iMacs and MacMini's run MacOS X.
iMacs come with iLife, MacMini's do not.
If Apple decided to include iLife with all new MacMinis,
and offered it as a $30 upgrade for existing MacMini
owners... I think that's a good deal.

I think Apple certainly wished to test the new App download process. I think it knows more than anyone that this was the way Palm should have ALWAYS done things. I'm interested to see what Apple's provisions are for "free" software, but I suspect it will be like podcasts (with added security for certificates). I'm more interested to see what the landscape will look like in 2 months.

iPhone/iPod will be THE most powerful mobile platform the tech world has ever seen. With all the security issues with hacked apps, the mainstream of iPhone users will go ga-ga over the developers that flock to the platform. Apple just needs to make sure it doesn't get a black-eye on security. --Then, they need to begin looking into upping the ante on devices with more storage space.

The ONLY real threat hackers represent, is a loss of control, and endless subsequent liabilities over privacy/identity attacks it did not properly armor its customers against. Apple doesn't need to be in the CONTENT business. It sells HARDWARE... whether its apps or music or video. Free apps are FOOT TRAFFIC. The more apps they sell, the more leverage they have making deals, so foot traffic matters for boosting potential sales so they can make the platform more attractive for cutting exclusive deals.

My 25 cents,
~ CB

 

[maxcady]

iTunes is different, Apple makes money off iTunes because of the iTunes store. Its to Apple's advantage to distribute iTunes to everyone at no charge. Actually its not hard to think of numerous ways that Apple has more of an advantage of making iTunes free rather than charging people for it.

Yes exactly.

Your situation is different, you seem to be complaining that Apple duped you.

Nope. I'm complaining that Apple dropped the ball on the initial touch by not including these apps.

From a customer point of view its not logical that they were not included. Leaving these apps off the original touch was poor product design. Apple has a reputation for great design. They didn't do it here.

I wasn't duped - I was disappointed. I don't think Apple is shooting to disappoint people with their products although when a company can act as a monopolist then they don't need to care so much.

Assuming that that's true (and that you didn't dupe yourself by buying before you were completely informed) it has no bearing on what I was discussing.

Yes I duped myself by assuming Apple would have put an honest effort into it. This adds to the disappointment.

Apple is a business who's sole purpose is to make money. They provide free

Yes exactly.

And they do this by positioning themselves as hip and cool and 'thinking outside of the box.' But that's just marketing and I'm relatively new to Apple and so I duped myself into believing some of that.

would, but when it comes to making the item do more than it was originally intended to do, then I think its reasonable for Apple to expect you to pay for

Unless its the iPhone or AppleTV.

 

[ScottFitz]

I bought the touch for its media capabilities. I use it while traveling. I have a great phone that handles my PDA needs. I'm one of the users that will likely never give up memory for apps I don't need. This new .3 update takes up memory I don't want.

 

[kdarling]

... I think complaining about this type of behavior will discourage apple from providing these glorious updates. Lets not discourage this behavior but encourage it. ...

Companies don't think that way. In fact, it's quite the opposite, especially in Apple's case:

The more complaints, the more updates you get. The fewer sales, the less they charge for add-ons.

 

[Cleverboy]

Companies don't think that way. In fact, it's quite the opposite, especially in Apple's case: The more complaints, the more updates you get. The fewer sales, the less they charge for add-ons.

Generally true, but poor complaints definitely sour the entire discourse. You can complain civilly and without floating conspiracy theories and character attacks. I think "customer feedback" (what I do) or "customer complaints" (when done constructively) causes real change. Usually, addle-minded en masse complains prompt a company to act, and then hope that they "got it right"... subsequently depending on community pressure or the news to reset the tone than anything else.

~ CB

 

[-Dark Angel-]

Here's a theory on why they're asking $20 for the Touch apps. (Yes, I know about the standard explanation of accounting rule requirements. But it's more fun to come up with your own theories.)

Third party apps are amost upon us, and it's likely that they'll be delivered in the same manner as these 5 apps, using the same security measures. By releasing these as paid apps, Apple can test drive the delivery as well as the security system. The $20 fee will give hackers an incentive to try to crack them and distribute them as warez. This will give Apple a month to observe how fast cracks are developed and what weaknesses they exploit, so they can develop better defenses for the big SDK/3rd party app rollout. It's a very clever ruse to lure out the crackers!

We think alike ^_^
Purchases apps..where are they?