Airport Extreme Air Disk, and 801.11n Upgrades $4.99 [Update]

[Chupa Chupa]

OK. The guy from Apple called me back. This was surprising, because they ususally don't do that. The tech guy, ironicly named Steve, said that any computer (intel) with a built-in G card can have it's n feature "activated". This is free when you buy a router, it comes with an "enabler cd". If you are not getting a new router, or if you just want N enabled, you have to pay apple $5 for the CD.

Are you sure he didn't mean when you buy an Apple router (AKA Airport Extreme)? I don't know of any non-Apple wireless products that come with Mac compatible CDs. Plus, the "n" enabler has to originate from Apple. If Apple is licensing the enabler to other companies that IS news to me.

 

[goosnarrggh]

Hum. This sort of plays out to me like this:

Harrumph!
My Mac already has the capability in hardware to do everything that iLife 2007 offers! All you need to do is put the 1's and 0's in the right places. So why do I have to pay money to have this capability enabled?

It feels good to say that Apple is guilty of some bad practise with the 802.11n enabler. But that argument just cannot stand up to common sense analysis.

A more valid question might by something like:

Harrumph!
My 5G iPod didn't have the capability to play back consecutive continuous tracks without adding a gap between the two. Apple added a new feature which makes this possible. It's been made freely available to all previous 5G iPod owners, despite the fact that 5G iPods had been on the market across two different calendar nd fiscal years at the time that the new feature was added.
Why couldn't they have done the same thing with the 802.11n enabler?

And the answer to that one is, as far as I can tell: Because they felt like it.

 

[ultimatemac]

Education store liftet the secret!

The education store for Austrian universities liftet the secret with the additional information, that wide channel would be banned!

So I love the new airport extrem with it´s NAS funtionality, but this uncertainty in future compatibility makes me a bit thinking about spending 164,4 bucks (Edu-price) for this!

 

[Chef Medeski]

The education store for Austrian universities liftet the secret with the additional information, that wide channel would be banned

IN AUSTRIA. This has been reported previously. Wide band is not currently banned in the US but in a number of European countries including England, Germany, and Austria it is. No secret.

 

[flipperfeet]

Glass is always have empty isn't it.

Six pages of people whinning about consciously buying computers with 802.11g and then having the option to drop a 5ver to upgrade to 802.11n. I have never seen ANY hardware manufacturer guarantee free upgrades for life. Instead, shouldn't you be happy in the knowledge that Apple didn't drop in a cheaper 802.11g chip that would not permit a firmware upgrade? You all need to consider yourselves lucky that Apple didn't box you in with a non-n-draft chip in those MacIntels. The reality is, if this patch were not offered by Apple, and a 3rd party provided one at twice the price most people would gladly drop the $10. This is hardly an injustice or another example of Apple greed, instead it is an example of Apple looking just far enough into the future to think the right decision by its customers was to put in upgradable chips.

 

[Ibjr]

This is sooooo gonna be all over the warez sites.. Stupid decision of Apple. they could sell it for 0.01$.

They have to charge something to deal with the credit card processing fees and other things related to conforming to SOX.

 

[fustercluck]

Six pages of people whinning about consciously buying computers with 802.11g and then having the option to drop a 5ver to upgrade to 802.11n. I have never seen ANY hardware manufacturer guarantee free upgrades for life. Instead, shouldn't you be happy in the knowledge that Apple didn't drop in a cheaper 802.11g chip that would not permit a firmware upgrade? You all need to consider yourselves lucky that Apple didn't box you in with a non-n-draft chip in those MacIntels. The reality is, if this patch were not offered by Apple, and a 3rd party provided one at twice the price most people would gladly drop the $10. This is hardly an injustice or another example of Apple greed, instead it is an example of Apple looking just far enough into the future to think the right decision by its customers was to put in upgradable chips.

What you and everyone else arguing this point ad nauseum fail to acknowledge is that we did pay for an 11n card. I'm sure that a card capable of only 11g would have been less expensive, dropping the overall price of the computer by whatever amount comprises the difference.

Furthermore, by the time I bought my computer, it was very clear that these cards were 11n capable, but that they were temporarily crippled by OSX to comply with industry standards & practices. As Peace pointed out quite early on, the .n functionality was and is available in Windows should you use Boot Camp or Parallels.

Some of you people don't understand what an analogy is. Instead there are these straw man examples of what you think are analogies, like the moron with the iLife example or the twit with the BMW example.

My computer did not come with iLife. I didn't pay for iLife. It's not figured into the price of the computer UNLIKE THE HARDWARE which I did pay for once already.

 

[flipperfeet]

What you and everyone else arguing this point ad nauseum fail to acknowledge is that we did pay for an 11n card. I'm sure that a card capable of only 11g would have been less expensive, dropping the overall price of the computer by whatever amount comprises the difference.

Furthermore, by the time I bought my computer, it was very clear that these cards were 11n capable, but that they were temporarily crippled by OSX to comply with industry standards & practices. As Peace pointed out quite early on, the .n functionality was and is available in Windows should you use Boot Camp or Parallels.

Some of you people don't understand what an analogy is. Instead there are these straw man examples of what you think are analogies, like the moron with the iLife example or the twit with the BMW example.

My computer did not come with iLife. I didn't pay for iLife. It's not figured into the price of the computer UNLIKE THE HARDWARE which I did pay for once already.

Did you, or did you not know before you bought your particular Mac that when you opened the box and turned on the machine it would operate using the 802.11g standard? Was there a guarantee anywhere in the enclosed literature or on Apple's website that Apple would enable 802.11n on your computer and that they would do so for free? I'll answer for you... "yes" to the first question and "no" to the second.

In fact, Apple still does not "officially" acknowledge they use 802.11n compatible chips, this factiod was identified by third parties. So you gambled that they would enable the chip and that they would do it for free. You're 50% ahead of the game, stop stewing in your juices and bitching at others for pointing out that Apple owes you nothing more than what they promised to deliver when you gave them your cash... 802.11g compliant connectivity. That you get to move to a whole new draft and the associated advantages for $5 is a bargain.

 

[Maxx Power]

What you and everyone else arguing this point ad nauseum fail to acknowledge is that we did pay for an 11n card. I'm sure that a card capable of only 11g would have been less expensive, dropping the overall price of the computer by whatever amount comprises the difference.

Furthermore, by the time I bought my computer, it was very clear that these cards were 11n capable, but that they were temporarily crippled by OSX to comply with industry standards & practices. As Peace pointed out quite early on, the .n functionality was and is available in Windows should you use Boot Camp or Parallels.

Some of you people don't understand what an analogy is. Instead there are these straw man examples of what you think are analogies, like the moron with the iLife example or the twit with the BMW example.

My computer did not come with iLife. I didn't pay for iLife. It's not figured into the price of the computer UNLIKE THE HARDWARE which I did pay for once already.

A law which is unsensible is not worthy of obeying. Apple should just stand up for the little guys, there are numerous ways of doing it legally - claim typos, release it as part of the next OS X major update, release it as beta software (draft-n is forever beta)....

 

[Chef Medeski]

Did you, or did you not know before you bought your particular Mac that when you opened the box and turned on the machine it would operate using the 802.11g standard? Was there a guarantee anywhere in the enclosed literature or on Apple's website that Apple would enable 802.11n on your computer and that they would do so for free? I'll answer for you... "yes" to the first question and "no" to the second.

In fact, Apple still does not "officially" acknowledge they use 802.11n compatible chips, this factiod was identified by third parties. So you gambled that they would enable the chip and that they would do it for free. You're 50% ahead of the game, stop stewing in your juices and bitching at others for pointing out that Apple owes you nothing more than what they promised to deliver when you gave them your cash... 802.11g compliant connectivity. That you get to move to a whole new draft and the associated advantages for $5 is a bargain.

It not about what was promised but what was paid for. N cards are significantly more expensive than G cards. No matter what is promised, the consumer pays for what is inside not what was promised. Look now that Apple admits that the new Macs have 802.11n, they didnt increase the price. Same hardware, same price. Its worth more based on what they promised. But not based on what is there, what they charge off of.

 

[Peace]

[snip]

Furthermore, by the time I bought my computer, it was very clear that these cards were 11n capable, but that they were temporarily crippled by OSX to comply with industry standards & practices. As Peace pointed out quite early on, the .n functionality was and is available in Windows should you use Boot Camp or Parallels.

[/snippet]

When I found out about the Airport being 802.11n in Windows Vista I never said it was N functional.I merely said Windows reported it to be a Broadcom 802.11n wireless card.I further tested it and found that there was a minimal increase in speed.Nothing close to actual draft-n speeds.

Please keep these facts straight

 

[NightStorm]

What you and everyone else arguing this point ad nauseum fail to acknowledge is that we did pay for an 11n card. I'm sure that a card capable of only 11g would have been less expensive, dropping the overall price of the computer by whatever amount comprises the difference.

When you are talking about the volume of chips that Apple orders, the price difference is negligible (if anything at all). In fact, it could simply be that when the chips were initially ordered, they were unsure if they could secure enough 802.11g chips, so they substituted a compatible chip.

 

[sblasl]

I actually did purchase the 3rd party upgrade for my BMW, the guy with the BMW example was spot on in his analogy.

You don't understand.

Some of you people don't understand what an analogy is. Instead there are these straw man examples of what you think are analogies, like the moron with the iLife example or the twit with the BMW example.

 

[Chef Medeski]

I actually did purchase the 3rd party upgrade for my BMW, the guy with the BMW example was spot on in his analogy.

You don't understand.

ACTUALLY....

Let me ask you something. Is Speed hardware? Is it a physically buyable product that you can install in your car. Nope. If you had bought a legendary BMW V-6 but found out it was really an 8 cylinder where two of the cylinders were disabled (which wouldnt make any sense I know). And then later down the road, BMW said theres actually 8. Youd be like . It was just disabled. Now there is an analogy. Speed is not something you pay for. Cylinders are. That V8 costs more than that V6 and you pay for that when you buy the car. Even if they only disclose it to be a V6. Its an odd situation since usually companies always disclose the best possible descriptions instead of under emphazing their features. Weird.

 

[flipperfeet]

Its not about what was promised but what was paid for. N cards are significantly more expensive than G cards. No matter what is promised, the consumer pays for what is inside not what was promised. Look now that Apple admits that the new Macs have 802.11n, they didnt increase the price. Same hardware, same price. Its worth more based on what they promised. But not based on what is there, what they charge off of.

Sorry, I disagree and your own behavior would seem to indicate you are not being honest with yourself. You may have told yourself you were paying for 802.11n, but Apple sold you 802.11g. If you had turned on the Mac and it only provided 802.11b, (or only CD-ROM playback despite containing a super-drive) you would have taken it back, but you still have not returned you Mac despite no 802.11n. You paid for and received 802.11g... n was not included in the price despite the rationalizations you are making now.

 

[flipperfeet]

ACTUALLY....

Let me ask you something. Is Speed hardware? Is it a physically buyable product that you can install in your car. Nope. If you had bought a legendary BMW V-6 but found out it was really an 8 cylinder where two of the cylinders were disabled (which wouldnt make any sense I know). And then later down the road, BMW said theres actually 8. Youd be like . It was just disabled. Now there is an analogy. Speed is not something you pay for. Cylinders are. That V8 costs more than that V6 and you pay for that when you buy the car. Even if they only disclose it to be a V6. Its an odd situation since usually companies always disclose the best possible descriptions instead of under emphazing their features. Weird.

Umm, haven't you ever heard of speed limiters? Most performance cars have them and most require a third-party crack to remove them. It is actually a great analogy. Law requires them, a firmware "upgrade" is required to remove them. I do not have access to 100% of the inherent capabilities of my vehicle's power-plant and transmission but I do not feel the manufacturer has ripped me off even though I might have to plunk down a couple hundred to get the firmware. It is actually your analogy that is seriously flawed.

 

[fustercluck]

You may have told yourself you were paying for 802.11n, but Apple sold you 802.11g.

...at 11n pricing. It might have been advertised as 11g, I will grant you that, but please - the argument that there should be an extra cost for a capability that we already paid in hardware cost for but which is artificially crippled by software is patently ridiculous.

 

[Maxx Power]

Umm, haven't you ever heard of speed limiters? Most performance cars have them and most require a third-party crack to remove them. It is actually a great analogy. Law requires them, a firmware "upgrade" is required to remove them. I do not have access to 100% of the inherent capabilities of my vehicle's power-plant and transmission but I do not feel the manufacturer has ripped me off even though I might have to plunk down a couple hundred to get the firmware. It is actually your analogy that is seriously flawed.

You are thinking of the speed limiters which apply to all vehicles sold in North America, not performance cars.

Just to contest to that we in the North America gets the worst of the worst, we can't police our own behaviour, so we need speed limiters, and now, ESP functions. Speed limiters.... how american, nowhere else in the world has this, or made it mandatory (Europe, Asia, etc). But hey, supposedly we passed these laws to protect ourselves, just like the copyright laws, right ?

I fail to see how limiting the speed of ethernet network chipsets using software is protecting anything ?! That example you mentioned is applicable where safety is concerned, which doesn't apply to computers.

More importantly, why does the US just bend over and accept crap ?

I think the direction people are arguing this is a bit short-sighted. The fact of the matter is, for windows compatible products using the draft-n technology, the upgradability is advertised but not promised, ie, when the draft-n becomes finalized-n, a firmware will be made available to mandate this upgrade for routers, wifi cards, etc. And, since Apple computers have been using x86 compatible hardware (and paying the same money for the same wifi cards), it doesn't make sense for apple to charge money for this firmware upgrade, to draft-n, not even finalized-n, when the Windows platform users get their driver upgrades for free to enable that functionality.

 

[fustercluck]

Umm, haven't you ever heard of speed limiters? Most performance cars have them and most require a third-party crack to remove them. It is actually a great analogy. Law requires them, a firmware "upgrade" is required to remove them. I do not have access to 100% of the inherent capabilities of my vehicle's power-plant and transmission but I do not feel the manufacturer has ripped me off even though I might have to plunk down a couple hundred to get the firmware. It is actually your analogy that is seriously flawed.

No, it's a flawed analogy. In your example, the user is trying to break the law with that little "workaround." The car is disabled from going that fast for a reason and it costs money to circumvent the legal limits. Apple is incurring no cost from this firmware/software installer to enable .11n on hardware that already supports it.

 

[flipperfeet]

...at 11n pricing. It might have been advertised as 11g, I will grant you that, but please - the argument that there should be an extra cost for a capability that we already paid in hardware cost for but which is artificially crippled by software is patently ridiculous.

Actually, the idea that you think pricing is simply some multiple of the cost to manufacture is patently ridiculous.

 

[fustercluck]

Actually, the idea that you think pricing is simply some multiple of the cost to manufacture is patently ridiculous.

*I* don't. But people who are arguing that the differential is negligble (or $4.95) are.

I'm arguing the opposite: that I already paid the difference in cost between an .11g and an .11n PLUS MARKUP when I bought the computer. Secondly, it probably cost Apple more to disable the stupid .n functionality than it will to restore it.

 

[flipperfeet]

No, it's a flawed analogy. In your example, the user is trying to break the law with that little "workaround." The car is disabled from going that fast for a reason and it costs money to circumvent the legal limits. Apple is incurring no cost from this firmware/software installer to enable .11n on hardware that already supports it.

"No Cost" is a false statement. Someone has to write the code, someone has to write the installer, someone has to QA and debug the firmware, someone has to pay to distribute it, and someone will have to provide the customer support when there are problems, in this instance it is Apple.

The law and legality has nothing to do with the argument as presented. The argument is, "If someone buys something they know to be limited, are they entitled to the full potential at no additional cost." I argue they are not, you get what you pay for as stated in the original agreement.

 

[fustercluck]

"No Cost" is a false statement. Someone has to write the code, someone has to write the installer, someone has to QA and debug the firmware, someone has to pay to distribute it, and someone will have to provide the customer support when there are problems, in this instance it is Apple.

The law and legality has nothing to do with the argument as presented. The argument is, "If someone buys something they know to be limited, are they entitled to the full potential at no additional cost." I argue they are not, you get what you pay for as stated in the original agreement.

In which case, Apple will be absolutely DELIGHTED to hear that you, flipperfeet, are volunteering to pay for security updates and anything else you get "for free" via Software Update.

I have Steve Jobs on hold - can I get your serial # please?

 

[Chef Medeski]

Sorry, I disagree and your own behavior would seem to indicate you are not being honest with yourself. You may have told yourself you were paying for 802.11n, but Apple sold you 802.11g. If you had turned on the Mac and it only provided 802.11b, (or only CD-ROM playback despite containing a super-drive) you would have taken it back, but you still have not returned you Mac despite no 802.11n. You paid for and received 802.11g... n was not included in the price despite the rationalizations you are making now.

LOL. Ok so who paid for the card? Apple just swallowed the cost. Forget about the promise made between the customer and the manufacturer. Think about realistically. Sure I thought I was only getting g. But I was paying for n. Whether you disagree or now, and whether I"m honest or not with myself . Since I have a PB I dont see how, but.... neverthless no matter what the consumer pays for all the parts. We dont pay for what they say is in there. We pay for WHAT IS IN THERE.

 

[Chef Medeski]

Umm, haven't you ever heard of speed limiters? Most performance cars have them and most require a third-party crack to remove them. It is actually a great analogy. Law requires them, a firmware "upgrade" is required to remove them. I do not have access to 100% of the inherent capabilities of my vehicle's power-plant and transmission but I do not feel the manufacturer has ripped me off even though I might have to plunk down a couple hundred to get the firmware. It is actually your analogy that is seriously flawed.

REALLY!?!?! Speed limiters is that what those things are called that limit speeds? Thank you sir. I never knew.

You are getting 100% of the capabilites of the power plant and transmission. Its not like its controlling your revs to a certain RPM. Its controlling your speed. Now before bashing me, think about it. Ok. If you got a V8 but they only allowed you to rev to 4000 RPM for no reason.... well that would be odd. It would be cutting off performance at every second of your drive, not allowing you to utilize 100% of the capabilites. Now if you are talking about speed. Whens the last time you went 150. Personally Ive only been 150 once. I really see no reason to go that fast when I cant legally be even CLOSE to the speed limit. But irrelevant. You get 100% of the capabilites of this car up until 150 mph. Yes or no?

Is any part of the engine, transmission, chassic not used to its fullest under 150 MPH?

And please sir tell me. Is speed a hardware purchasable upgrade? Can I go down to my local mechanic at purchase speed? Can you install 150 MPH in there for me, I dont like the current 140 MPH I have installed?