Well, what is it? Are these significant new features or is push email and update to an app we already bought? Apple did say that updates to applications would be free through the AppStore...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPod touch Down with Apple's Touch "Upgrade" Fees
- Thread starter aidanpendragon
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, what is it? Are these significant new features or is push email and update to an app we already bought? Apple did say that updates to applications would be free through the AppStore...
My 1.1.3 problem is that the apps are dead-wood that take up space, and you have to download them even if you aren't going to use them. It's currently equivalent to losing 2 CDs or 1 half-hour program's worth. That's bad enough, but if this becomes habitual, it will add up. All I want is the ability to get 1.1.3 without the apps bundled it - or to buy the apps separately if I so choose.
It's still unresolved - and speculation at this point - whether the next firmware will require you to buy it just to get bugfixes. That would really be beyond the pale - even M$ would think twice.
I think the real reason theTV update was free was because the product was a flop and without some serious changes, it was just going to die off. Take 2 makes it a more viable piece of revenue-generating technology, which means it's a smart business decision to give it to people for free so they will start spending their money on rentals and downloads.
Since this is constructive, I'll engage it. I totally agree with you that it's a smart business move. It'd also be a smart business move to let me buy SDK apps without first charging me for the privilege to do so.
It doesn't seem to be a smart move to create two tiers of customer service for what are essentially the same high-priced gadget, and blame it on some accounting flim-flam. As others have said, why would you ever buy a Touch, if there will always be a better version at same cost in three weeks? This has the obsolescene curve crunched down ridiculously.
Ok fair enough, but confirm for me please... you don't have any problem with the charge for any reason other than it takes up needless storage on your Touch?
Right now, that's it, yes - can't get rid of the apps & free up that space. Going forward, it sounds like the firmware itself will either continue to contain such bloatware, OR be a for-cost item for Touch owners only.
So at best, even more of my space is eaten up by crap I don't want/can't use; and at worst, I have to pay if I want bugfixes, etc. everybody else gets for free.
I guess I can sympathize. However, I didn't join in the Jan. melee for a big reason: the Touch didn't have those 5 apps., and it wasn't advertised it should. I wish I could opt-out altogether, but it is new stuff.
This, on the other hand, promises that Touch owners get the same upgrade but have to pay for it. I think that's a bad precendent, and - for reasons discussed earlier in this thread - one whose "accounting" rationale doesn't hold up. And just because something's a smart business move doesn't mean it's also good for the customer - ask M$.
...Hey, I'll say it again - if 2.0 costs $1.99, I won't have a problem. If it's $20, problem.
You keep saying that even though that's not the case.
Yes, it is the case. Why is the $20 upgrade 12kb? Because the Applications are embedded in the 1.1.3 firmware to begin with.
You pay to unlock them.
Apple has a precedence (going back several years) of selling iPod applications for $4.99 each. I wonder how many lawsuits they would have seen if they tried to sell a bundle of 5 applications for a total of $1.99.
The same thing follows with the iPod touch. How much did adding the "previously unadvertised feature" of being able to add a calender entry from the touch cost you? Nothing. Like iTunes/QuickTime/Safari updates, it was an update to an already existing program on your device.
IMO, there's a huge and obvious difference between not charging for an update to an application that was on the device when you purchased it vs. charging to add five new applications to your device that weren't there when you purchased it.
I bet that if Apple could redo the decision of how they account for touch revenues, they'd do it differently.
I figured, and I wanted to make sure that I had your argument correct. Here's my problem:
1.) Your point above wasn't mentioned anywhere in the previous 4 pages as your main point. It might have been mentioned by you previously but if so, it was done in passing. Only now do we determine that it's actually your main, and dare I say in my nicest tone your only point. It certainly doesn't reflect the attention or the anger that you gave in your first post. You don't like the space the firmware takes up, that's understandable but doesn't deserve, in my opinion, a whole thread devoted to it or the anger behind it.
2.) You've stated repeatedly that the fee is needless for Touch owners vs. iPhone owners... but I've confirmed with you that the fee is not your issue. Why bring up the fee at all? You suspect, I'm guessing given your words above, that Apple will at some point charge you for bug fixes when it has no history of doing so previously. This argument doesn't wash with me. We can't blame Apple based on what we think they'll do in the future if they don't have a history of doing so in the past. We certainly can't call them greedy based on this foundation. Sorry.
3.) Why such anger? You bought your original Touch under certain conditions and by you downloading the updates that are "required", you're still using your Touch under those same conditions with absolutely no charge to you whatsoever.
4.) Can we confirm by someone smarter than me (preferably someone who has a Touch) that the previous required updates do indeed contain the equivalent storage as a 1/2hr program or a couple of album's worth of space? This seems like a large amount... but I suppose it's possible.
rjfiske
Except, this 2.0 firmware adds no new apps, only updates "already existing programs" - and only Touch owners will be charged. I assume from your statement you're not OK with that.
Apple blames this on accounting - but that's BS, precisely because they didn't do the same for the Calendar update, for iTunes 7.6.1, and a host of other things.
They also blame charging $20 for the 5 apps on accounting - again BS, because the accounting laws apparently don't make that fine-grain a distinction as to what's a "previously unadvertised feature." If they just said what you did - "hey, these are new apps, so we'll sell them to you" - that would be more credible.
The App Store that allows you to download 3rd party applications is a new application that will be included in 2.0
I paid $400 for the experience of going through 4 devices, a lot of hassle from Geniues, and two months' of fruitless trips to Apple stores & on the phone, to get a device with a decent screen that wasn't all negative. I guess I feel that, after all that, this whole two-tier upgrade thing is insult to injury.
All my other posts here explain how I feel on lots of things, bad precedents going forward, etc.
The 5 apps in 1.1.3 eat up about 80-100MB of useable space. I'm figuring at 4MB per song, 12 songs per CD, that's about 2 CDs. A half-hour show at the bitrates I use encodes at ~130MB, so I'm rounding up a little, but it's close.
I really wish I had thought to be more observant while I was going through the 1.1.2 -> 1.1.3 update process.
Are you certain that the actual space available for songs on a freshly restored, empty iPod Touch running firmware version 1.1.2 is really any different than the space available for songs on a freshly restored, empty iPod Touch running firmware version 1.1.3?
I ask because I have seen a couple of webpages (and I've linked to them on these forums in the past) in which it is claimed that the iPod Touch has two distinct partitions on its Flash drive - one for the OS, and another for Media. It was claimed on that website that on an 8 GB iPod Touch, the OS partition was 300 MB, and the Media partition took up the whole remainder of the Flash drive.
Assuming for the moment that the Apps distributed with 1.1.3 were installed in the same partition as the OS, then it would follow that the extra space now being used by the Apps was actually previously untouchable by music anyway, so the new use of that space (holding the untouchable Apps) is no more harmful than the previous use (or non-use, as the case may be) of that space.
Ahhhhhh.... now we're getting somewhere. Your anger resides not in this charge, but with getting a faulty device. Actually did you really go through 3 devices before getting one that worked? If so man that sucks. I'd be pissed too.
But I'll reiterate... assuming that they had given you a working Touch from the get go, there's nothing in the updates that give or take away from the Touch that you originally bought. And in contrast to what you and others have claimed, Apple is not charging you anything for using your Touch in the same manner you always have. Further they have no intention of doing so, going forward. You want to be angry at Apple for screwing up the device to begin with, I don't blame you. But your anger exposed here doesn't seem to make any sense to me personally, given what we've determined the real issue to be.
I have, and you started this thread as a gripe. Then, when you take a direction like this:
... you completely annihilate your argument because it become clear that you won't accept any evidence that you might be wrong.
Yeah, we investigated this on another thread, and I made myself a guinea pig in going up from 1.1.2. Out of 14.84GB useable on a 1.1.2 Touch, about 20MB went to "Other." After the upgrade, this jumped to over 100MB. It counts directly against your useable space. The 5 apps are not, as I had hoped, apparently put into that 300MB OS partition.
I'm probably more PO'd then perhaps otherwise, due to this being "yet another issue."
But, I paid an extra $100 for a 16GB because I wanted space. When upgrades contain things I don't want, can't opt-out of, and would have to pay to use (this is the trifecta) that eat into that space, I'm not happy.
Even then, I didn't start a thread on 1.1.3 because I figured this would be a one-time deal. But firmware 2.0 sounds like more of that trifecta. It's the trend & precedent I'm not happy with.
That line was in reaction to a specific comment by a specific person. I've tried to constructively engage everyone here - even that poster, subsequently. I've laid out why I feel I have a legit gripe - not just "OMG
SUKKXX."Part of it is my opinion, and while I'm certainly open to arguments to the contrary, I don't think my opinion can be "wrong" per se. If anything, bits of this discussion on Sarbanes-Oxley have illuminated even more how arbitrary and BS Apple's "it's just b/c of accounting" argument is.
All that said, I'm willing to let this go until we see how much 2.0 actually costs. Again, if it's $1.99, this kvetching might be premature - although no one so far expects under $20. It still leaves the larger issues of two-tiered upgrades, paid bugfixes, and bundled apps you can't opt-out of. I would think people would not be happy there - certainly M$ would be roasted if it did the same - but I could be wrong.
Yes, that's exactly it. The code you download simply is a key to make the apps accessible.
I've just restored my iPod and it's DELETED the software upgrade. Surely I don't have to pay for it AGAIN??
Help me please!!
Help me please!!
if you are on Windows:
Do a search for the folder 'Mobile Applications' and the .ipa file will be there.
On Mac OS X:
~/Library/iTunes/Mobile Applications/
Disable Auto Sync of iPod.
Click Sync
Then it should be there.
Do a search for the folder 'Mobile Applications' and the .ipa file will be there.
On Mac OS X:
~/Library/iTunes/Mobile Applications/
Disable Auto Sync of iPod.
Click Sync
Then it should be there.
Suspicious
Do you work for Apple? I doubt that any sane (and actual) customer would write what you just wrote.
Do you work for Apple? I doubt that any sane (and actual) customer would write what you just wrote.
oh yes, and I am disgusted at yet another charge for touch users. I know where I'm getting it if it's too expensive. iTunes App Store/iTunes Updates. But if I choose to stay on 1.1.4 JB'ed its because there is only sdk support in 2.0 and nothing I would use.
allbrokeup.
allbrokeup.
Bravo Adokimus! For standing up for this, we consumers don't have to take up everything Apple rolls out setting down. Well, there are other smarter people out here that refuses to be fooled by Apple. All these arbitrary treatment to its loyal customers will backfire to them eventually.