Bartman, the article references the well known (or at least I thought) fact that the AppleTV is also accounts for by Apple on a subscription basis. It has nothing to with with the iPhone's AT&T service contract. It's an accounting thing.

what about apple tv? isnt it basically an ipod for your tv? apple tv 2.0 software is given away free (which really surprized me) and apple should gave away the touch's software.. someone is plain greedy

But the AppleTV is also classifed as a subscription device and can get 'free' updates (up to the point it becomes popular, then they'll start charging for them, or stop releasing them, in order to get you to upgrade).

- Apple could add Time Machine support to AEBS, not because it was claimed to be there, but because the failure to work with AEBS can be classified as a bug, more than anything else. Either way, they won't, most likely. The direct attached drive of Time Capsule is a better solution.

Couldn't the lack of "Mail" be considered a bug? "Hey, we didn't release it because it was buggy....". Couldn't the MBP's 'n' support be listed as a bug ("Damn, the software to make it work isn't working correctly". Anything can be listed as a 'bug'. It's just a question whether it's in Apple's interest to charge for it.

Notice, BTW, they didn't charge for the update to add support for viewing rented content. Nor did they charge a fee to nano owners, where (according to what I just read on Macintouch) the 1.1.1 update added 'lyrics' support.

"Paying $400 for this product was my choice, but then having to pay $20 for its software is fraudulent."

Get a grip on yourself - how is this fraudulent? You bought a product knowing exactly what it could do - you weren't promised anything additional. Now that additional functions are available, if you want them, you can have them. If you don't want them, or don't want to pay for them, then don't. Your iPod Touch will still do everything it has always done, which seemed to be fine with you when you bought it.

I also think the fee is for the locator service. Apple gets a fee for use already for the iPhone so its coming from that money there.

Hey, I bought a car last week and now I have to pay for gas. There was gas in the tank when I got it, so there should always be gas in the tank (paid for by someone else) when I drive it. Right???

:-)

From what I understand, the Sarbanes & Oxley Act is why this happens.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarbanes-Oxley_Act

It's absolutely an accounting rule. If they didn't charge for the upgrade then they wouldn't be able to recognize the revenue from the iPod until the date that the upgrade came out. It becomes a nightmare.

Now ... as to why it's $20 and not $2 .... Got me. I guess you have to pay those accountants. :-)

at the nudie bar for one night and gave the $20 to Apple. So what's the big deal? Nobody died and nobody went bankrupt. If you look at the big picture, $20 in the life of an American is a fairly insignificant amount. The presidential candidates are pissing away your money like nobody's business and what do the losing constituents get out of it. Nothing. Nada. Zip.

20 lousy bucks. Four lousy ballpark franks. Get a grip, people.

Fake Steve Jobs has a term for all you whiners wanting everything to be free and damning Apple for being "greedy".

Freetards. Siooma!

If you think Apple is "greedy", "fraudulent", and "unethical" then there's a simple solution. Sell your Touch on ebay and go buy a Zune. Your ethical dilemma is solved. Simple wasn't it.

Don't you have to pay when you download games from the iTunes store to your iPod? How is that different from downloading new programs to your iPod, especially if you are paying a licensing fee for certain aspects of the application.

If they are forced to charge, just to fulfill a law, there is no reason not to charge at COST. Which is more likely around a couple of bucks. The profit they are making off of this is unacceptable as the new machines already have this "upgrade".

You seem to think that it is okay to accept being "nickel-and-dimed" is okay. For you, go for it, piss away a little here and a little there. I for one won't pay unnecessary fees.

As to the posted suggestion about getting rid of the iPod and getting a Zune...nah, but I did get rid of the iPod and buy a nice Sony Walkman that sounds so much better than the iPod (no software needed to trasfer files) that it practically makes my dog cry.

No more rotten Apples for me. Look great, but taste nasty!!!

Steve Jobs has a term for all you willingly pay the $20 for this upgrade and future upgrades - suckers.

It's Apple's product, they can do what they want. If they get enough customer backlash over it then you will see something similar to the $200 in store credit over the iPhone price drops.

I'm not gonna be mad at any company for making poor PR choices, I'm just going to voice how it has effected my choices in purchasing that companies product. If they get enough of negative feedback (not angry, angry is just stupid) then they will adjust, cause if they don't sell products they don't make money.

What is the controversy? They are charging $20 for the upgrade because their marketing department has determined that there are enough people willing to pay that to make it profitable for the company. There is no secret law or accounting trick. It was a business decision. Anyone who has studied economics would understand this.

lamewing: "there is no reason not to charge at COST"

Well, let's see...Apple is a publicly traded company with a whole lot of shareholders that expect them to make a profit so the value of the company, and thus the shares, goes up.

I guess while we are at it, let's make Ford, GE, Microsoft, and Kraft all register as not-for-profit organizations and tell them they need to start selling all their products at cost. Brilliant!

Apple is a business. They need to make money. Not only to pay to produce the product you purchased, but also to fund development of new products. And the future upgrades/bug fixes you'll be getting, may of which will be free, for your iPod touch.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. Nobody is forcing you. If enough people don't think it's worth it, Apple will need to adjust something. But I suspect that won't be the case and you will be in the minority.

You know, if they were charging everyone for the update, that is one thing. But to charge the folks who bought the Touch a few months earlier and yet include it in the more recently released models is clearly what I meant.

Well, I guess I am in the minority, but I would MUCH rather see something like: 1. disk mode. 2. tablet-like features for note taking, etc, voice recording, etc. 3. bluetooth capability to hook up something like a bluetooth keyboard. 4. replaceable battery

Ender, I really don't like folks who act as idiots and take a comment to the extreme (it the Ford, Kraft, etc comment) when you know exactly what I mean. To charge only a portion of the customers for a product..why aren't the new machines $20.00 more exopensive..is bad, bad business.

No more rotten Apple for me...and this comes from someone who has been using Apple's since the time of the Apple IIe/IIc....sigh

...here's the REAL question: when they inevitably come out with another upgrade in a few more months, are we gonna have to pay $20 for that one too? Are we gonna end up paying $40 or $60 a year to keep our Touches up-to-date, on top of the $500 we spent up front?

Why didn't they have a problem with this when it was released? This isn't an analysis and it should not be considered news. I got the upgrade so I wouldn't have to hassle with downgrading to get a jail broken iPod Touch to work.

Mac OS 10.5.2 added DVD sharing and they didn't charge $20. I wonder what happened to accountancy there?