Comments on: Apple’s $2 accounting problem

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 25 Jan 2007 07:07:38 +0000

I did.

Basically Apple is making an excuse by using SO to bilk their customer’s out of $2. Since the hardware is there anyways, why pay for it at all?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 01:29:05 +0000

I’m sure it won’t be long before that update hits the torrent sites.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:12:48 +0000

read this and understand it

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 16:39:30 +0000

You know, I’ve read through all this and I’m still not comprehending exactly why Apple is charging $1.99 for this. I have devices that get updates all the time that add new features and functionality. The price of the hardware to do this was included in the computer purchase price even though it was not advertised. They are not giving it away at a discount, those wifi cards were paid for by their customers. If the hardware can do it, and all it takes is a minor software update, then what’s the problem?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 21 Jan 2007 20:59:29 +0000

as usual all the macolytes with the brain implants miss the point which to me is that Steve wants to wring every last cent out of people dumb enough to use his stuff. $2 how many millions times is a lot of money and he could have just made gthew switch available free.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 21 Jan 2007 03:39:43 +0000

The whole point of this news article is that Apple isnt ALLOWED to cover the cost, due to accounting regulations. But, why should we expect you to actually do a little homework before you reply?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 21 Jan 2007 00:52:35 +0000

before spouting crap online

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

although I doubt you’ll make anything out of it.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 21 Jan 2007 00:45:57 +0000

Apple leads as usual. There is NO single router than Apple Airport Express ones to support the ‘n’ standard. Those who get one have the corresponding sw to activate the functionality on their Macs included. No additional fee.

In order to *having* to pay the $2 a Mac user (sorry Winwhiners, you are still out of luck on this one. Try next year, will’ya) should have access to a ‘n’ network, which does not exist but from Apple wireless router, just having the functionality activated gives you zilch on a ‘g’ network, pretty useless.

‘n’ will be mostly with home and small business users who will then be able to activate all their Macs for free. Pretty a worthless issue: exactly worth for professional baseless bashers.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 21 Jan 2007 00:39:08 +0000

– It’d be interesting to know what it makes on the Intel Macs.

It is public. Go and educate yourself.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 21 Jan 2007 00:38:26 +0000

You know what? It’s amazing how much time is spent on an article to complain about $2. Yeah, yeah, it’s the “principle of the thing.” I would suggest to not get your energy all hyped up over $2. Relax about this issue, because there are more things to get upset over. If you get upset about every issue, you could ulcers.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 21 Jan 2007 00:02:51 +0000

If you want a good explanation about the SOX implications, head over to the thread at Macrumors.com

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=271382

BTW, there are better things to complain about than $2 for this one-time upgrade.

And for all the whiners who think this is about principle, I think it clearly would have been better for you if Apple had just shipped straight-up 802.11b/g cards in the Core2 Duo Macs and then charged you $50 or $100 to ship you new 802.11b/g/n cards that you had to physically swap into the machine. Then again, some people never seem to be happy.

There was no fully established “n” standard at that time, so Apple could not guarantee their hardware would ultimately work with the future “n” standard. I don’t think the “n” standard has still been finalized, but Apple can guarantee that the hardware will work with the new Apple products (Airport Basestation and Apple TV). Therefore, it is being enabled as new functionality. And the SOX requires that new functionality has to be charged.

What is charged for is the functionality of the router. Not the funtionality of the hardware contained in the MacBook. Furthermore, it was advertised as 802.11 b/g capable and charged as such. No draft-n capability is mentioned in the ad/brochures.

These days Apple is under scrutiny for accounting (stock backdating, for which Microsoft was fined in 1999). You may bet they will stick to the letter of any possible existing regulation these days.

If Apple was Microsoft everything would have been kept secret and one day there would have been a $50 enabler for 802.11n with much fanfare and Winfanboys would have drooled “Look, Microsoft innovates faster than anyone”
“Look, they are not greedy: usually one should buy a new computer for such MAJOR improvements”.

Keep sucking from Redmond. It suits you fully.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 20 Jan 2007 23:52:14 +0000

What are you smoking? If Apple does not charge Uncle Sam goes after every and each but of every and each Apple employee.

Complain with Bush, moron. It is the law that FORCES Apple not to release a new feature for free.

Greedy? $1.99? Yeah, very greedy.

Apple CANNOT cover the cost by law. Read the norm.

PS
Microsoft is not going to add the new norm to computers for YEARS.

What an asshole: you deserve Windows.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 20 Jan 2007 23:48:48 +0000

Totally agree. What a assholistic point of view.

I can’t make it all these Winfanboys and Gates/Balmer acolytes spinning every possible news to bash Apple.

So Apple is mandated by law to charge for the additional feature (in that not ready at time of sale of the laptop, hence not contractual), Apple decides to anyway sell the machines ready to go with the new wireless protocol when possible instead of deceiving customers in the future (Sorry, your MacBook Pro, just one month old, cannot go with the new standard) and this jerkalist complains “Apple was in a hurry to get the product on the shelves and get your money”
He certainly likes Microsoft promising bells and whistle for Vista and selling a crappy Windows XP SP4 with eye candies in place.

What a lobster: head full of shit and tail full of meat.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 20 Jan 2007 23:41:39 +0000

A jerkalist? You’re the jerk. If the hardware is there, why doesn’t apple just send the update as a patch? Because they are a greedy money grubbing company that want’s to get into everyone’s wallet. That’s why.

Apple should have to cover the cost, not the customer. This is a minor update for added functionality. I don;t see Microsoft doing this on their Windows platform. Mircosoft charges you to upgrade windows versions, not for patches and updates.

Good job Apple, you just screwed over your user base for 2$. Glad I don’t own a Mac. What a joke.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 20 Jan 2007 22:05:12 +0000

Trashing Apple for releasing a new product rather than waiting — what crap.

“Apple was in a hurry to get the product onto the shelves so it could get your money into its pocket.”

I’d rather get a new product if I’m going to buy something rather than buy an older product and a short while later find out that a newer product has replaced it but I could have gotten the new product, even if I would later need to upgrade software a short while later to take advantage of a newer technology and had to pay a few dollars for the upgrade.

Whoever wrote this is a jerkalist, not a journalist.

(and why do these asswipe forums post anonymous as coward? what a bunch of dikheads, just cause I don’t want to bother with “joining” their pathetic website?)