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 iPod touch 2.0
- Thread starter IgnatiusTheKing
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Going with $20 (£12.99) - same as last "Upgrade". And whilst I would have begrudged the £12.99 for the January Upgrade had I bought a touch before it was out, I wouldn't begrudge £12.99 to run 3rd party apps and have Exchange integration.
They've said they don't see it as a profit-making opportunity, and I don't think a fee of more than $20 would be received well by the community in light of that statement.
They've said they don't see it as a profit-making opportunity, and I don't think a fee of more than $20 would be received well by the community in light of that statement.
I'm sure it'll be $20 and I'm more than happy to pay it. The features offered are above and beyond those which I bought the device for.
20 bucks. I'm not paying for it, I'd much rather hack (if it is 20, then that means I can either pay 40 bucks for the jan update and the jun update or hack for free). it is a no brainer. I will be getting the iphone 2, so I won't waste any more money on this ipod touch.
Same here. SJ can take that 'nominal' fee and stick it where the sun don't shine. Greedy pigs ...
Same here. SJ can take that 'nominal' fee and stick it where the sun don't shine. Greedy pigs ...
Do you think Leopard should have been free?
This isn't the same situation, but if you want to go there... Do you think MacBook Pro owners should get Leopard for free because their machines cost more than MacBooks?
Do you think you should be charged for 10.5.2 and every subsequent upgrade after you already bought Leopard on launch day?
Do you think you should pay $20 to install applications on ANY device?
It's like paying to put the toast in your toaster!
This is ********, and I'm tired of it.
It's like paying to put the toast in your toaster!
This is ********, and I'm tired of it.
How is it not the same situation? 10.5 was a major upgrade (lots of new features, etc.); 2.0 will be, as well.
If you'll notice, the SDK is for the iPhone, not the iPod touch. That is the way Apple is marketing it, that is the way developers will be approaching it. The touch, as much as I love it, is like the retarded cousin of the iPhone and as such, will be treated that way. If you don't want to pay for major updates, the solution is simple: buy an iPhone.
Attachments
Again, 2.0 is to the iPod touch what 10.5 is to a Mac.
Your argument would make a lot more sense if we were talking about 2.0.2.
Wirelessly posted (iTouch 1.1.3 (JB'd): Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A93 Safari/419.3)
I think you guys are deluding yourselves if you really believe Apple will charge the same amount ($20) as they did for 1.1.3. The January app pack cost $20, for five already developed apps! This new 2.0 firmware allows for possibly 100's of apps to be installed - you think that has the same value as five already-developed apps??
I think you guys are deluding yourselves if you really believe Apple will charge the same amount ($20) as they did for 1.1.3. The January app pack cost $20, for five already developed apps! This new 2.0 firmware allows for possibly 100's of apps to be installed - you think that has the same value as five already-developed apps??
Wirelessly posted (iTouch 1.1.3 (JB'd): Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A93 Safari/419.3)
No, and I paid for Leopard on launch day.
The difference is, some people will be getting this update for free. Apple is choosing to screw the rest of us, and I find that objectionable.
IgnatiusTheKing said:Same here. SJ can take that 'nominal' fee and stick it where the sun don't shine. Greedy pigs ...
Do you think Leopard should have been free?
No, and I paid for Leopard on launch day.
The difference is, some people will be getting this update for free. Apple is choosing to screw the rest of us, and I find that objectionable.
I don't think Apple can afford to charge $20 again.
The backlash was immense! They want this SDK to get its feet off the ground. $5 tops.
You didn't pay for 1.1.3. That was free. You paid for the application package, which you can consider the equivalent to shareware on the Mac.
No, I paid for my wiggly icons and webclips. I also paid to get that damned Adware Advertisement in iTunes to get out of my face.
Perhaps that's what you purchased it for, but those are, as advertised, features of the application package. As for the advertisement, there was a "No thanks" button on the lower left which put it to rest permanently.
Oh, but it didn't do ANYTHING but give an error message. The Ad could NOT be disabled without a purchase.
If that's the case, then I'm sorry that your experience with this ad was this awful. Apple's marketing team is a clever one; they squeezed $20 out of you by annoyance and wiggling icons.
Sure. Wouldn't it be great if every single person in the world lived in the US? It's easy for you guys to make comments like this, but you seem to overlook the fact that for most of the world's population, buying an iPhone is impossible. So, we just get screwed?