iPod touch $20 for apps: conspiracy theory time.

[isshou]

I think it is fare if Apple charges $20 for their app, it is their work and you are free to take them or leave them. However, Apple has taken me to a dilemma, I don't like piracy, neither do I like to use some software I haven't paid for, I don't mind to pay the $20 for their app but I don't want to renounce to install third party applications which I would if I install the 1.1.3 upgrade.

I bought the iPod Touch because it is like an ultraportable computer and I knew I could install third party apps, paying the $20 will mean closing that door, which I will not do.



Perhaps, Apple is simply starting to play its dominance card.

I really wish to be wrong, but I wouldn't like to see walking the same path than MS did.



regards

 

[kshott]

You forgot a step:

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 wait until right after I sell a gi-normous crapload of the old devices over the holiday season, thus ensuring I will sell a crapload of $20 apps to the poor unsuspecting fools!!! Mwahahaha!
5. I release new apps pre-installed with new devices.
6. I offer existing customers new features for $20.
~ CB

 

[Cleverboy]

I bought the iPod Touch because it is like an ultraportable computer and I knew I could install third party apps, paying the $20 will mean closing that door, which I will not do.

With all due respect, you're saying the reverse of what's happening. We've had it verified that 1.1.3 specifically prepares the platform to ALLOW 3rd party apps... it doesn't "take away" a feature... like every update before it... it only restores over a hack and improves security for the device. Adding new apps is the very nature of the 5 new apps you received with the $20 update (while adding homepage customization and paging). The SDK is next month. Moreover, even 1.1.3 has been "jailbroken" already (for those needing to unlock). Without Apple specifically clarifying their position, people are just reluctant to spread the new method.

You forgot a step:

Heh, heh... that's true. But, I think they wouldn't want to toss out a major update at Christmas for any number of reasons. Considering 1.1.3 "unbricks" phones that had their baseband corrupted, it seems plausible that they wanted to really let this one "bake" an not repeat past mistakes. MacWorld makes for the best "announcement" venue too... unless someone leaks the update.

~ CB

 

[isshou]

With all due respect, you're saying the reverse of what's happening. We've had it verified that 1.1.3 specifically prepares the platform to ALLOW 3rd party apps... it doesn't "take away" a feature... like every update before it... it only restores over a hack and improves security for the device. Adding new apps is the very nature of the 5 new apps you received with the $20 update (while adding homepage customization and paging). The SDK is next month. Moreover, even 1.1.3 has been "jailbroken" already (for those needing to unlock). Without Apple specifically clarifying their position, people are just reluctant to spread the new method.

Are you being serious?

Please, tell me I am wrong. As per today, if I upgrade to 1.1.3 and pay the $20 for the five app, I WILL NOT be able to install any other third party app, am I wrong ?.

You say -the SDK is next month-, sorry to say I was not by God's side at creation time and I haven't got the ability to know about the future!. Next month we can talk again , but so far Apple as you say, has not publicly or specifically clarify their position.

Therefore, AS PER TODAY and as far as I know, if I upgrade my JB-door to third party apps will be closed, despite perhaps next month Apple could "open another door" to third party apps, but so far, nobody out of Apple knows what shape that door will have.

If I can do the upgrade keeping my current third party apps, please, let me how to do it as I will love to pay the $20 to Apple as they deserve them for those five beautiful apps.

regards,
ro

 

[Cleverboy]

Are you being serious?

Please, tell me I am wrong. As per today, if I upgrade to 1.1.3 and pay the $20 for the five app, I WILL NOT be able to install any other third party app, am I wrong ?.

You say -the SDK is next month-, sorry to say I was not by God's side at creation time and I haven't got the ability to know about the future!. Next month we can talk again , but so far Apple as you say, has not publicly or specifically clarify their position.

Therefore, AS PER TODAY and as far as I know, if I upgrade my JB-door to third party apps will be closed, despite perhaps next month Apple could "open another door" to third party apps, but so far, nobody out of Apple knows what shape that door will have.

If I can do the upgrade keeping my current third party apps, please, let me how to do it as I will love to pay the $20 to Apple as they deserve them for those five beautiful apps.

regards,
ro

Don't confuse things by asking wrong-headed questions.

With 1.1.3, Apple has reportedly setup the iPhone and the iPod Touch to accept 3rd party apps. If you have a hack that allows you to use "jailbreak apps" don't make it sound like 1.1.3 somehow "disables" 3rd party apps, when it does just the opposite. 1.1.3 does what each iPhone update has always done. Hacks tend to have problems afterwards... because they're HACKS! I just think its ridiculous for someone to complain that Apple is somehow actively shutting down "support for 3rd party apps" simply because a hack solution is no longer functional after an official update. When Apple rolls out the SDK, 1.1.3 users will be able to install their apps and keep them after every subsequent update. The iPhone exclusive apps that iPod Touch users install AS OF TODAY, will work in the future, without any fuss.

I love that people have created hack solutions to get apps on the iPhone. I had them installed for a while, until I wanted to restore and upgrade my phone. I'm looking forward to Apple's SDK release, as many are. Just don't encourage people to keep thinking Apple is "taking away" features each time a USER CHOOSES to upgrade their hacked phone. It's a really inaccurate and crazy way to look at it.

If you could prove Apple has CODE in their update to delete things specific to jailbreak apps, I'd certainly agree that they're "breaking" things. Otherwise, the user is (by not waiting for another "hack" that gets them what they want). Hacks BY DEFINITION are temporary, often unstable solutions. To think otherwise is to just get mad at reality.

BTW, someone has already hacked 1.1.3 to allow your jailbreak apps again. With hacks... that's just how it works until the official solution is fully in place. Like it or not.

Cheers,
~ CB

 

[isshou]

«in claris non fit interpretatio»

regards,
ro

 

[phytonix]

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.

Good deal for you?
Mac mini comes with iLife. Of course if you want to pay extra for it, it's none of my business.

 

[Quasiportnoy]

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!

Good idea, pretty much what Andy Ihnatko said on MacBreak Weekly after the update was released (although he didn't extend it to hackers, which I think is a good point that you make).

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

I think that $5 would have been just as offensive as $20. "Why charge us anything if it's an update!?" Just like the 802.11n enabler for iMacs that was $1.99, people would be mad instead of appreciating what Apple was offering. $20 creates a perceived value of the apps instead of just "Here you go if you want, enjoy!" It creates demand, while otherwise it wouldn't. [This idea stolen from Andy Ihnatko ]

 

[Cleverboy]

Good deal for you?
Mac mini comes with iLife. Of course if you want to pay extra for it, it's none of my business.

I stand corrected. I'm going to redirect on cross examination and blame the new Apple employee I talked to for confusing iLife and iWork. That's annoying.

Well, it'd be like buying a Mac with iLife 05 in October, and then getting mad that a few months later new Macs (of the same model) start being shipped with iLife 06 (with new apps like Garageband and iWeb). Coincidentally, I think I bought iLife 04 and felt screwed when iLife 05 came out months later (before I'd even put 04 to good use), and suddenly I was behind. Point is, its small potatoes. Not much to cry over. Apple is constantly improving the benefit of buying their products, which seems to always mean that new customers get treated better than old customers... although old customers loved the deal they got for when they got it. Funny stuff. My sister got IIvx screwed, and she'd financed the darn machine.

~ CB

 

[Cleverboy]

«in claris non fit interpretatio»
regards,
ro

Mm. Meanwhile people propose conspiracy theories as truth. No, it doesn't take an explanation for most of Apple's customers. I'm only empathizing with the confusion and explaining the obvious to the fringe who believe every complaint they read on Gizmodo. My fault I guess. Sigh. Agreed, next time I won't take more than a sentence if I bother at all.

Cheers,
~ CB