Apple to Charge Upgrade Fees?

[MacRumors]

News.com reports that Apple may start chargning for upgrades to some of its iApps:

According to sources familiar with the plans, Apple is expected to announce at the Macworld Expo in San Francisco on Tuesday that consumers will have to pay for new versions of iDVD, iPhoto and iMovie, which will be sold together as a bundle. Previously, Apple had offered upgrades to its digital media, or "i" applications, for free.

Historically, Apple has charged for the last iMovie upgrade (2.0), as well as a $19.95 shipping/handling fee for iDVD 2.

First hints of this particular rumor can be found in this Appleinsider thread.

 

[iShater]

well .. microsoft is doing it ...

so why can't Apple do it?


Edit : First post!

 

[insidedanshead]

I expected this to happen sooner than later... they need to make money to continue development of these incredible apps.. so either charge for these or raise the price of the OS.. and we all know how well that would go over.

 

[chewbaccapits]

Hmmm..

I can MAYBE see imovie as an app to pay, but something like iCal?...Whatever.....Don't know about this.....


And how come no one ever gets happy at the 3rd post?



3 post!!

 

[Mudbug]

Here we go again with the $$ whiners.

Sounds like bad juju to me, but since noone seems to be buying new machines these days, you have to make a few dollars somewhere just to keep the lights on.

I'm in favor of this, by the way...

 

[texas2001]

Doesn't Bother Me!

I don't see how Apple can continue to give away superior products. I don't mind paying the fee for those apps.

 

[alset]

While I would say Apple deserves a return on their investments in iApps, I still wonder if this will kill or slow their development as fewer users have access to them. The iApps have done a tremendous job of growing Apple's software line, but once users lose the ability to try them just for fun will we still see them reflect such popularity?

Dan

edit: btw - I for one will purchase iApps - I only question the masses.

 

[medea]

Umm, I belive arn already has a thread on this rolling in the software rumors section......
are arn and the macrumors admin two separate people? I always thought they were the same.

 

[Nebrie]

There shouldnt be any $$ whiners here, they'll just grab it off of carracho anyways. They whined because they couldnt do that with .mac

 

[achmafooma]

seems to me...

Seems a smarter way to do this would be to roll it all into .Mac. I like the stuff in .Mac, but I can't justify the expense (since I get most of what it has for free).

Now if .Mac came with what it has now, plus iApps, plus Mac OS and AppleWorks updates for free as long as you're a member - HEY, count me in

I don't particularly mind them charging for some of the iApps - particularly iMovie and iDVD, but iPhoto?! Man, I actually use that one! lol.

That said, since I use Final Cut for my DV work and don't have a DVD burner, I'm not sure I'd pay $50 for what is - effectively - iPhoto alone.

 

[bretm]

Re: Doesn't Bother Me!

Originally posted by texas2001
I don't see how Apple can continue to give away superior products. I don't mind paying the fee for those apps.

I thought we were already paying for these apps. Isn't that supposed to be a good portion of the added value in paying an extra grand or two for a slower machine?

But the quote is wrong anyway. Apple has charged in the past as noted by others.

Bottom line, I love apple and think their products, hardware and integration is flat out light years beyond anything based on windows. I would not operate in the computer field any longer if I had to work on windows day in and day out. Seeing something done the right way, for the right convictions and reasons and then succeeding at it gives me some hope. I have absolutely no problem paying a premium for it. If apple wanted to make something for the masses they would. I for one don't really think they do. They want to make the best. The best is not the cheapest. Sure they want as big a market share as they can get, but not if they have to lower their standards.

But it's not going to help them win over more switchers!

 

[MacKid]

O.K. ...

I think this is O.K. because it's traditional for Apple to charge full price for ground-breaking new versions to old software. Also, as Apple said Jaguar was a totally new OS, not just an upgrade, I think that since almost nobody actually paid for these iApps, I think it is normal. If it was something like iMovie 2.3 or something, that would be another matter, but these will probably be very different applications so I think it is a logical move for Apple.

 

[adamcoop]

If they worked bug free, I'd have no problems paying for them.

I thought we were already paying for these apps. Isn't that supposed to be a good portion of the added value in paying an extra grand or two for a slower machine?

That is a main selling point, yes. But if you buy a new machine, you'd expect that this software would still ship with it.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Re: seems to me...

Originally posted by achmafooma
Seems a smarter way to do this would be to roll it all into .Mac.

I agree, this makes sense. If only 180,000 Mac owners are currently subscribing to .Mac at the $50 introductory rate, then Apple obviously needs to add more value to .Mac, even if that value is subtracted from somewhere else -- or they're going to lose most of the current subscribers when they have to renew at $99.

Give me the current .Mac services plus "free" updates of the iApps, and I might accept that. Make me pay for both, and one of them will have to go.

 

[Hmm]

I think historically the problem has never been Apple charging money, but how much they actually charge. If they had offered .Mac at $50 a year, every year, or Jaguar at $60 for upgraders from 10.1, then there probably would have been a lot less whining. You don't hear nearly as much about the $29.99 upgrade for QuickTime Pro, for example.

If they offer iApp upgrades for $20-$30, then I think there won't be much complaint. I just hope they don't think they can start charging $99 and expect people to swallow it like some did with .Mac.

 

[steve53e]

I've spent 50 bucks on far worthless stuff.

 

[snahabed]

I posted support in the "no eMacs at MWSF" thread about tying some premium iApp services into .mac ... I predict a huge .mac exodus in September if the price remains $99 without new stuff being added.

Anyway, I have mixed feelings about charging for the iApps. I can see it with .mac more, in that there are server costs. But the cost of iApps is all R&D, and the bulk of that has already been done in the iApps' creation.

Moreover, iApps such as iTunes, iCal, and iPhoto, while I like them a lot and use them, are not really good enough to cost money. If iTunes and Audion cost tons of money, and one can do Ogg Vorbis, skins, etc., and one cannot, a lot would go for the latter. Than again, any sales of iTunes would increase the profits that they are making now (none)..I definitely would not pay for iCal and iPhoto though.

iMovie and iDVD maybe I can see minimal fees for. They are used by less people (and people, of course, that have enough $ to have nice DV cams).

God I can foresee my beloved iTunes 4 with AAC and Rendezvous being for-pay. Ugh.

I tend to agree that the iApps are part of the "value" we get as part of the more expensive Apple hardware and OS X lifestyle. But that argument was raised re: iTools as well and was blown off. Apple can do what they want; I guess no one is forcing anyone to upgrade to "Pro" versions of each iApp. Frankly iMovie, iDVD and iTunes work perfectly fine in current free versions.

 

[kingslod]

iPhoto alternative

If you want a program that does what iPhoto does, and that also catalogs all of your CDs and drives for graphics, video and other media, check out iView Media Pro.

I've been using it for almost a year and I can't imagine life without it. I'm an Art Director who has to manage an insane amount of image files (logos, photos, charts, etc.) and the program works great. It creates a thumbnail and location for any disc you point at it.

I also use it at home to manage all of my digital photographs. It prints proof sheets, rotates, enlarges and can even take a selected range of photos and copy them to a new folder. OK this doesn't sound that cool, but it works flawlessly and never crashes.

http://www.iview-multimedia.com/

 

[Ocelot]

This is a bad idea....

I would like to say first off, I am not a whiner. I am happy to pay for the software I use, and proud of that fact. My major problem is I thought I paid for these Apps when I purchased Jaguar... and usually when you pay for apps you are typically entitled to upgrades usually within in the first year, or first couple of years. The reason I assume I've paid for these Apps already is because of that wonderful MacWorld keynote that convinced me on all the good reasons to upgrade, and the idea that I am getting 100s of features, upgrades, apps, so that I'm really paying $1 per new feature.

I really do like Apple, and it would be a shame for them to charge to upgrade these apps... I find it hard to believe they would first charge for their OS, then upgrade a couple Apps a few months later and charge more for them. It seems to be getting way too expensive to own and maintain a Macintosh... Plus I'm sure they will release OS X 10.3 sometime this year with more promises and more charges... How much more gouging is going to take place? only to subsidize crappy sales because Apple can't stick a decently fast processor in a computer to warrant a purchase or upgrade...

My Software costs since I got my mac roughly one year ago (this does not include the initial cost of my Mac, or the cost to upgrade to mac 10.1):

Quicktime 5: 29.99
Quicktime 6: 29.99
Mac OS X-Jaguar: 129.99
.Mac: 49.99
------------------------------
= 239.96

next years projected costs:
iApps $50-$100 depending on how many upgrades we see
mac os x 10.3 = 129.99 (theoretically)
.mac = 99.99
----------------------------
279.98 - 329.98

so within 2 years I will pay out about 569.94 to simply upgrade software....
this is kind-of grotesque

Of course this is still just a rumor, but coming from Cnet its pretty credible. I do plan to upgrade my computer in the next year it may be an Apple, but if this trend of gouging customers for upgrades continues...I will be using Windows XP next year.

..I recently made the switch to macs and have been pretty happy about the whole experience, but this continuing trend may force me to be a bit more sane with my money

 

[bluecell]

You'd think that Apple would fix their hardware problems before making this kind of a dramatic change. For some, the iApps are what caused them to move to Mac in the first place. I'm plugging my ears when he makes the announcement so I'm not deafened by all of the whining that will follow. I hope they know what they're doing.

 

[slaboda]

Two points

Two brief points:

1. It's not as if iApps don't come free with new Macs, you just pay for the upgrades. A contract for lifetime free software updates was never part of the whole OS X lifestyle sell. The stuff works fine when you buy it. Want newer features, pay for their development.

2. That being said, I would be pissed if these iApps are not included in .Mac, since the service is grossly overpriced for what you get. Adding iApps would be a good way to prevent most people form dropping the service once the fee goes up in September, and .Mac's subscription model could easily include iApp upgrades.

 

[scorpion]

not unreasonable

The real question -- what do we all pay a year for software? I bought my iBook in May and have paid (software alone):

$129 for Jaguar (actually more like $109 w/rebate and all)

$50 for .mac, which as of today allows me to do something I can't easily
do any other way, which is sync my contacts and give me some decent
webspace and a really easy homepage

$360 for M$ Office (partially because of work, even though I dislike Bill
as much as all of you, it's still the best product out there that does what
it does and plays well with others)

Could I have done what I did another way more cheaply? Absolutely. More cheaply and with user friendliness that might be considered in the same universe? Probably not. More cheaply, as user friendly, with as many features, an elegant interface, and a lower TCO long-term (remember that concept)? No way in a million years.

My car's a piece of junk. It's not pretty but it gets me to work. It's a responsibility. I spend less than a half hour a day in it. It doesn't matter.

My computer is my work and a hobby. I spend 8-10 hours on them a day. They make me money whether I'm doing work for clients or auctioning stuff on eBay. I need one that's a pleasure to use -- not a pain. That's why I pay more for it, and don't feel too bad about it in the grand scheme.

Apple has spoiled us with applications and technologies which just get better and better. And while I think they should include the iApps for free as an integral part of the hardware 9that is what they're pitching), I'm willing to pay for them. The upgrades will still be far less than you would pay for an inferior product.

Sorry took so long.

 

[OutThere]

hmmm...a question...will apple release uprgrades for bug fixes for download? I think that it would be silly if they didn't offer for free a new version that stopped iPhoto from corrupting all pics that you opened with it, or a bug that made iTunes quit after finishing aac song. I hope that they will offer important updates through the internet, and leave the costs at buying iMovie 3 or iTunes 4.

Edit: Thinking about it, I was kinda worrying about something that Apple would have to be total idiots to do.

 

[scorpion]

Re: Two points

Originally posted by slaboda
Two brief points:

1. It's not as if iApps don't come free with new Macs, you just pay for the upgrades. A contract for lifetime free software updates was never part of the whole OS X lifestyle sell. The stuff works fine when you buy it. Want newer features, pay for their development.

2. That being said, I would be pissed if these iApps are not included in .Mac, since the service is grossly overpriced for what you get. Adding iApps would be a good way to prevent most people form dropping the service once the fee goes up in September, and .Mac's subscription model could easily include iApp upgrades.

right on both points -- especially point two -- maybe an even better idea would be to pitch .mac memebrship as an alternative to the iApp -- i.e. when you upgrade if you're not a .mac member you get the option to become one and do the upgrade online for some small amount (just to get more .mac people!)

 

[chubakka]

no one knows...

I could see them charging for iDVD then people who
get external DVD drives or add them later to their towers can buy it...

You get iTunes free when you buy an iPod... or a Mac in general.

I don't see what the big deal is...all the iApps do a good job... don't want the new features? Don't buy the upgrade.

I think many of the iApps will stay free...iChat, iCal, iSync.

iPhoto is a toss up...

if you want free apps all the time... use linux... gag ... and goodluck!