Apple to Charge Upgrade Fees?

[hesdeadjim]

Pro Versions

Could it be possible that Apple will charge for "Pro" Versions of the iApps like Quicktime Pro. Like a person already mentioned that support for external DVD burners for iDVD or a higher number of transitions or effects for iMovie. I don't really see Apple charging for iTunes, iCal, iSync, and iPhoto only because they are highly used. Well, maybe iPhoto adding more features. Either way, they will have the free version with normal features and have the pro version with lots of added features. Maybe just an idea.

Plus I'm perfectly happy if they want money for updates for me to keep the current operating system that I own, but I think that the updates should come out with OS X 10.3 since Apple considers them part of the added features of OS X, just my two cents.

 

[daveg5]

#2 whiner

Originally posted by pyrotoaster
Codemonkey:
I believe I said: " I say good for you when you offer constructive feedback in a forum, good or bad. But when you whine, when you complain like a spoiled six year old, then I say shut up."
Call me crazy, but weren't you whining?
I have no problem with you, you're probably a great person, but it isn't nice to mangle somebody else's words.
Am I offering constructive feedback now? No, not really. But at least I'm not whining, and I certainly wouldn't take a person's posts out of context for my own gain. That isn't nice.
But who am I offering criticism to? Right now, you.

I thought i was the #1 whiner until seeing your replies it now seems you are the number #1 whiner, what with telling people you disagree with, in a free forum to shutup, whats up with that.
Are will all to bow down and worship Apple and never complain. If that was the case .mac "$49 price and 90 day demo" would have never been extended and we would probably be paying for 10.3 upgrade and might still be with a 90 day warranty on ipod and have no recent hardware price reduction.
The best thing a prospective consumer can do is alert a company when the policies are becoming too farreaching and exspensive.
Anyway it might no be so bad if Apple decides on a 3 tier software approach entry i=free and limited u=upay more features and pro= professional version. But will should reserve the right to complain and whine before during and after as you too also seem to be doing.

 

[rjrufo]

I thought I'd add my $0.02, since we are on the subject of money...

I don't think anyone should be whining about being charged for great software. Apple produces some of the easiest to use, less buggy, and more usefull apps than a lot of other software companies. If Apple does charge for upgrades to the currently free software, suck it up and pay for it. If you don't use the software in the first place, then don't pay for it. It's that simple.

Try getting upgrades for Windows software upgrades, it isn't free either.

Besides, paying for the upgrades is just a rumor. We'll find out soon enough if the rumors are true.

 

[OutThere]

Two Faces of the Argument

a) Has anyone seen a bundled PC app as good as iTunes? iMovie? or iChat? They are way better than anything that I have seen that comes with a PC or that you can download for free for a PC. Most PC movie makers that you can get for the same price ~ as iMovie are worthless. The iApps are quality products that are worth the money.

b) Everybody doesn't have the money to buy the new versions, Macs are already cost way more than PCs, now apple charges for .mac, which used to be free, and might start charging for the iApp upgrades, if they do then they will lose even more populairty. Macs need more speed and lower costs, charging money for .mac and for iApp uprgrades limits the functioanlity that I have with my mac when I am on a tight budget. If the programs come with the computer that I shell out a ton of money for then I should be guaranteed at least 1 or 2 free upgrades. You would get the new versions for awhile and the free upgrades would help make up for the overpriced computer.

I can see how both sides of this argument can come about. I don't have unlimited funds to throw at apple, yet I really believe that they if they need the money then it is justified to charge money for such cool apps. I think that an excellent way to make it equal for all people would be to offer pro versions. iMovie with more transitions, features and possiblities could cost ~$30. The free version could be similar to what we have now. The really basic ones, iChat, iTunes, and iCal should be left free, I don't think I would really want to pay for new or pro versions of those, iChat Pro? that would suck. iTunes is the best iApp (in my opinion) and really needs to be free. iPhoto I don't use but have read the comments here saying that it has a beastly interface, and iCal is too easy to replace with some freeware calendar, sure it might not look pretty, but it gets the job done.

Thats my 20¢

 

[QuiteSure]

.mac add in

I like the idea of including the iapps as part of a .mac add in. Or adding "pro" features for the upgrade price. But if the upgrade to 10.2.4 or 10.3 will disable the prior free iapps, I think that creates a serious pr problem.

"OK, I can get the bug fixes included in 10.2.4, but if I fix those bugs then i can't use my apps?"

Those would be strange days indeed ...

 

[bousozoku]

Re: Apple is better, remember that.

Originally posted by pyrotoaster
Maybe it was a mistake for Apple to ever offer these things for free...
We're spoiled. When asked to pay a reasonable sum for quality apps, we whine and cry.
Apple is better. We pay a premium sometimes, but Apple is better. That's why just about everybody bad-mouthing this will still watch the keynote intently and rave to their friends about how much they love using their Mac.
PCs are cheap. Apple is good.
PCs are copiers. Apple is an innovator.
See where I'm going?
If Apple had asked $20 for the original iTunes, we'd all be willing to pay $20 for iTunes 2, 3, and eventually 4. But it was free. It still is, let's not forget that.
I say good for you when you offer constructive feedback in a forum, good or bad. But when you whine, when you complain like a spoiled six year old, then I say shut up.

Well said, but the whiners just won't get it.

 

[Q-bert]

This story is all spin!

After carefully reading all this, I'm not seeing how any of this qualifies as a story at all. Apple has ALWAYS charged for certain iApps, this CNet story is just spinning the facts a certain way to make it seem as though something major has changed, when in fact by their own story, nothing has changed at all. They're also flat-out wrong in stating that previous upgrades to ALL iApps were "free" - only some of them were. Don't believe me? Look at the history of the iApps:

- iMovie 1.0 to 2.0: $49 upgrade fee
- iDVD 1.0 to 2.0: $20 upgrade fee
- iPhoto: still at version 1.x, hasn't had a major upgrade yet.
- iTunes: free upgrades to all versions
- iCal: no major upgrades yet
- iSync: no major upgrades yet

Notice that both the CNet and ThinkSecret stories report that ONLY iMovie, iDVD, and iPhoto would be paid upgrades, neither says that ALL the iApps would have a cost associated with upgrades. So, what's different here? Seems to me that Apple is going to continue to:

1) Offer the iApps free with new hardware purchases (nothing changed there)
2) Offer upgrades to iMovie 3.0, iDVD 3.0, and iPhoto 2.0 for a fee (not much changed there, either, except that iPhoto has no history to draw from).

What's the big deal? I guess people tend to lump all the iApps in together and simplify the offerings as "everything's free, plus free upgrades for life", but the reality is that the ONLY iApp that has offered FREE major upgrades in the past is iTunes! So unless Apple is planning to charge for iTunes as well, which nobody is rumoring yet, it seems as though all of this is a non-story just looking for some spin.

 

[pyrotoaster]

Really good point.

Q-bert has a really good point. We have no idea what's actually going to happen, but iMovie and iDVD have had pay-for upgrades before, and iPhoto is still in its infancy.

 

[MacsRgr8]

They could have done it with the release of Jaguar. Pay $ 20 extra for CD #2 (or $ 20 less if you only bought CD #1)
But they didn't.
I would have paid for it, but many wouldn't have, and these people would have missed the prettiest part of OS X. I think if Apple would like to increase their market-share, it would be a good idea to keep the i-Apps free whenever you bought a new version of OS X.

 

[thecure]

Re: Oh no im shaking

Originally posted by daveg5

If they keep doing this junk then maybe we will be better off with out them. i will start a company called orange or banana and hire all of apples employees and with 2 billion in the bank I wont use the buy me or i am going out of business crap.

That's the spirit, we need more people like you in this country. Let me know when you start your company, I'm sure you'll do way better things than apple with that attitude.

 

[daveg5]

Yea Right?

Originally posted by bousozoku


Well said, but the whiners just won't get it.

No one is arguing that Apple apps are some of the Best.

First off, lets get one thing straight. "Apple has never offered any of the iapps for free" or anything else for that matter!!!! It is paid for when they recieve the profits from your OS or computer purchase just like their advertisement. Much like cable companies who now charge for channels they did not before or cable boxes and remotes that were once part of the package.
Same for phone companies who did not charge for information (now a $1) and service(dont ask). And of course banks who did not charge for tyme machines transactions, checking or the privilege to let them keep ypur money. Now they charge you to keep your money there if you go under say $500-$1000 per month, and for checks you cash there if it comes from another bank.
Were any of these free before?
Of course not, its just the little trogen all in one, now seperate bait and switch. Apple is late in the game but "Geez they sure learn fast!!!"

Yearly(10,10.1,10.2) updates $100 or $19 -yearly.mac $100- updates to crucial apps $50-Quicktime pro $30- Quicktime pro mpeg plug $20. Let's see what else can we add a .10 charge for each update we install .10 for using apple support. a charge for using certain sherlock channels and itunes radio 90 day warranty on purchases under $1000, remember with 2,000,000,000.00 in the bank they might be out of buisness tomorrow, maybe Jerry can throw a telethon for them, oops I better not give them anymore ideas

 

[daveg5]

Re: Re: Oh no im shaking

Originally posted by thecure


That's the spirit, we need more people like you in this country. Let me know when you start your company, I'm sure you'll do way better things than apple with that attitude.

You are hired. remember customer and honest fair profit first. now i just need some start up capital i think i will ask steve but then he cant even afford a suit.

 

[usersince86]

Re: I swear on EVERYTHING HOLY...

Originally posted by MDiddy
No godamn way will I pay for an iApp update. The Mac advantages are dwindling by the second. If I have to buy a damn update to iMovie 3.0 after its languished for well almost 2 years (maybe more). Fix the bugs in the current software before trying to scrape me for more money.

If this is the petty nickel & diming from Apple , then I'm gonna start breaking stuff.

This is a losing idea-No good will come of it.

One OK thing to come of it might be if you stopped using the Mac. Maybe you'd have a better attitude in the world of Windows.

Just a thought...



(Nice command of the English language, by the way. Thanks!)

 

[Centris 650]

I've been thinking about this today...

1) I've read in other posts and on other websites that Apple might a "Lite" and "Pro" version of their iApps. The Lite version would be free to upgrade while the Pro version would cost. My question is would this be like Quicktime? Will the machines ship ONLY with the Lite versions? It will be interesting to see how this pans out.

2) Just what iApps will they charge for. As stated in so many other threads and sites some iApps can't merit an upgrade fee.

iChat, iTunes, iCal and iPhoto I see as TOYS. Theres not much there forprofessional productivity. (Except MAYBE iCal but that's really pushing it!) Plus many of these you can download for free in other forms. I think can't see many people really NEEDING to upgrade these.

Appleworks, iMovie and iDvd I can see as Apps that have some professional use and that people might really want to upgrade. Though how many people have camcorders with firewire or a superdrive?

Finally, I read on another site that the reason for charging for iApps was that many mac users are "sitting" on their computers and not upgrading enough to provide Apple with revenue. Hunh? Not everyone can upgrade their mac as often as Apple would like them to!

 

[daveg5]

a fresh money making idea

Heres something else they could charge for. We can use Linux and Beos and windows with virtual pc on Mac. and since over 50% of Mac users still use OS9.
Why not charge all new Computer buyers $25 to boot in OS9 for a serial number and password.
Or better yet lock it out for all Macusers in 10.3 and charge for a key usbkey to unlock it. Apple needs the money to survive right.

 

[MacSlut]

Re: Apple is better, remember that.

Originally posted by pyrotoaster
Maybe it was a mistake for Apple to ever offer these things for free...

I agree with this, but not for the reasons you state. For example:

If Apple had asked $20 for the original iTunes, we'd all be willing to pay $20 for iTunes 2, 3, and eventually 4. But it was free. It still is, let's not forget that.

Uh nope. Some of us would be paying more/same/less for an alternative application to iTunes. It was free, so almost all development of competitive applications stopped.

I think it's seen as Microsoftian to launch something for free and then jack up the price once it's fully taken over the market.

iApps are great as free apps, but for almost every iApp, there's an alternative that I use instead. The biggest of which is iView Media Pro. It is vastly superior to iPhoto, but far fewer people have even tried it than "own" iPhoto. It won't be long before Apple can charge the same or more for iPhoto than what iView will sell for or go under. Inferior product + unfair advantage = market dominance is pretty much the motto for Microsoft.

The same could be said for other iApps like iChat versus Proteus.

When iPhoto first came out, I almost switched from iView. I figured iPhoto was free, iView may not have a future and even if it did I would be paying for it. Unfortunately, it was too hard to transfer all of my templates and scripts. There were numerous things iPhoto could not do, so I stuck with iView. I would be slightly upset if I had invested all the work into switching to iPhoto only to realize that it might be more expensive than iView. Probably as upset as all those people who signed up for a free mac.com account and published info/biz cards with that address who were then forced to choose between reprinting their contact info or pay Apple for a .mac account.

 

[daveg5]

no iapp was ever free.

Every iapp Apple has ever offered has been paid for in full by loyal Apple users. None of it is or was or will ever be free.
It developement, research and marketing is all paid for by us when we spend our money on apple products.
Apple just sees another way to make a profit in addition to .mac, OSX, service contracts, quicktime pro, hardware sales etc.
This is the same practice thats been used by banks, phone companies, cable companies etc. when revenues are low look at what your loyal customers pay for and recieve, and then make them pay for what was already paid for seperately. Start off with a few items and slowly add more.
Just make sure it starts off as included in the initial product or service purchase.
All in all it would'nt really be so bad if this was just the iapps but coming after yearly os purchases and . mac and quicktime its starting to look very bad. I can just see more schools and colleges switch to the other side with more of these little extra revenue enhancers.
Apple should just create a new mid u for upay line in addition to the included and paid for iapps and pro line. Charging for some iapps and not others just causes more confusion and thats the last thing Apple needs right now as OSX is about to take over the majority of macusers computers.
Apple missed a golden oppertunity with this iapp debaucle. They could have and should have and still can include these "upgrades" in with .mac contracts. that would have added a few million more .mac users and would be a way to say thanks for supporting our slow computers (i love them anyway) and letting us fleece you again and again.
Just my take
Peace out.

 

[redAPPLE]

Re: iPhoto alternative

Originally posted by kingslod
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/

sounds good, but i ain't free like iPhoto...

here is to hoping the iApps stay free.

 

[Inhale420]

lol, this is the funniest thing i've heard in a long time. all of you people who are 'not bothered' by this really need to step out of the reality distortion field.

 

[NHMac]

Perhaps those that feel a company/divison/biz unit can remain profitable while shipping free products are the ones that need to step outside of the reality distortion field! The ".com" days are over, save a few notable exceptions, folks did not do to well with making profit on "free."

I hate to say it but we were all paying "an extra grand or so" for our "slow" machines well before iMovie was a sparkle in Apple's eye. If anything the development of the "iApps" has likely cut profit margin per machine.

 

[daveg5]

Backwards

Originally posted by NHMac
Perhaps those that feel a company/divison/biz unit can remain profitable while shipping free products are the ones that need to step outside of the reality distortion field! The ".com" days are over, save a few notable exceptions, folks did not do to well with making profit on "free."

I hate to say it but we were all paying "an extra grand or so" for our "slow" machines well before iMovie was a sparkle in Apple's eye. If anything the development of the "iApps" has likely cut profit margin per machine.

Apple does not ship free products the Iapps and Itools are/were standard feature packaged with the OS or machine purchase, or at least they were.
They were to noticable exceptions. idvd for superdrive equipped macs and 1 imovie upgrade to the best of my knowledge and soon thier will be moreYou got it all backwards, first off the iapps were never free you paid for them when you bought your OS/computer,
If anything the "Paid for Iapps and Itools" helped to sell those overpriced machines which paid for the Iapps and Itools.
You are correct, though in stateing that we were always paying a grand or so more for our "slow" machines except back then we were at least as fast as intel and sometimes faster with a single processor mind you clock speed and otherwise.
So let us whine and complain a little it is healthy, something that was standard is now pay per view and we need to release a little stress and let Apple no we dont all think it's a good idea whether or not it does any good is anybody's guess