Because Apple would lose money in the transaction, which would inhibit their ability to collect revenue to offset cost of the new feature.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's $0.99 FaceTime Charge Due to Accounting Requirements
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Because Apple would lose money in the transaction, which would inhibit their ability to collect revenue to offset cost of the new feature.
i could be wrong, but i think their own guidelines on the app store set a minimum price of $.99 if you are charging anything. and let's face it, if they charged a $.01 then I'm sure someone would start shouting about them not following their own guidelines
They can give away the Beta all that want because it's not a finished product. They could give away the Gold version but then, as many others have said, FASB(and probably IFRS) rules require you go back and restate earnings, which would be(in my opinion) pointless because of the work involved(from my perspective it doesn't make sense to buy one of these new laptops or Facetime either until Lion comes out)
Keep in mind that this is only an issue because it is the Version 1 release.
I'm curious as to why this one has to cost money. I understood the 11n update, because it was if the hardware sold was 11g, then boom, you've got n for $2. No one should've complained about that, as it was a nice surprise.
Why was it free when older MacBooks got multitouch a couple of years back? Was it because the newer machines effectively paid for it?
There have been many free "significant" software updates in Macs. Seems odd this one costs money, but I do agree that any hint of having to charge for it would make them inclined to use the opportunity to promote the app store.
Why was it free when older MacBooks got multitouch a couple of years back? Was it because the newer machines effectively paid for it?
There have been many free "significant" software updates in Macs. Seems odd this one costs money, but I do agree that any hint of having to charge for it would make them inclined to use the opportunity to promote the app store.
I'm sure that's what enables HD video calls on the new MBPs, but the older models are completely capable of utilizing HD webcams. I can connect my Logitech HD camera up to my 2010 MBP and it works just fine.
Okay? Apple's performance standards are evidently higher than Logitech's.
The original question was whether Apple was artificially limiting video quality on older MacBooks. I provided Apple's published technical reason for limiting HD Facetime to the new MacBooks. That's my only point.
It's possible. IFRS is more principles-based, but the same concepts of multi-element arrangements and vendor-specific objective evidence will (generally) apply under IFRS as well.
I would guess they are talking about the Intel Quicksync encoding tech that is included in sandy bridge CPUs. Since facetime worked before Sandy bridge was release, hardware h.264 encoding really isn't an issue. CPUs have been fast enough to handle that for a while now. Sandy bridge may may make it into a more attractive power envelope for laptops though.
It really has nothing more to do than encouraging technolust for the new laptops.
Edit:
The real test will be if the new laptops can do facetime when using their ATI GPU. Quicksync only works while the integrated GPU is active. If they work while the ATI gpu is working, the h.264 encoding reason is BS.
Really? because that's not what the FaceTime app description says or at least they don't allude that you have to use the Mac's FaceTime camera for HD.
That's not a "technical" reason. That's a marketing reason. Easy way to tell the difference? It doesn't make sense.
You're telling me that a Mac Pro with 12 cores and two ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB cards couldn't do HD chatting? Come on, man. Same thing goes for a MBP that's three months old. Of course it could handle HD chatting. No problem.
It has nothing to do with standards.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Jeez people, does eating need an excuse? Software doesn't grow on trees. A bottle of coke costs more.
Jeez people, does eating need an excuse? Software doesn't grow on trees. A bottle of coke costs more.
Key phrase being "HD." Connecting an external HD webcam will not work. VGA will.
Buggy as a dead bison
I've tried to pay my 59p charge no less than 7 times, but it still won't start to download. The one time it did get further, I got the icon on my icon bar but the progress thermometer didn't move from the starting position.
I'll come back when things are less flaky...
I've tried to pay my 59p charge no less than 7 times, but it still won't start to download. The one time it did get further, I got the icon on my icon bar but the progress thermometer didn't move from the starting position.
I'll come back when things are less flaky...
Yeah... but then I'd have to wait a few months. Instead, I'll avoid this $0.99
charge by buying a new Core i5 13" MBP and copying FaceTime to my 2010
Core2Duo 13" MBP. (It helps that I was planning to buy a new MBP anyway.)
Is there any difference between FaceTime for Core i5 and FaceTime for Core2Duo?
lol. god help nyc and their .99+ cans of soda! theres a drug store near my work that still sells cokes for .35
Apple and its accounting advisors clearly believe that a public release of FaceTime software for existing Macs represents a substantial new feature addition for which the company is required to either charge a small fee or restate its past earnings to retroactively delay recognition of a tiny slice of revenue from each past machine sale.
I'm sure Apple's all broken up over the tens of thousands in revenue they'll bag.
It's sort of a win-win, and is, at the very least, the kind of legitimizing discourse a corp like Apple (and customers like Apple's) would like using. No SOX review and they pocket our Washingtons (or three Washingtons, two Eisenhowers, and four Lincolns).
I'm sure Apple's all broken up over the tens of thousands in revenue they'll bag.
It's sort of a win-win, and is, at the very least, the kind of legitimizing discourse a corp like Apple (and customers like Apple's) would like using. No SOX review and they pocket our Washingtons (or three Washingtons, two Eisenhowers, and four Lincolns).
I can assume you've tried it then or at least read that it doesn't work somewhere? Just curious. The only HD camera I have is on my iPhone ... I wonder if that would work?
I was wondering the same thing. What's different (besides HD obviously)?
That's in the US!? Not anywhere near where I live or have traveled (a good bit of the US), I know that.
I'm not a lawyer. But why is it only Apple that claims this excuse?
Windows Live crap? Free. Android updates (no, I don't have a mobile contract)? Free. Major updates to games? Often free.
It seems everyone else has no (legal) problem giving away free software and free updates. Except Apple.
Windows Live crap? Free. Android updates (no, I don't have a mobile contract)? Free. Major updates to games? Often free.
It seems everyone else has no (legal) problem giving away free software and free updates. Except Apple.
FaceTime is currently the #1 Paid App on the Mac App Store. So if there's a protest against 99¢ apps, it isn't working.
I'm not grumpy with Apple charging money for this upgrade. Yet, I think the "Accounting" issue could have been avoided by upgrading iChat. It seems silly to need both iChat and FaceTime.
I'm not grumpy with Apple charging money for this upgrade. Yet, I think the "Accounting" issue could have been avoided by upgrading iChat. It seems silly to need both iChat and FaceTime.
They have got to be kidding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! talk about loose customer faith and trust, just pure greed.........
The only people that can use it are people that purchase an iPhone not exactly a built in feature then is it..
As a long term Apple promoter I am slowly beginning to despise the greed of Apple..
The only people that can use it are people that purchase an iPhone not exactly a built in feature then is it..
As a long term Apple promoter I am slowly beginning to despise the greed of Apple..
iChat is built on AIM. For video I believe it uses the AIM video protocol whatever it is. FaceTime is a modern protocol (or set of them) and works a lot better.