Why you shouldn't get mad for buying the iPhone Apps

Discussion in 'iPod touch' started by TheSpaz, Jan 15, 2008.

  1. TheSpaz macrumors 604

    TheSpaz

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    #1
    Here's the reason why you shouldn't get mad for buying the iPhone Apps:

    Lets say you bought a MacBook and it came with 1GB of RAM and then a few months later, they release MacBooks with 2GB of RAM stock (for the same price they were charging for the old ones). Should the people who bought the first MacBook get angry and demand Apple to give them the extra 1GB of RAM for free now since it "should" have come with 2GB in the first place? No, people deal with it... it's an upgrade and Apple doesn't have to bow to the people who bought the first ones with the lower specs... that's just the computer industry for you.

    Now, with the iPod touch... it's the SAME situation. You bought something... you KNEW what you were buying and now they have an upgrade that they are including in the new iPod touches but, the old ones have to pay for the upgrade... that's what you get when you buy technology... Apple doesn't have to bow to you... you bow to Apple.

    I'm not mad about this at all. I think Apple has the right to charge their customers for the 5 new software Apps. I know you can hack it and get them for free... but, that's not really legal and not everyone knows how to hack their iPod touches or wants to void their warranty.

    I embrace the change, and I don't care about 20 stinking dollars.... it's just the way it goes.

    I'm not an Apple fan-boy though because I don't always agree with everything Apple does but, this particular case... I don't mind for some reason.
     
  2. dtancu macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Location:
    Bucharest/Romania
    #2
    My dear Sir,

    You flawless logic has a big hole in it: what do we do in all those countries where we WANT to buy the famous 5 apps but we can't, since iTMS is not available?
    Our money is as good as yours, and we all paid the same amount for our Touch. And everybody bought it with hard earned cash, not stole the damn iPod.
     
  3. Lordillingworth macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Location:
    Shropshire, UK
    #3
    how about this, early adopters have bought a product, likely to have showed other people how good it is, then be told by the company they have been promoting that they have to pay for something that the people who are buying the product you have advertised to them will get for free.

    This is merely a software update, and it is only a selection of software that has already been up and running on the iphone for ages so it isn't as if they had to design and develop these apps and spend lots of time and money to make them work on the touch. If apple had to put any thought or efforts into this update i could understand a charge to cover the costs and make a return on the investment. But when these things already existed it is another story all together.
     
  4. TheSpaz thread starter macrumors 604

    TheSpaz

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    #4
    Can't help you there. I live in the USA.
     
  5. TheSpaz thread starter macrumors 604

    TheSpaz

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    #5
    I guess I'm just excited I don't have to mess with Jailbreaking anymore... I really don't like breaking laws (and I'm pretty sure that installing iPhone apps on an iPod touch breaks the EULA for the iPod touch). Now, the people who are installing the iPhone software on the iPod touch for free are breaking the law even more because they are not paying for what should be payed for... legally speaking (NOT "should" as in Apple SHOULD make us pay.) That's my view. I'd rather pay for stuff than to steal it.... that's just how I am... however, up until now, there WAS NO WAY to pay to have the iPhone apps, so the only way to get them was to steal it but, now that there's a legal way, I'd rather do that.
     
  6. dtancu macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Location:
    Bucharest/Romania
    #6
    Then you understand why a lot of people SHOULD get mad about buying the 5 damn apps.
    Selling Apple products OFFICIALLY in countries where you cannot provide afterwards at least a functional mechanism for buying firmware updates gives a lot of people the right to get very mad about the system employed by Apple to update this bloody thing.
     
  7. mrgreen4242 macrumors 601

    mrgreen4242

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    #7
    This is completely and totally different. The example you give adds something of intrinsic cost to the device. RAM modules cost money. The amount they cost may have changed between now and then, but it has a price.

    This software update on the other hand does not have any intrinsic cost. If it was NEW software that they paid someone to develop it would have an actual value, an investment that they needed to recoup on.

    It's not. It's something that they've already developed and are just removing an artificial limitation to let more people use it.

    I'm not saying that Apple was under any obligation to give this update away for free, however the way they've gone about it (the price tag, and the fact it's free with new purchases) will cost them a lot of public good will.

    BTW, Jailbreaking doesn't violate any laws, nor does installing the iPhone software. Even if it is in an EULA, it's not a crime. It's an unenforcable contact clause.

    What IS illegal though is distributing the iPhone apps binaries, and maybe downloading them depending on where you live and how you interpret the law.
     
  8. Aaleck macrumors 6502a

    Aaleck

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    #8
    Your reasoning is flawd. You're actually paying for something then. Software, you can copy over and over and over.

    Its not the fact that it costs money to get it, its the fact that its free if you buy a new one.
     
  9. 66217 Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    #9
    And the fact that even if I wanted to buy one, I can't, because I don't have an iTunes Store.
     
  10. TheSpaz thread starter macrumors 604

    TheSpaz

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    #10
    I guess I'm just failing to see the big deal about it. You know... What they (Apple) COULD have done is not released the 5 iPhone Apps for the iPod touch all together and let everyone stay on 1.1.2 for as long as they could stand until people figure out how to hack the iPod each time there's an update out. Frankly, I'm sick of having to hack the iPod everytime there's new software for it and I'd rather just have the simpleness of a virgin iPod that is what Apple intended it to be. Besides, I find that 90% of the Apps that are on the installer.app are garbage and just take up memory and SpringBoard space. I'm quite happy about this change... now everyone hates me... awesome.
     
  11. delude macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #11
    I see your point TheSpaz, but I think I am generally annoyed what is going to happen with the SDK and apps in the future as well. It will be much more complicated, and will take longer for apps to be released, with maybe more restrictions and added costs. I know that it will probably be safer if Apple check it all and get to see the source code etc, but I’d prefer it to be more open to its potential with quicker updates and a wider variety of apps.
     
  12. Ubuntu macrumors 68000

    Ubuntu

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK/US
    #12
    But you could argue that the iPod touch was deliberately restricted beforehand.
     
  13. Dale Sorel macrumors 6502a

    Dale Sorel

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    #13
    I bought my touch on January 1 and knew I'd be within the 14 day return period come Macworld. I called a rep at Apple Support and they fixed it up so I could get credited for the full purchase price after I buy the software. Now if I could only download v1.1.3 :mad:
     
  14. IgnatiusTheKing macrumors 68040

    IgnatiusTheKing

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Location:
    das Fort
    #14
    I bought an iMac right after Leopard was released. I got it free. Someone who bought the exact same iMac a month or two before has to pay $129 for Leopard. Should he be angry and demand Apple give him the software free or should he realize that anytime he buys something, there is a 100% chance that something better will come along one day, be it a week or a decade later.
     
  15. Dale Sorel macrumors 6502a

    Dale Sorel

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    #15
    I just bought a Touch on January 1, and know I'd be within the 14 day return period when Macworld hit. I just got off the phone with an Apple rep who set me up so I will get a full credit for the new software.
     
  16. Mikey B macrumors 65816

    Mikey B

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    Location:
    the island
    #16
    This argument can go around in circles forever. Here's my sad story- I bought my macbook that has the core duo, and what seemed like the blink of an eye later, the core 2 duo was released. Was I mad? Hell yeah, but that is the nature of technology. I just upgraded to 1.1.3 and un-jailbroke my touch. And I do have mixed emotions about it. I miss summerboard the most. Like a previous poster said, I felt that a lot of the apps on installer were pretty useless. Kind of cool, but I wasn't using them much. The ones I did use a lot were the iphone apps, and for what I see as a nominal fee, $20, I can get them legally. It is illegal to download them to a jailbroken ipod. It isn't illegal to jailbreak your ipod by any means, but those apps are the property of a third party that has no interest in distributing them for free. Sucks, but that's life. I think I'm just going to wait and see what the SDK brings to the table, if the apps are totally useless, than I'll probably jailbreak again. But can we really expect Apple to give us stuff for free? $20 is $4 per app, really not too bad in my book. Plus you get the benefit of bug fixes and a more stable firmware (which was free). I totally understand being miffed about the fee, but, Apple is a business, and that really is the bottom line.
     

Share This Page