Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPod touch Do you agree with Apple charging $9.95 for 2.0 for iPod touch users?

Do you agree with Apple charging $9.95 for the 2.0 firmware for iPod Touch users?

  • Yes... it's a perfect price.

    Votes: 82 26.4%

  • Ya... it's ok.

    Votes: 85 27.3%

  • I don't really care, i just want 2.0

    Votes: 52 16.7%

  • No, i hate it, i wished it was FREE

    Votes: 92 29.6%
  • Total voters
    311
  • Poll closed .
omg people its 10 lousy dollars who cares its not that expenisve and if some of you dont want to use your parents credit card those under 18 just go and buy a itunes gift card for 15 bucks and download it and you also get 5 songs or a video and what not your acting like it was a 50 $ upgrade ... its only 10 bucks and you get a lot of cool stuff and dont forget about the app store there is cool free stuff in there ... i hope :apple::apple::apple:
 
BOSS10L said:
If this is true, then why did Apple sign an exclusivity deal with AT&T? I may be missing something, but cutting off potential customers just doesn't make sense IMHO.
Click to expand...

Think back in time eighteen months. Nobody knew whether the iPhone would sell or not. And Apple wanted a deal to their terms. Possibilities were: Selling through AT&T, or through Verizon, or through both, or through none (which would be bad).

AT&T makes _some_ money by selling iPhones, but they make a lot more by taking customers away from Verizon. So to AT&T (and same with Verizon) an _exclusive_ deal was very, very valuable. Probably worth five times as much as a non-exclusive deal. (That is also why Verizon doesn't miss an opportunity to talk down the iPhone. They didn't get the deal because AT&T bid higher, but they would never, ever admit that). Apple makes a lot more money from every iPhone with this exclusive deal than they would have made with a non-exclusive deal. They sell a few iPhones less, but they make more money.
 
I'd prefer it to be free (who wouldn't)....but am more than happy to shell out a small amount of money for some new features.

The way I see it it's like new software. The fact that we all refer to it as an upgrade is probably the problem. You will be getting new software/programs....bottom line is that someone's gotta get paid! I'm sure a % of the iPhone price is going towards covering this too.
 
If I complained about paying $9.95 (SOMEONE GOT THE ACTUAL PRICE RIGHT!... I've seen a lot of $9.99's), I'd be going against my luck. I didn't get the JSU but I'll definetly buy 2.0, which I recently learned will include the JSU complimentary :D
 
Good deal.

Given the time it takes Apple to write and test this software, I think it's a good price. I'd much rather have a company improve software and charge for it than not improve the software at all. Given that improvements aren't free for Apple, I don't see why they should be free to us.
 
dccorona said:
iPhone users pay monthly service fees, so their upgrade is provided for free

Touch users do not, so I believe the charge is fair.
but for people who did not buy the first upgrade, I wonder if they will require that first or if it will be included in 2.0 or if they can run independent of each other?

I also hope Apple will at least provide Touch users with a portion of the 2.0 update for free, that is any bug fixes they may have added. You shouldn't have to pay to fix something that wasn't working the way it was supposed to to begin with
Click to expand...

hmm..yeah iPod users will get a portion of 2.0 as always..i got 1.1.3 and 1.1.4 updates, but without buyin the jan software upgrade
 
appleretailguy said:
Yeah, that extra 9.95 killing ya?
Click to expand...

No, I just don't want to deal with the hassle, and I figure an iPod Touch update might come out fairly soon. Within 3 months or so. And why is Apple going to charge for the update in the first place? Because they want to squeeze every dollar they can out of you.
 
No...

Beric said:
No, I just don't want to deal with the hassle, and I figure an iPod Touch update might come out fairly soon. Within 3 months or so. And why is Apple going to charge for the update in the first place? Because they want to squeeze every dollar they can out of you.
Click to expand...

Not true, actually. Read up on the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

But even IF they simply chose to charge for it, what's the problem in that? It's an upgrade to an operating system that already works. It's not an update that simply fixes problems, it's a whole new way of running the Touch.

Companies are in business to make money.
 
The "law" as far as I'm concerned is a myth or at best creative accounting. It's all a smoke cloud to hide greed. Apple doesn't HAVE to charge anything. They do it because they can. They don't do it to iPhone owners directly, but they will profit from downloaded apps, and have raised the lease fees.

I have a Samsung P2. It cost me $199 new less than a year ago. Since then, Samsung has released 4 "bluewave" firmware updates that each added new functionality to the P2. Every one of those updates was a free download. Now they have added the ability to download games to it, and those games will cost money. Samsung will profit from those downloads.

The previous upgrades to the Touch are no different than the upgrades to my P2, yet Apple demanded money. The 2.0 upgrade will add the ability to download games (and other apps) that will cost money. Apple will profit from those downloads. Apple has been profitting from music downloads all along.

The common word here is "profit". Apple is in business to make profit. Greedy bastards from my point of view.
 
While there has been much discussion over the requirements of the Sarbannes-Oxley Act, the release of software version 2.0 does appears to have a major differences with the earlier, $20 upgrade.

The first major upgrade was simply an increase in features, for which Apple (apparently) had to charge (although they did get to set the rate). While OS version 2.0 has a number of major additions, the inclusion of the Applications Store would suggest that it could be given away for free.

Because Apple will receive revenue from store in the future, the upgrade could be counted much the same way that the iPhone's upgrades are counted. Perhaps it's easiest to demonstrate in reverse. If Apple wanted to give away access to the Application Store in order to generate more revenue through the sale of applications, there is no way that they would be required to limit the adoption of the App' Store by charging for it.

If the reason Apple had to charge for the Mail App (for example) was because they added a feature after the device had already been paid for, then the App Store (and by extension, OS 2.0 which makes it possible) is paid for by the potential to pay Apple through the purchase of applications.

For that matter, because the mobile iTunes Store keeps any iPod Touch as a source of revenue for Apple, the iTunes Store should have made [any/I] upgrade fee unnecessary for the iPod Touch.

And here is the proof on top of it all. Apple TV did not require a fee for the upgrade to version 2.0 and, unlike the iPhone, does not have a contract for future fees in place. An Apple TV is much like an iPod Touch with the mobile iTunes Store (and now with the App Store, the iPod Touch moves out in front). Now Apple had to do this because the first iteration of the Apple TV was a flop while the iPod Touch has not been, but as they say, "what is good for the goose is good for the gander."
 
The real question is, is it fair that Apple is charging $10 for the 2.0 update which will include the extra iPhone apps for the touch that many people already paid $20 for alone? Also, if you purchased the apps, you'll now have to pay an additional $10 for the 2.0 update, bringing your total to $30.
 
Wow....

itsmequinn said:
The real question is, is it fair that Apple is charging $10 for the 2.0 update which will include the extra iPhone apps for the touch that many people already paid $20 for alone? Also, if you purchased the apps, you'll now have to pay an additional $10 for the 2.0 update, bringing your total to $30.
Click to expand...

For the LOVE OF GOD, who cares? Don't like it, don't buy it. Seems pretty simple to me.

I can't stand when people complain about doing something that they have full power not to.

I'm pissed that BMW charges so much for their cars, but I'm not about to start a letter writing campaign.

Anything you receive after you've already purchased a product should totally be paid for, unless it fixes something inherently wrong with it.
 
Or...

appleretailguy said:
For the LOVE OF GOD, who cares? Don't like it, don't buy it. Seems pretty simple to me.

I can't stand when people complain about doing something that they have full power not to.

I'm pissed that BMW charges so much for their cars, but I'm not about to start a letter writing campaign.

Anything you receive after you've already purchased a product should totally be paid for, unless it fixes something inherently wrong with it.
Click to expand...

Or I could take my own advice and just ignore posts that make me mad and thus not comment on them, but hey, I'm geeky enough to be on macrumors in the middle of the day, so...oh god I'm addicted.
 
Out Of Money?

Well I think if you perchesed a 300 doller device. Or more. You should be able to affort a 10 or 20 doller update..
 
I'm not mad about the $10, I'm mad that they charge for iPods in the first place! They don't have to charge for iPods, they could give them to me for free! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

:p

P-Worm
 
Why can't people seem to scrape together $10. The iPod will not just stop working if you don't buy the 2.0 upgrade. If you want NEW features and capabilities, then buy it. What is it with people these days that think everything on the internet should be free?... Music, movies, software, games... just because you can't HOLD it, doesn't mean it shouldn't be paid for. I pay for all of my software and music and movies because stealing it doesn't feel right to me.

Sorry for the rant but people have to get out of their little world of "If it's on a computer, it has to be free or there has to be a way to get it for free even though it's illegal... I'm behind this computer screen where there probably won't be consequences for my actions... yay!".

I'm gonna buy it and I'm glad.
 
TheSpaz said:
Why can't people seem to scrape together $10. The iPod will not just stop working if you don't buy the 2.0 upgrade. If you want NEW features and capabilities, then buy it. What is it with people these days that think everything on the internet should be free?... Music, movies, software, games... just because you can't HOLD it, doesn't mean it shouldn't be paid for. I pay for all of my software and music and movies because stealing it doesn't feel right to me.

Sorry for the rant but people have to get out of their little world of "If it's on a computer, it has to be free or there has to be a way to get it for free even though it's illegal... I'm behind this computer screen where there probably won't be consequences for my actions... yay!".

I'm gonna buy it and I'm glad.
Click to expand...

Yep hes right on the dot!
 
I don't know if this discussed law applies to 2.0 or not, but who cares? It's a $9.95 charge and it's adding lot's of more functionality to your device? Who can argue with that!? If you don't see this update as worth it, don't buy it. For us 2.0 buyers, we'll be receiving lots of free, useful applications, as well as lots of new other features.

Edit: After reading The Spaz's comment, I have an opinion on this very close to his, and I also, for future reference, pay for all my content.
 
AceFernalld said:
I don't know if this discussed law applies to 2.0 or not, but who cares? It's a $9.95 charge and it's adding lot's of more functionality to your device? Who can argue with that!? If you don't see this update as worth it, don't buy it. For us 2.0 buyers, we'll be receiving lots of free, useful applications, as well as lots of new other features.

Edit: After reading The Spaz's comment, I have an opinion on this very close to his, and I also, for future reference, pay for all my content.
Click to expand...

I for one do not pay for any of my content. The new update is the only thing I will be getting off iTunes. The the reason I get my music illegely is becouse of cost. I have 4600 Songs. Thats a lot of money for 99 cents a song!. And all theres songs are sung my different people. Well most. And for a 13 year old to earn 4600 dollers...Little hard..Just for music... Well thats my 2 cents
 
linden said:
I for one do not pay for any of my content. The new update is the only thing I will be getting off iTunes. The the reason I get my music illegely is becouse of cost. I have 4600 Songs. Thats a lot of money for 99 cents a song!. And all theres songs are sung my different people. Well most. And for a 13 year old to earn 4600 dollers...Little hard..Just for music... Well thats my 2 cents
Click to expand...

Because of your age you have to steal music? What??? When I was 13, I didn't have a computer, I didn't have the internet and I didn't have mp3s. If I wanted music... I saved my money ($5 weekly allowance) to buy a tape by my favorite bands. I still spend my own money for music except now-a-days it's much easier to find what I like because I can preview stuff before I buy it. Get a paper route or something. You wouldn't rob a bank... why would you steal stuff online?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back