News

Apple's Four Rotten Decisions

Friday, September 21st, 2007 at 3:00 PM - by

Apple is known for "Thinking Different," generating huge customer loyalty and doing the right thing. Recently, however, Apple has made four really bad decisions, according to Jeremy Horwitz at iLounge on Thursday.

While Apple did the right think fighting the greedy record labels, stood up to NBC, and gave its iPhone early adopters US$100 in store credit, Apple has taken some actions lately that have angered its customers and taken on Microsoftian tones. Jeremy Horwitz listed them:

1. Apple has broken many of the "Made for iPod" accessories with video output. "Accessory makers have suggested that Apple is attempting to take control -- and extra profits -- on third-party video accessories..." Mr. Horwitz wrote.

2. People who purchased iPod Games have learned they'll have to buy them again for the new iPods.

3. Some customers had problems with the display of their iPod touch. When customers tried to return them as defective, Apple denied the problem and charged a restocking fee.

4. Apple is double charging customers to turn songs they've paid for into ringtones. They've also blocked customers from using their own. Customers get cranky about their ringtones, and Apple's action was not welcome.

"Will Apple take the appropriate steps to satisfy its iPod, iPhone, and iTunes Store customers, or will it continue to engage in the same sorts of user-antagonistic practices that eventually earned Microsoft widespread scorn, consumer lawsuits, and international governmental intervention? Like you, we'll be watching to see what happens, and hoping Apple quickly does right by its biggest supporters," Mr. Horwitz concluded.

22 comments from the community.

You can post your own below.

+ show options

Your current settings, click to change: Sort Oldest First, Show Guest Posts, Hide Community Stats

Brutno said:

member since 28 Aug 2002 with 198 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:21 pm

I agree on the first three points, however...While I agree that ringtones are a racket and are way overpriced, it's too typical to rip Apple for having the cheapest and most flexible paid ringtone policy in existence. Not many comments that Apple made inroads into ringtone policies. I've also heard no one calling for Verizon, Sprint et al to change their ringtone practices. Don't single out Apple for criticism, especially when they may be changing (albeit slowly) the rules of the ringtone game.

Edited for content

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:34 pm

I could not agree more. Who is running Apple these days? As a customer this makes me mad, as a stockholder this makes me scared!

I have been waiting three days for answer.

http://www.reelsmart.com/2007/09/18/apple-screws-customers-that-bought-games-for-ipod/

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:34 pm

Hey, hold on now. The ringtones comment is completely unfair. The pricing of ringtones is more due to licensing w/ the record companies and less w/ Apple's profit margins. If anything, by comparison they charge LESS than many of the other cell phone rackets, plus you get to pick what range of a song you want to use rather than the canned versions carriers offer. I would guess that if Apple had it their way, they'd give the ring tone to you w/ a song purchase.

I agree w/ Brutno... this one feels like a "page hit" article.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:54 pm

1. apple changed the features of the video out - a new update will "fix" this issue soon

2. the games thing is a valid issue - but not a deal breaker

3. didnt apple just recently admit to this problem? store managers can be out of the loop from time to time until an issue hits critical mass and they get word from steve.

4. freaking ringtones - cheapest out there and people still rant - its not even up to apple lmao

do you get paid to write this crap?

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Fri Sep 21, 2007 4:22 pm

The games thing is not necessarily a valid issue in general. When one buys a software package it is usually licensed for just one device (or one desktop and one portable, as most Apple software is). So, it seems reasonable to require that a new device might require a new software purchase. A side note - keep an eye on the headlines at appleinvestornews.com and note how there are essentially 3 main types: (1) those that are just trying to attracts hits, (2) a wave of negative twists to drive the stock down, followed by (3) a wave of positive twists afterwards to drive the stock back up. Amongst those are occasional valid and informative articles, but many seem to have an alterior purpose.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Fri Sep 21, 2007 5:33 pm

Guest wrote:
The games thing is not necessarily a valid issue in general. When one buys a software package it is usually licensed for just one device (or one desktop and one portable, as most Apple software is). So, it seems reasonable to require that a new device might require a new software purchase.

That's a ridiculous thing to say. If I buy a software package, I can install it in a new machine as long as I remove it from the old one. Tying a piece of software to one computer permanently would be completely outrageous. What if my computer is destroyed by a power surge? Do I have to buy every program I need again? No. I can get a new computer and install my old programs.

The real issue here is that new iPods don't seem to be backwards-compatible with existing games, though that would have been really nice of Apple to do and customary in some gaming systems. For example, old Gameboy games worked in Gameboy Advance and Gameboy Advance SP. PS1 games worked on the PS2.

That being said, this guy Horwitz is completely wrong when he says people with old iPods will have to re-purchase their games. That's simply not the case because old games don't even work with the new iPods. If he would have taken the time to look at the iTunes store, he would have realized that old games are not compatible (though new games do work in old iPods).

Quote this post ↓

Bosco said:

member since 03 Jun 2002 with 1001 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Fri Sep 21, 2007 5:56 pm

The truth, my friends, is very sad. Like Fidel Castro, Steve Jobs is actually dead. Fidel died of having his entire digestive tract removed a year ago, and Steve succumbed to pancreatic cancer. But the insiders knew that if it were known that either were actually dead, their respective revolutions would be seen as totally hollow. In the case of that narcissistic commie bastard Fidel, the truth hurts, but people at Apple knew they had something even without Steve Jobs. So they decided to cover it up. Sadly, this has led to these 4 mistakes, which are slowly leading to the truth.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:38 pm

Well, for being dead, Steve certainly looked lively enough in Europe this week.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Fri Sep 21, 2007 8:45 pm

It costs, what, $5 to replace an iPod game? What corporate, monopolistic greed! Can you believe I can't run any OS9 games on an Apple Intel machine?

Apple has acknowledged the iPod touch issue.

Cell phone carriers have the last say on ringtone policies, not Apple.

These are the lamest criticisms I've seen yet, grasping for pertinence.

Quote this post ↓

deasys said:

member since 08 Apr 2003 with 296 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:23 pm

Invoking the "M" word? Bad form, Mr Horwitz...

Quote this post ↓

Small White Car said:

member since 02 Jul 2004 with 1960 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:49 pm

Anonymous wrote:
It costs, what, $5 to replace an iPod game? What corporate, monopolistic greed! Can you believe I can't run any OS9 games on an Apple Intel machine?

So it's your opinion that Rosetta was a waste of time and money for Apple to make?

I thought it quite useful, but apparently you'd prefer I go without it?

After all, if backwards compatibility on iPods is (in your opinion) foolish, surely the same must apply to Macs?

Quote this post ↓

Intruder said:

member since 07 Jul 2004 with 3144 posts, TMO Mac Specialist, send him a message or view his profile

Fri Sep 21, 2007 11:40 pm

I think he was being facetious.

Quote this post ↓

Small White Car said:

member since 02 Jul 2004 with 1960 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:53 am

Intruder wrote:
I think he was being facetious.

Uhm, yeah.

If you take his comments literally it looks like he's saying old games SHOULD be backwards compatible. But since it looks sarcastic to me I believe he thinks games SHOULD NOT be backwards compatible.

So I asked him what he has against backwards compatibility.

In other words, my reply assumes he is being sarcastic. Am I missing something?

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Sat Sep 22, 2007 1:34 am

The cheapest ringtones in the industry are free. I can cut a clip out of any song I want, Add it to the audio folder on my motorola phone, and have my ringtone.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Sat Sep 22, 2007 3:12 pm

Guest wrote:
The cheapest ringtones in the industry are free. I can cut a clip out of any song I want, Add it to the audio folder on my motorola phone, and have my ringtone.

Yes, but Motorola has no legal accountability or agreements with record labels. Like any other media format, ringtones require proper mechanical licensing to be negotiated, and since Apple has ties to record companies through iTunes, and thusly has legal obligations to uphold, that's why they can't just give this stuff away (as they probably wish they could). This is also why only some songs on iTunes are available for creating ringtones. Apple has had to negotiate licensing with each respective label for their ringtones.

I really wish people would shut up about this. Like others above, even if you want to complain, at least realize that Apple is not the one being greedy here.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Sat Sep 22, 2007 3:47 pm

Guest wrote:
That being said, this guy Horwitz is completely wrong when he says people with old iPods will have to re-purchase their games. That's simply not the case because old games don't even work with the new iPods. If he would have taken the time to look at the iTunes store, he would have realized that old games are not compatible (though new games do work in old iPods).

You just reiterated the point (not contradicted it). The old games are not compatible with new iPods, therefore, one must repurchase the same game (albiet one that is implemented for the new iPod).

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Sat Sep 22, 2007 3:50 pm

Guest wrote:
Cell phone carriers have the last say on ringtone policies, not Apple.

That is simply not true, and it's is also untrue that it is the record labels who set the pricing policy either. Other smartphones let you take any old sound file and make it into a ringtone. This is where Windows Mobile shows that is a more complete and flexible operating system for smartphones than the slimmed down version of OS X that is running the iPhone.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Sat Sep 22, 2007 3:54 pm

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
The cheapest ringtones in the industry are free. I can cut a clip out of any song I want, Add it to the audio folder on my motorola phone, and have my ringtone.

Yes, but Motorola has no legal accountability or agreements with record labels. Like any other media format, ringtones require proper mechanical licensing to be negotiated, and since Apple has ties to record companies through iTunes, and thusly has legal obligations to uphold, that's why they can't just give this stuff away (as they probably wish they could). This is also why only some songs on iTunes are available for creating ringtones. Apple has had to negotiate licensing with each respective label for their ringtones.

I really wish people would shut up about this. Like others above, even if you want to complain, at least realize that Apple is not the one being greedy here.

Yes, exactly. Apple wants to SELL ringtones. The could not give away anything, and just give users the ability to create their own ringtones. But you're right, Apple is in this to squeeze the dimes & pennies, nine of each, out of your pockets for each ringtone you want to use. Apple approached the ringtone feature as a content provider, not as a handset manufacturer. And so the handset is crippled in order to force users to buy the content.

Quote this post ↓

gslusher said:

member since 13 Nov 2002 with 2088 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Sat Sep 22, 2007 5:13 pm

I'll have to go over to iLounge, but it's surprising that someone there would miss the point so clearly.

"1. Apple has broken many of the "Made for iPod" accessories with video output. "Accessory makers have suggested that Apple is attempting to take control -- and extra profits -- on third-party video accessories..." Mr. Horwitz wrote."

BS. The dock connector specs are available. How long do you think it will be before Griffin, Belkin, XtremeMac, Pacific Rim, and a couple dozen other companies come out with cables for the new iPods? The change was made to enable component video output.

Mr. Horwitz (and some here) may not remember early iPods, so he/they may not recall these earlier instances where the accessories were "broken":

- Dock connector replaced the FireWire connector on the bottom of the iPod (iPod 3G)

- The "remote" port was removed (iPod 5G?) I have quite a few accessories that I bought for my iPod 3G that do NOT work with my iPod 5.5G: 2 FM transmitters, voice recorder, microphone adapter, 2 remotes (one with FM radio), and the Griffin iBeams. (Wonder if anyone remembers those little guys?)

- Change from FireWire to USB 2 for syncing

- Addition of video out (started with iPod Photo)

"2. People who purchased iPod Games have learned they'll have to buy them again for the new iPods."

People who have Classic games learned that they'll have to buy them again for their Intel Macs. (Not only that, but the version of Photoshop that I had on my old iMac does NOT work under Classic.)

"3. Some customers had problems with the display of their iPod touch. When customers tried to return them as defective, Apple denied the problem and charged a restocking fee."

Not any longer, apparently.

"4. Apple is double charging customers to turn songs they've paid for into ringtones. They've also blocked customers from using their own. Customers get cranky about their ringtones, and Apple's action was not welcome."

Another bit of distortion. Check the license/terms of service for the iTunes Store. The right to modify songs for ringtones is not included. Mr. Horwitz should read any of the several articles on the legal issues involved. I would also invite Mr. Horwitz to turn his wrath on cell phone companies who do NOT allow users to load ringtones on all their phones. The only way I can get a ringtone on my Verizon Samsung is to buy it with the phone--and that process counts on my monthly minutes, as well as the cost of the ringtone. At least mine doesn't expire, as some apparently do.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Sat Sep 22, 2007 7:24 pm

Why is it legal for Motorola but not for Apple? I can possibly understand A contractual provision between Apple and the record companies preventing them from adding that functionality to the hardware, but noone has mentioned that as the problem. If Motorola can do it, Apple should be able to do it. I won't own an iPhone until this is fixed along with being able to use non Apple applications. Gonna be a long wait I'm sure

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Sun Sep 23, 2007 2:12 pm

Guest wrote:
That's a ridiculous thing to say. If I buy a software package, I can install it in a new machine as long as I remove it from the old one. Tying a piece of software to one computer permanently would be completely outrageous. What if my computer is destroyed by a power surge? Do I have to buy every program I need again? No. I can get a new computer and install my old programs.

Windows and OSX ARE software, you can only install them on ONE machine... I'm not saying games are the same as operating systems, but a blanket statement like that one is simply not true.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Sun Sep 23, 2007 7:46 pm

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
That's a ridiculous thing to say. If I buy a software package, I can install it in a new machine as long as I remove it from the old one. Tying a piece of software to one computer permanently would be completely outrageous. What if my computer is destroyed by a power surge? Do I have to buy every program I need again? No. I can get a new computer and install my old programs.

Windows and OSX ARE software, you can only install them on ONE machine... I'm not saying games are the same as operating systems, but a blanket statement like that one is simply not true.

No. If you buy a standalone copy of Windows or Mac OS X, you can can install it to one PC and later remove it from said PC and install it on a new one. It would be completely unfair to permanently tie it one computer if you paid full price, as long as it's not installed in both computers simultaneously. Now, the OS that came pre-installed with a computer is usually tied to the computer, but it's because of different licensing terms and it's included in the price of said computer, usually at a discount price because manufacturers buy in large volume.

Quote this post ↓

Post Your Comments

  Remember Me

Not a member? Register now. You can post comments without logging in, but they'll show up as a "guest" post.


Please enter the word exactly as you see it in the image above. Registered users aren't prompted for this. Having trouble reading the image get a new one.