Slashdot Mirror
Apple To Charge for Some iApps
randomErr writes "News.com has this story that according to sources familiar with the plans, Apple is expected to announce at the Macworld Expo in San Francisco Tuesday that consumers will have to pay for new versions of iDVD, iPhoto and iMovie. Previously, Apple had offered upgrades to its digital media, or 'i' applications, for free."
i've been talking with someone who's had inside inf before, including the LCD iMac info, and the god awful flower power macs.
this looks like it's true. as long as it's only upgrades you pay for, i don't see that it's that big of a deal. get a new machine and you get the new software for free anyway, that's pretty much how it is now.
maybe if they can make money off it they'll update iMovie and iPhoto, both need it badly.
Seriously though. Apple is a corporation. Besides the "community/family" factor, they need to boost the stock prices.
I'm not an avid Mac user, but I would rather pay for few small upgrades from Apple which would amount to $30 bucks, than to switch Office suite versions twice a year.
Gee, is anyone really surprised Apple is starting to use the shareware model? These iApps require significant investments of time and money and they have to recoup their investment somehow. Apple is a publically traded company you know...
Besides the consumer application of many of these iApps, I also know lots of folks (including myself) that are using them for scientific and business purposes and then upgrading to the more expensive Pro apps when needs outstrip the consumer products. So, by getting these application "free" when you purchase a new computer and then paying to get the latest versions combined with using them as a portal to the Pro stuff, it seems to be a pretty good business model. If the iApps don't cost too much, are helping me to be more productive and are well written, more power to them.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
As far as iDVD goes, I could see them charging for upgrades, or if you want to use it with a non-OEM/External DVD-R drive. That would actually be an improvement over the current situation.
--
The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.
While I do have a few gripes w/ Apple, this is a perfectly decent strategy. Every machine will come with the iApps included, and if you don't need upgrades, don't pay for them.
I don't remember anything in my purchase that said upgrades to all software would be free forever....
As someone who is waiting for a compelling reason to buy a new mac I agree that compared to Wintel hardware mac hardware is overpriced.
.Mac. Now I definately will not be switching if the big annoucement at the expo is to charge for the Iapps. These apps along with .mac should be free to encourage people to switch.
.mac and now this a lot of people are going to see the light finally.
Ive tried several of the iApps and think they are pretty nice applications and I used to think a good reason for switching was the *FREE*
My big problem with Apple is they dont really seem to care about getting new customers as much as they just want to take advantage of the existing loyal customers. These people arent going to hang around forever. With the charging 129 for an upgrade that finally brought performance to the level originally promised, taking away the formerly free
Oh, and the next version is for a fee.
How is this any sort of bait and switch? It's a lot like shareware software that gives you a trial version with no expiration, but if you pay you can unlock the full features... which is what Apple has been doing with Quicktime vs. Quicktime Pro for years.
And as for Microsoft not ever pulling this, what about Word 95, Word 96, Word 97, Word 98, Word 99, Word ME, Word 2000, Word 2001, Word XP, etc. You complain about things getting EOL'd with every major upgrade, but you forget the primary Apple business model - they make money on hardware, not software. Most users get a Mac and stick with the operating system on it and never upgrade. When they buy a new machine, that's when they upgrade to a new OS. Very few Mac people ever upgrade their OS independantly of the hardware.
Additionally, the incremental upgrades of Mac OS are free - they only charge when it's a major change.
For instance, 7.0 to 7.1 was free. 7.5 to 7.6 was free. 8.0 to 8.1 was free. 8.5 to 8.6 was free. 9.0 to 9.1 to 9.2 was free. X to X.1 was free. Windows has done the same thing - patches and service packs are (usually) free, but major changes - 95 to 98 to ME to XP cost money.
Stop bitching 'cause you don't understand the business and think you should be given everything.
-T
No, if you bought the computer with the DVD-ROM, then it comes with iDVD for free.
The reason you can't crack the player to run on other hardware is that Apple wasn't concerned about protecting their player - rather they didn't want to have to deal with thousands of different models of DVD-ROMs requiring thousands of different drivers. With an Apple DVD-ROM, you know that it will work perfectly, no need for drivers or any sort of configuration.
-T
Yes, but when 10.3 appears all this software will get some mysterious 'incompatibility' with the new OS. Guess what fixes that?
If the software is EOL'd every 6 months the hardware becomes useless.
What, your machine just turns into a lump of inert plastic? What ever happened to buying a piece of technology that does what you want and using it until what you want something better?
There are millions of Mac users with ancient machines running exactly the same software they set them up with years ago. The machine worked fine for them then, and works the same way now.
There's no one holding a gun to your head forcing you to "upgrade".
More likely, what's happening is that you want to upgrade, because the new software or hardware does something your old system doesn't. Guess what, time to pay for something new. It's not a $1500 lifetime membership to everything Apple will ever invent.
IMHO, software companies created this brain damaged thought process when they beat it into people's heads that it was a license instead of a purchase. Maybe if they started making it clear that we're buying a physical product, people wouldn't feel such entitlement to every future iteration. Honda doesn't send you the latest model every year for any less than the full price, why should Apple?
-pmb
I've heard they were putting a lot of work into properly Cocoaizing iPhoto for the next release, a serious upgrade. You can tell with the 10.2.3 update that it, along with iTunes, aren't really properly Cocoaized because the stoplight buttons don't look right anymore.
--hongpong.com
Yes, but when 10.3 appears all this software will get some mysterious 'incompatibility' with the new OS. Guess what fixes that?
The fact that those iApps probably will ship with 10.3, if 10.3 is a pay-for upgrade?
Apple doesn't intentionally break software with new OS versions.
And if those iApps do break in 10.3, and do not ship as new versions in 10.3, perhaps your friends will choose not to upgrade to 10.3.
Or maybe 10.3 will be so amazing they they will want to pay for both 10.3, and the updated iApps. They do pay for software they find useful, right?
No one is forcing people to upgrade. More likely, you're a power user who never considered the idea that you don't have to be running the latest and greatest software of the given moment, and it's psychologically traumatizing to consider the possibility of not upgrading.
-pmb
> $50 for iDVD, iMovie, and iPhoto together
.Mac, the service didn't get any better; I still have problems getting my email. In short, they'd better make iPhoto a helluva lot better if they want my money.
.Mac, Apple built their value proposition on a number of factors, like someone buying a virus checker every year (without upgrading), buying web space, buying email, etc. The problem is if you only want one or two of these items, their value proposition falls apart. For example, there aren't any Mac OS X viruses, so what's the point of Virux? I see the same problem with the proposed 3 app bundle. I am only interested in iPhoto (and see #1 for limitations on that), but I have no need for iMovie (I have no DV camera) or iDVD (I don't have a DVD burner in my PowerBook). If they bundle the three together, it may help their, "but you get 3 applications for only $79 (or whatever)", but the point is the other two are basically shovelware if you don't have the entry hardware.
.Mac. Apparently fewer than 200,000 people signed up for the service, which is likely a 5-10% take rate. That take rate doesn't bode well for Apple's model to make .Mac a heavy source of revenue.
.Mac, charge for iPhoto, iDVD, iMovie, and who knows what else?) and a recuring revenue stream? Or is it to grow adoption of Mac OS X and gain overall market share? I'm not sure they can do both at the same time since the former means milking their installed base, while the latter means actually growing their business.
I don't mind Apple charging for software that is worth it ; iTunes and iPhoto (maybe) are worth the money.
However, Apple has two problems:
1. Software for money is held to a higher standard than free software. iTunes is incredible: it's fast, has plenty of features, and works great. iPhoto on the other hand is slow, very slow, and extremely slow. Plus you can't combine photo albums, and it doesn't perform well when you have thousands of pictures. So if Apple is going to start charging for software it should perform to a higher standard. Unfortunately, when Apple dumped the for-free iTools for the $99/year
2. Bundling! It will be really annoying if Apple makes you buy iDVD, iMovie, and iPhoto together. Like
Somebody at Apple is playing a dangerous game where they believe that Apple purchasers have an inflexible view towards price. That is, Apple purchasers will pay anywhere from $0 to a premium price because it's from Apple. While it's true that Apple users will pay more for Apple products because they're generally of higher quality, Apple users aren't stupid when it comes to value propositions. Exhibit A is
What Apple needs to do is figure out what their goals are: is it to gain more short term revenue (charge for
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
Lets sit back and ONCE AGAIN remind everyone that rumors are, at best, rumors. Now that we've done this, let's just look at the prices involved...
If the rumors are true, Apple wants to charge users $50.00 to update three pieces of software: iPhoto, iDVD, and iMovie. The rumor article even doesn't coroborate if Apple is even considering of doing something similar with it's other applications, just speculating that if the rumor is true it might be the first move toward that.
Now, let's assume the first rumor is true. That the three apps named - iPhoto, iMovie, and iDVD - are going to charge for updates. It goes on to state that iPhoto manages your digital photos, where iMovie and iDVD allow you to edit digital videos and burn them to DVD. Now, having worked the retail sector before, this seems like a very good price for this. However, just to be certain, lets look at the prices of a few competitors...
After searching around on CompUSA's website, this is what I found. First, Pinnacle Studio version 8. After checking what software I could find that would actually burn MOVIES onto DVD, I ran across this particular title. This does the job (I'm speculating here, give or take a few features) of iMovie and iDVD. As for Photos, lets just go with Ulead PhotoExplorer Pro 7.0, again with the same disclaimer: based on speculation from knowing the basics of what the applications do, give or take some features.
Now let's compare the prices.
the Mac iBundle
iMovie, iPhoto, iDVD: $50.00
TOTAL: $50.00 + applicable tax
Ulead + Pinnacle Studio
Pinnacle: $99.99
Ulead: $24.99
TOTAL: $124.98 + applicable tax
All in all paying $50.00 for all three apps would not be a horrible fate by any means. Slightly annoying in that it used to be free, but not ripping anyone off either.
----- I want my LART.
A lot of shareware authors, particularly those with programs that are fairly popular have been switching to a new registration scheme that this Apple upgrade policy reminds me of.
Shareware authors tend to call it something like "upgrade protection". Basically when you register the software, you get any updates for some period of time (usually a year) afterwards. If you want to upgrade again after that, you must purchase the upgrade protection fee.
I know all the arguments why they do it, how they need the money, etc.
But it makes me mad, and I refuse to play that game.
I registered a certain shareware internet application a couple years ago that had always been "free upgrades" ever since version 1.0 (it was version 3.x when I purchased it). The version AFTER I got mine, the author decided to start this upgrade protection nonsense. No continuing free versions for previous customers, we all get to play the protection racket game.
Needless to say, I immediately went looking for a keygen and made myself a valid key for the new versions.
I know everyone on their moral highground will defend the author and probably give me a hard time. So be it, I can accept that.
Had I known about this policy before making my purchase, I would've chosen another product to spend my money on. My _trust_ was violated, regardless of the legality of his actions.
In the marketing world, perception is everything - Apple's decision may make sense on budgetary, ethical, and legal footings, but if it annoys people as much as this shareware author's new policy annoyed me, Apple will get some negative PR.
Not strong, not particularly mean and nasty PR, but a lot of "Apple just isn't quite as good a company as I thought it was". And that cooling of the warm and fuzzy feelings on which Apple so bases their marketing and promotional campaigns, could be very dangerous indeed.
N.
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
iPhoto is free, iMovie and iDVD have always required payment for new versions.
This is NOT news.
Join the Free Software Foundation
And, regardless of what people want to believe or not on Apple being different, they have been time and time again. They've expiremented with various designs of computers and computing devices (both iMac designs, the cube, the iBook, the All-in-One systems dating back to the origional macs and going through the performa and powerPC's and the precursor to the origional iMacs, using PowerPC chips at a time when everyone was going with intel or other x86 designs, the Apple Newton which helped pave the way for modern PDA's, etc...). I've watched through the years as features Apple introduced seeped it's way into the PC world.
They are different in the way that they've done most things. However they are still a company that has employees and bills that need to be paid. You can't forget this.
Do people think that Apple is different? Yes. Is that the only thing that makes them different? No. Does being different always benefit them? Of course not. However, them charging for updates hardly makes them the same as every other company out there.
----- I want my LART.