Speculation: Apple to charge $$ for future iPhone apps?

DeathBySnuggles

New Member
Bronze
Jul 5, 2007
88
0
0
Tampa, Fl
#1
My phone is modded, lots of those nifty apps installed that these genius coders have made. The features of the new update barely registered on the intrigue scale, no way in hell worth losing my apps and customs for in my opinion. But this got me thinking.

It seems like Apple went out of their way to develop this new update and put the kabash on the current modding techniques. Why? They could have just focused on adding the new features. But they went ahead and made it so that after the update the phone could not be modded (yet) and I'm sure that cost them a lot of money in man hours to code. Again, why? You already bought the phone. If you brick it because of software mods, you either buy a new phone or pay for service to fix. the only reason I see to spend the money on locking out outside coders is if you are looking to monopolize your own revenue stream. Why would Apple spend time and money making it so that you couldn't install ApolloIM? Because they are going to release iChat soon? Who cares, unless they plan on charging for it. Then it all makes sense. Block the ability to install non-Apple apps and if you want the software you have to pay.

I'm just speculating, but I can't see any other reason why there would be so much invested in locking out coders. I love this phone, mostly because of the apps other people have made. Without that I would be disappointed. I had an HTC Wizard (Cingular 8125) prior to this phone and I felt the same way about it. Out of the box it lacked finesse. But once you started putting other software on it and tweaking it, it became a lot of fun. I think Apple's stance on 3rd party apps at the moment is rather discouraging and conversely I encourage the coders out there to stop working on new apps and try answering the common wish lists of iPhone users. If Apple doesn't want to give us copy paste, a2dp, etc let the coders. I had a2dp on my HTC long before it was made available by HTC.

End rant.
 

greenjbhsd

Member
Silver
Jul 13, 2007
571
0
16
#2
I would not be surprised if they had some sort of application suite that you could pick apps from in a piecemeal manner and be charged a small fee to use them. Depending what they are it could be good, and of course it could be horrible since they will not allow others to provide the items that many deem as "missed" by the phone.

If nothing else this recent patch does show that they are at least working on the code and not dropping the phone like some have posted. It does not show that they are necessarily giving us what we want, but at least they are working on the device still which some did post that Apple had stopped doing since we did not get an update every day.
 

SpongebObiWan

Member
Bronze
Aug 25, 2007
218
0
16
#3
My phone is modded, lots of those nifty apps installed that these genius coders have made. The features of the new update barely registered on the intrigue scale, no way in hell worth losing my apps and customs for in my opinion. But this got me thinking.

It seems like Apple went out of their way to develop this new update and put the kabash on the current modding techniques. Why? They could have just focused on adding the new features. But they went ahead and made it so that after the update the phone could not be modded (yet) and I'm sure that cost them a lot of money in man hours to code. Again, why? You already bought the phone. If you brick it because of software mods, you either buy a new phone or pay for service to fix. the only reason I see to spend the money on locking out outside coders is if you are looking to monopolize your own revenue stream. Why would Apple spend time and money making it so that you couldn't install ApolloIM? Because they are going to release iChat soon? Who cares, unless they plan on charging for it. Then it all makes sense. Block the ability to install non-Apple apps and if you want the software you have to pay.

I'm just speculating, but I can't see any other reason why there would be so much invested in locking out coders. I love this phone, mostly because of the apps other people have made. Without that I would be disappointed. I had an HTC Wizard (Cingular 8125) prior to this phone and I felt the same way about it. Out of the box it lacked finesse. But once you started putting other software on it and tweaking it, it became a lot of fun. I think Apple's stance on 3rd party apps at the moment is rather discouraging and conversely I encourage the coders out there to stop working on new apps and try answering the common wish lists of iPhone users. If Apple doesn't want to give us copy paste, a2dp, etc let the coders. I had a2dp on my HTC long before it was made available by HTC.

End rant.
I posted this in the modification section earlier, but I'll paste it here as my response to your post:

Was Apple breaking mods deliberate?
IMHO, the act of Apple breaking the ability to jailbreak and modify one's iPhone, or even to unlock one's iPhone, was a deliberate act. I am not suggesting it was a malicious act, designed merely to antagonize those that have done this. But I am pretty sure that to many modders and unlockers, it will appear as a malicious act.

It is my opinion that this was predominantly about revenue and revenue possibilities. If you consider all the applications that third party developers have already come up with (but are now rendered useless by Apple), you can begin to see just how beneficial having control over these apps could benefit a company such as Apple or even AT&T.

For example, one application that was recently introduced, though not fully developed yet, was a GPS locating program. Other carriers are charging anywhere's from one minute's worth of talk time for each locating episode, to $40/month premium for this service. Just think of the revenue possibilities of only this one application. Now, multiply that by some unknown number that would represent other of the hundreds of applications already developed by third party developers that people would be willing to pay for. Now multiply this number by future applications that might be developed (though it is unclear yet whether third party developers will ever have this chance now).

From Apple's perspective (and I might add, from every other profit driven company in existence) this is possible money out of their cash drawer. And I'm quite certain this is precisely how Apple viewed this and why they included this mod breaking software in their update.

I can't imagine that Apple did not know that this would happen and that this was merely some "fluke" caused inadvertently by the few upgrades they did make to the iPhone. Apple personnel surely monitor sites such as this one and many others, and they are well aware of all the unlocking techniques and jailbreaking and modifying techniques. And quite frankly, I would be surprised to find out that they did not actually unlock and jailbreak test phones in the development of these current upgrades to the iPhone, and are well aware of the consequences to unlocked and modded phone.

That was precisely their reasoning behind the warning put out by Apple just days before the upgrade. That was merely a CYA (cover your behind) maneuver on Apple's part, to protect them (they hoped) from the backlash they were about to receive as a result of the upgrade. Now, they could always come back with the "we warned everybody in advance" response. And I expect today and in the next few days to come, you will see this from Apple.

I can almost visualize in my mind, as Apple's software developer leaders are sitting around discussing the possible ramifications after seeing the results in their own test phones. Most likely, Steve Jobs was present. And somebody likely said "We're going to receive a lot of flack about this, you know?" And then somebody else, maybe even Jobs himself, responded with "Well, let's just issue a warning a few days before the upgrade is released. That will cover us. But this is a step we must take if we hope to cash in on these program possibilities in the future".
 
Last edited by a moderator:

scott99

Member
Bronze
Sep 5, 2007
131
3
18
Great Neck, NYC
#4
I wouldn't have a problem paying for a small amount for something like GPS or IM. Maybe a purchase from iTunes, like you would buy a game or song. I would gladly pay $4.99 for GPS or IM.
 
Jul 23, 2007
205
0
16
#5
I would rather have Apple let me sign a warranty void and let me use 3rd party apps unfettered.
 

iCheez

New Member
Sep 4, 2007
11
0
0
#6
It's all about product support. Why would Apple publicly support modding, then deal with the headaches of supporting it if a couple of guys in a basement created an app that locked your phone.

If they certifiy legit software companies to create third-party apps, then it would be a different story. The software company would charge you for the app and support it.

Apple will continue to create branded apps to add the phone, if you buy a new phone it comes with it. If you already have the phone, you pay for the app.

This is not a new concept, Apple done this for years. For reference see iLife. But a new computer, it comes with it. Have an old computer, go buy an incredibly powerful bundle of software for $80. With that structure, who loses?
 

kdarling

New Member
Bronze
Jun 20, 2007
425
1
0
NJ, NC, CO
#7
Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer said this at the July quarter earnings call:

"As we discussed previously, we plan to build on today's tremendous iPhone foundation by incorporating new software features and applications into the iPhone over time at no charge to customers. As a result, we have adopted subscription accounting for the iPhone handset sales and are recognizing the associated revenue and cost of goods sold over 24 months. "

Of course, this doesn't mean they won't ALSO have applications that they'll charge for. After all, they already gave us the iTunes store app for free. Haha.
 

mparkes

New Member
Jul 17, 2007
20
0
0
#8
Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer said this at the July quarter earnings call:

"As we discussed previously, we plan to build on today's tremendous iPhone foundation by incorporating new software features and applications into the iPhone over time at no charge to customers. As a result, we have adopted subscription accounting for the iPhone handset sales and are recognizing the associated revenue and cost of goods sold over 24 months. "

Of course, this doesn't mean they won't ALSO have applications that they'll charge for. After all, they already gave us the iTunes store app for free. Haha.
Yes, they could give us "copy and paste" functionality for free, and only charge 1 cent for each time you actually copy or paste something! :)
 

tdefriez

New Member
Bronze
Jul 2, 2007
139
0
0
#9
And these application will be.....

Web-based.....

This is the only application base that Apple supports officially on iPhone.

Whilst this works for such things as stock quotes, weather and YouTube videos (2 of the 3 are useful to me) there are certain programs and files better stored locally. Why did more of the local 3rd party application take off? They where local to the device.

Also, if this update, is a view of the future or a lets test the waters check then I expect the attached statement to change - what is the first new application to added by Apple? A program so you can buy music, video and TV shows on the go using WiFi (smells like Zune to me, MS had no music store so WiFi flopped on Zune) - sorry but that is clearly a revenue earner for Apple but (maybe its just me) a useless application. Why? You need an accessible WiFi network, where is the most likely place for you to have access to this? At home. At home you have a laptop or desktop. Why download to iPhone at home via wireless when your hardwire link maybe quicker?
 

iPaul

New Member
Bronze
Jun 25, 2007
176
0
0
Minneapolis
#10
THANK YOU. I was looking for that. Now I'm going to cut and paste (on a PC, of course) that into every thread that has fanboi "you knew what you were buying" responses.

:cool:

Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer said this at the July quarter earnings call:

"As we discussed previously, we plan to build on today's tremendous iPhone foundation by incorporating new software features and applications into the iPhone over time at no charge to customers. As a result, we have adopted subscription accounting for the iPhone handset sales and are recognizing the associated revenue and cost of goods sold over 24 months. "

Of course, this doesn't mean they won't ALSO have applications that they'll charge for. After all, they already gave us the iTunes store app for free. Haha.
 

Tinman

Evangelist
Gold
Jul 16, 2007
4,334
183
63
Aridzona
#11
THANK YOU. I was looking for that. Now I'm going to cut and paste (on a PC, of course) that into every thread that has fanboi "you knew what you were buying" responses.

:cool:
"You knew what you were buying" responses. LOL. :)

I think there should a top ten list:


10.) You agreed to a contract when you bought it.

9.) Grow up and act mature.

8.) 3rd party apps are illegal anyway.

7.) Just eBay it if you don't like it.

6.) You had two weeks to realize all of this.

5.) Web apps are fine.

4.) ?

3.) ?

2.) ?

1.) ?



--
Mike
 

DisneyEcho

New Member
Bronze
Jul 14, 2007
54
0
0
disneyecho.emuck.com
#12
OP is right in saying that it is just speculation that Apple did this on purpose.

For all we know, perhaps the changes had to be made for the WiFi iTunes Store to work as well as it does.

 

Tinman

Evangelist
Gold
Jul 16, 2007
4,334
183
63
Aridzona
#13
OP is right in saying that it is just speculation that Apple did this on purpose.

For all we know, perhaps the changes had to be made for the WiFi iTunes Store to work as well as it does.
Doubt it, the store had nothing to do the way the new software update is encrypted--and that is the reason we don't have our third-party apps back (like we did right after the last two updates).

I am not saying Apple deliberately bricked phones, just that I think at this point there is a very high probability that they deliberately locked out third party apps.


--
Mike
 

Dawgfan

Member
Bronze
Jul 27, 2007
347
0
16
Atlanta, GA
#14
I would pay $$ for good native apps. Heck, I bought a lifetime/any handset license to Jive Talk because it is worth it. If Apple supported 3P developers or came out with some solutions I would be fine with paying for them if they were supported well and quality apps.

Web-based apps are a joke.
 
Sep 15, 2007
17
0
0
Atlanta
#15
I like how no one took into consideration or acknowledged:

Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer said this at the July quarter earnings call:

"As we discussed previously, we plan to build on today's tremendous iPhone foundation by incorporating new software features and applications into the iPhone over time at no charge to customers. As a result, we have adopted subscription accounting for the iPhone handset sales and are recognizing the associated revenue and cost of goods sold over 24 months. "

This is saying we get free apps for our two year contract, they make a new iPhone (after two years, or they will make a new one every year), then we can buy the new one and get all the apps already on the first iPhone, plus the next apps to come in those 24months.

Apple does this for everything software wise. It makes it even more organized with the 2yr contract.
 

philhh

New Member
Bronze
Jul 30, 2007
38
0
0
#16
Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer said this at the July quarter earnings call:

"As we discussed previously, we plan to build on today's tremendous iPhone foundation by incorporating new software features and applications into the iPhone over time at no charge to customers. As a result, we have adopted subscription accounting for the iPhone handset sales and are recognizing the associated revenue and cost of goods sold over 24 months. "

Of course, this doesn't mean they won't ALSO have applications that they'll charge for. After all, they already gave us the iTunes store app for free. Haha.
My suspicion is that they'll add free "features" akin to the Youtube tie-in. If they can make some sort of beneficial alliance with another company which either brings them revenue or advertising, etc., then the added "feature" will be free.

If it adds true functionality, such as an office suite or gps etc. then I would easily see Apple charging for it.

I do suspect however that we'll see MMS for free, unless for some reason Apple and ATT agreed not to let this version of the iPhone have MMS due to bandwidth limitations? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense since virtually every other phone now has the capability...