Because, Apple.Why, the f*** , should the weather app be an M1-only feature?
First of all: You're comparing two different device categories. Secondly, the original iPod touch had Safari from the very beginning and thirdly, until iPhoneOS 3 (I think) iPod touch users had to oay for full OS updates, NOT certain features.Because, Apple.
They've been doing stuff like that for a very long time. For example, the original iPod touch didn't have an email app, or Safari. You could jailbreak it to get the iPhone's apps, but those apps weren't officially available. Then in January or February of 2008, Steve Jobs announced that the iPod touch would be getting mail and Safari, but in order to unlock those apps, we'd have to pay an unlock fee of $2 or $5 or something like that. 🙄
So, yeah. Apple has a long, rich history of arbitrarily withholding software features.
I don't remember having to pay for full OS updates, but I do remember having to pay for Mail and something else - thought it was Safari but I guess I was mistaken. The point is, Apple has a history of arbitrarily locking out certain software features (or in this case, putting them behind a paywall). People should bear this in mind, to avoid being surprised by this kind of behavior in the future.First of all: You're comparing two different device categories. Secondly, the original iPod touch had Safari from the very beginning and thirdly, until iPhoneOS 3 (I think) iPod touch users had to oay for full OS updates, NOT certain features.
You're remembering wrong. 🤷♂️I don't remember having to pay for full OS updates, but I do remember having to pay for Mail and something else - thought it was Safari but I guess I was mistaken. The point is, Apple has a history of arbitrarily locking out certain software features (or in this case, putting them behind a paywall). People should bear this in mind, to avoid being surprised by this kind of behavior in the future.
Uh, no - I distinctly remember paying to unlock the mail app on my iPod touch. Except it wasn't just $2-3 - it was $19.99. So again, the point is that Apple has a history of arbitrarily locking out certain software features (or in this case, putting them behind a paywall). People should bear this in mind, to avoid being surprised by this kind of behavior in the future.You're remembering wrong. 🤷♂️
I had the original iPod Touch and I definitely had those apps.Because, Apple.
They've been doing stuff like that for a very long time. For example, the original iPod touch didn't have an email app, or Safari. You could jailbreak it to get the iPhone's apps, but those apps weren't officially available. Then in January or February of 2008, Steve Jobs announced that the iPod touch would be getting mail and Safari, but in order to unlock those apps, we'd have to pay an unlock fee of $2 or $5 or something like that. 🙄
So, yeah. Apple has a long, rich history of arbitrarily withholding software features.
Because, Apple.
They've been doing stuff like that for a very long time. For example, the original iPod touch didn't have an email app, or Safari. You could jailbreak it to get the iPhone's apps, but those apps weren't officially available. Then in January or February of 2008, Steve Jobs announced that the iPod touch would be getting mail and Safari, but in order to unlock those apps, we'd have to pay an unlock fee of $2 or $5 or something like that. 🙄
So, yeah. Apple has a long, rich history of arbitrarily withholding software features.
That was the BS story we were fed, yes. And yet they've had no problems bypassing this supposed "accounting requirement" in other cases, bringing new functionality to older devices (Continuity, Handoff, AirDrop, Siri, etc).Having to pay was an accounting requirement that Apple had to comply with
Accounting rules behind iPod touch update charge
An accounting rule that requires companies to charge for upgrades is why Apple charged $19.99 for last month's iPod touch update, analysts say.www.macworld.com
Then you must've bought the iPod touch after January, 2008. Because that's when Steve Jobs announced that Mail, Weather, Stocks and two other iPhone apps (?) were coming to the iPod touch (for $20). The apps were pushed out in iPod touch update 1.1.3 but weren't unlocked until you paid the arbitrary $20 fee.I had the original iPod Touch and I definitely had those apps.
They could be computing the weather forecast on-device.Why, the f*** , should the weather app be an M1-only feature?
Weird isn't it. Some people just have anger issues...Sheesh people: this was an easy one. Yes, all iPads are getting the weather app. Do we really need to have WWIII?
Your example is from over 10 years ago and was the only time an iOS device has charged for an update.That was the BS story we were fed, yes. And yet they've had no problems bypassing this supposed "accounting requirement" in other cases, bringing new functionality to older devices (Continuity, Handoff, AirDrop, Siri, etc).
I mean, the 'pay $20 to unlock a few apps and be able to rearrange your Home Screen icons' thing with the iPod touch is just one example. I think I also had to pay to unlock some Wi-Fi thing on an old Mac, as well. Again, the point is that Apple has a history of arbitrarily locking out certain software features (or in this case, putting them behind a paywall). So when someone here posted that there was no way an app like Weather could possibly be tied to processor-specific devices, I just wanted to point out that Apple has, in fact, done exactly that, in the past. So I wouldn't put it pat them at all. I mean, given their history.
And I think it truly was an error correction Apple had to do to comply with regulations. They initially forgot to put in the marketing fine-print that future software updates may enable new functions and capabilities.Your example is from over 10 years ago and was the only time an iOS device has charged for an update.
Yes. Apple has, in the past, restricted access to certain apps based on device class (iPhone: yes, iPod touch: no). So when someone here posted that there was no way an app like Weather could possibly be tied to processor-specific devices, I just wanted to point out that Apple has in fact done exactly that, in the past. So I wouldn't put it past them at all. I mean, they've done it before.Your example is from over 10 years ago and was the only time an iOS device has charged for an update.
That was the BS story we were fed, yes. And yet they've had no problems bypassing this supposed "accounting requirement" in other cases, bringing new functionality to older devices (Continuity, Handoff, AirDrop, Siri, etc).
Cool. But I'm not sure why people insist on beating this fourteen-year-old horse.It is even true today. It has to do with how you recognise revenue.
For the iPods Apple recognised all the revenue immediately when a device was sold. Therefore it was required for them to charge for upgrades.
For devices like iPhone they only recognise part of it. The rest is recognised over two or three years as they provide OS updates. Basically part of the price you pay for an iPhone includes OS updates, iCloud services, maps etc.