Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Justifies iLife Price Tag

pudge posted more than 10 years ago | from the words-me-make-no-sense dept.

Media (Apple) 182

CameronWolf writes "Just in case there was any doubt about Apple computers decision to sell applications they used to give away, I got this response, via email, from Apple upon my enquiry: 'As the iLife applications have become increasingly integrated it has become more and more important for a user to have all of the "correct" versions on their Mac at once, working together, giving a unified user experience. This is one of the main reasons we've decided to offer iLife in suite form only. In addition, for iLife users who want the latest and greatest applications on their Macs, the iLife suite is priced very affordably.' Apple are running an upgrade scheme for those who bought a qualifying Mac after Jan 6th. Too bad I just had to have the iBook G4 the second it was released!" For those who used only the free iLife apps before -- those without SuperDrives -- this reason doesn't make any sense. If the goal were really to make sure you had the latest versions, they could simply make the latest iMovie require the latest iDVD.

cancel ×

182 comments

So, you bought and Apple and got ripped off... (-1, Troll)

duffbeer703 (177751) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974731)

You paid a premium for an inferior product that looks good from a company with a long history of screwing its customers over with abandoned produts and charging for os updates.

Are you honestly suprised that "free" apps are no longer "free"?

Re:So, you bought and Apple and got ripped off... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7974840)

Please mod parent to "Troll".

I've been nothing but pleased with my Ti Powerbook since I purchased it 18 months ago. The apps are of a very high quality, much better than any compariable windows app.

People need to remember that Apple needs to stay in business. They are offering a great product suite for a very low price. They are not ripping anyone off. We all have our current versions of these apps and if we get a new Mac we get the newest version with it. If you want to always have the newest software you have to pay for it. What the heck is wrong with that?

Re:So, you bought and Apple and got ripped off... (4, Funny)

MoneyT (548795) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974950)

Because, don't you understand EVERYTHING HAS TO BE FREE!!!!!! We can't let 73h 3\/i|_ C0|2P0|247i0|\|5 have money. I paid once, so I should be entitled to FREE updates forever and ever and ever. ME ME ME ME MINE MINE MINE.

Re:So, you bought and Apple and got ripped off... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7975096)

because the money you paid was for time and labor to make the app you bought WHEN you bought it. SINCE THEN, hundreds, perhaps thousands of man hours have been spent on making the app better and adding features you never even knew you would want when your originally made your purchase. should those programmers and designers starve because of YOU and YOURS?

when you buy a car, are you entiled to next years model too?

Re:So, you bought and Apple and got ripped off... (2, Insightful)

Echnin (607099) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975161)

I think maybe it's time for you to learn something new [dict.org] today:

Irony: 2. A sort of humor, ridicule, or light sarcasm, which adopts a mode of speech the meaning of which is contrary to the literal sense of the words.

Re:So, you bought and Apple and got ripped off... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7975224)

Irony is the lowest form of comment.

Please grow up.

Re:So, you bought and Apple and got ripped off... (1)

MoneyT (548795) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975281)

No, Irony is a high art form that is very difficult to master. I true master can be found by noticing that others are unable to dicerne whether the author is truely serious.

Re:So, you bought and Apple and got ripped off... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7975177)

Dude. Chill. It was sarcasm.

Re:So, you bought AN Apple and got a good "produt" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7975139)

Sadly, I left my illiterate troll dictionary at home. What are "produts"? Idiot.

Re:So, you bought and Apple and got ripped off... (1)

jiggywhiteboy (454516) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975241)

Inferior? Huh? I'll let that go due to ignorance.

Long history of screwing customers? There has been some of that from Apple over the years. No excuses here.

Charging for OS updates? Are you running Linux or BSD? If not and you are running WINXX, BeOS, Amiga-OS, Solaris, SCO or any other commercial OS then you pay for updates. Companies have to defray the costs of development even if they aren't interested in making a profit. Apple's price/feature ratio for upgrades is extremely high compared to say WINXX. You may be confused by the marketing nonsense that goes on with most other companies. Apple choses to identify its products with point-releases while Microsoft choses to completely rename their product. Sun choses to jump whole version numbers for what should be point-releases. So What. The marketing name for the product is irrelevant. The additional functionality is the only important consideration in justifying the cost of the upgrade.

BTW-iDVD and GarageBand are too large to be downloaded and if they are required for the Suite then the only solution is to distribute everything on CDs/DVDs. The price that Apple is charging is reasonable under the circumstances.

Does this make any sense? (5, Insightful)

Sklivvz (167003) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974796)

I just don't understand what the poster is talking about.
1) Apple now sells software which used to be free beforehand.
2) Poster asks for explanation from Apple
3) Answer explains why they sell the software in a suit as opposed to single apps, but now why they are now selling what used to be free
4) Story gets on Slashdot

So why is Apple charging for these products? Where's the news here?

Re:Does this make any sense? (3, Insightful)

Steveftoth (78419) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975689)

Apple always charged you for the applications, but you just didn't know you were paying for them.

It's an upgrade fee, I don't understand how people can be so mad about this. Are people angry about paying to upgrade their Photoshop?

"I bought Photoshop, that means they should give me the next version for free! Stupid Adobe!"

According to Apple, iPhoto is much better, (faster, less buggy and has new features) and the GarageBand application is brand new!

I know that I sound like an Apple apologist, but come on, you didn't actually think that when you bought an Apple computer that they will solve all your problems with software updates for no cost?

Re:Does this make any sense? (1)

use_compress (627082) | more than 10 years ago | (#7976281)

1. Spend hundreds of thousands of $$$ developing product.
2. Give the product away for free.
3. ???
4. Don't profit.

It was justified... (2, Insightful)

MoneyT (548795) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974812)

The minute they released garageband.

Re:It was justified... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7974918)

GarageBand music for 10% of our user base. I can add it to the list of iApps I don't use.

Re:It was justified... (1)

The Bum (597124) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975747)

Same here. Even though my household is in the 50% that has at least one musician (per Steve's keynote), the musician (my wife) works with computers all day and wants nothing to do with them when she gets home. As for me (I also work with computers all day, but they're Windoze and HP-UX machines so that doesn't count), GarageBand will probably be a neat toy that I'll play with for a couple of hours and then get bored with...unless I can get motivated to make another attempt at learning the recorder (the flute type, not the tape type).

Re:It was justified... (2, Insightful)

mista kuro (741525) | more than 10 years ago | (#7976802)

I don't believe so. I myself am a musician and will definitely use garage band. What about he people who don't want to make music or use garage band? I think the reason people are a little upset is because this is .mac all over again. Its just a little tricky to offer something for free and not give a heads up or warning that users may need to pay in the future. I know that if I had used the free mac.com email address when it was free and had to start paying, I would be pretty disappointed. Its not the money, its the principle.

Hmm. (2, Interesting)

daeley (126313) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974824)

OK, first of all, unconfirmed submission: can someone point out where on the web Apple actually said this? And second of all, it should be pointed out that iLife [apple.com] comes bundled with every new Mac at no extra charge. And third of all, what's the big deal?

Re:Hmm. (1)

Trillan (597339) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974907)

Yeah, I'm waiting to see the download fail to appear on their web site this week or next. Becuase we've certainly never seen any FUD directed at discrediting Apple before, have we?

Re:Hmm. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7975118)

Remember "APPLE INVOKED THE DMCA!" hysteria (which was based on an implication, not even a definite statement, by Other World Computing's CEO)...

Or who could forget the charming "APPLE IS CUTTING OFF SECURITY PATCHES!!!" crying that was based on pure speculation. Oh, and for laughs, there's always the old favorite "Apple is owned by Microsoft!"

But no, there aren't a bunch of Slashbots too cheap to buy a Mac and anxious to get all self-righteous and huffy about how Apple is immoral. Perish the thought.

so people are complaining? (5, Insightful)

Grand (152636) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974837)

so people are complaining they are offering 5 apps in a bundle for 50.00, when apple COULD go and sell them individually for 30-50 dollars. Yes they were free, but 50 dollars is nothing to complain about.

Re:so people are complaining? (3, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974934)

Not only that, but if you don't need the latest greatest features, you can download older versions [apple.com] still...

Re:so people are complaining? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7975048)

Realistically, no, they couldn't go and sell them for 30-50 dollars individually. They have a very small market share, and one of the few reasons they can compete with Microsoft is because they offer out-of-the-box usefulness (that is provided by OEMs by bundling Office et al in the Windows world).

I doubt they'll stop giving iLife applications away with new Macs, so charging for loyal existing customers to use them seems like generating unnecessary bad-will.

iCal, iSync, and Safari are next (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7975088)

It's not that they are selling iLife for 50 dollars its how they get people to buy into the product. They get people dependent on their free products and then they start charging. We've seen this before with .Mac. I find it extremely sleazy. Just wait people you will be paying to use iCal and iSync.

Re: iCal, iSync, and Safari are next (4, Insightful)

MoneyT (548795) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975367)

Except you're not paying to use it. iTunes still works for me. As does iMovie, iDVD and iPhoto. You're paying for the latest and greatest versions. And you can even DOWNLOAD the old versions FREE. And if they start charging for the latest Safari and the latest iCal, so what? it's not like my version of Safari will stop working instantly. I will use th eold version untill I decide the new features are worth the price. NO ONE IS FORCED TO BUY SOFTWARE.

When was the last time you paid $50... (5, Insightful)

Microsift (223381) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974861)

...for four applications (since iTunes is free) that do as much as these do. I think most people would be willing to pay $40-50 for just one of these apps(if they needed it).

Also, if you have more than 1 computer that you want to install iLife on, you can buy a 5 user family license for $79.

Anyway, the real story should be that iLife is a bargain.

Re:When was the last time you paid $50... (1)

billybarty (741469) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974962)

I totally agree i was shocked at how low the price was. Garageband alone is worth more than $50, especially since it seems to have a lot of the functionality of Protools. *purchasing iLife as we speak*

Re:When was the last time you paid $50... (1)

sc00p18 (536811) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975371)

Yes but people tend to get upset when they have to pay for something that was previously free. It's a natural reaction to have.

Why the apple.com.au link? (1)

poulbailey (231304) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974874)

The story links to the Australian Apple site. Here's the American one [apple.com] . The update costs $19.95 and that includes shipping.

$19.95 isn't an upgrade price (1)

njfuzzy (734116) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975944)

The update costs $49.95. The $19.95 price is part of the Up-to-Date program, and only customers who bought a new Mac *after* January 6th, which did not have iLife 4 installed, qualify.

This is just to cover machines that came out after the launch. It doesn't cover the iBook I bought in December, let alone the G4 I would like to be using a functioning version of iPhoto on.

$50!! (5, Informative)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974900)

It's $50, or $80 if you want the "family pack" (unlimited licenses within the confines of your own home.)

I don't really see what's to complain about. Given it includes an entirely new application, and iDVD now doesn't require a SuperDrive...

(It's not even like Apple are preventing you from using the old versions. You can even still download [apple.com] the older versions. Nothing is being taken away.)

iDVD doesn't require a SuperDrive? (1)

theEd (61232) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975018)

But the iDVD site [apple.com] still says....

*Burning DVDs requires an Apple SuperDrive.

Do you know something we don't?

Re:iDVD doesn't require a SuperDrive? (1)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975114)

What you said doesn't contradict what I said.

iDVD doesn't require a SuperDrive any more. Previously it did. It wouldn't install and if you found a way to install it it wouldn't run, unless you had a SuperDrive in the same machine.

Re:iDVD doesn't require a SuperDrive? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7975196)

Let's clear this up.

A new feature in iDVD is the ability to compile a VIDEO_TS folder from an iDVD project. Previously, you had to go straight from iDVD to your SuperDrive. Now, you can go from iDVD to a VIDEO_TS folder, which you can then move to another computer for burning.

iDVD does not require a SuperDrive to run and be useful. It requires a SuperDrive for burning.

Re:iDVD doesn't require a SuperDrive? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7975269)

As I understand it, that isn't a new feature, that's a feature of the previous version (the idea was people could use DVD Player to preview DVDs before they burnt them.)

The "new" feature is that iDVD will install and run without an Apple SuperDrive being physically in the machine (this is what Jobs announced last week.) As you say, the ability to make VIDEO_TS folders means this is a very useful enhancement (and FWIW, it should mean you can burn a DVD if you have DVD burner - you don't need a SuperDrive, you just need a DVD burner with software that supports it. A generic DVD-R drive connected via Firewire is usually ok for this.)

Re:iDVD doesn't require a SuperDrive? (1)

Echnin (607099) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975221)

I watched the keynote. Apparently, after requests by schools, it's now possible to author DVDs with machines not equipped with DVD burners. You can just save the "project" and transfer it to another computer with a DVD burner, to burn it there. Before the latest version, iDVD would not install on machines without DVD burners, though there was a hacked version available.

iDVD DOES NOT need a Superdrive (1)

DebianDog (472284) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977962)

You do not need a "Apple SuperDrive"just a compatiable drive (Pioneer A03,A04, or A05) and you can install it yourself. [dvdcreation.com]
That is what I did. ;-)
--
Daniel C. Slagle
Keeper of the "Unofficial" iMovie FAQ [danslagle.com]

Re:$50!! (1)

elmegil (12001) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975407)

$50 to be able to use iDVD without a superdrive doesn't seem like an enormous cost....

here's me trying really hard to care... (5, Insightful)

Maelikai (118093) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974909)

...nope, can't do it.

As a software person I just can't manage to work up any ire that Apple wants to be paid for some of the work they do.

Re:here's me trying really hard to care... (1)

Trillan (597339) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974940)

In fact, I'm hoping it's true. It makes it less likely that Apple will swoop down and replace one of my commercial products with a free one.

Re:here's me trying really hard to care... (1)

Su||uSt (151462) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975216)

and paid poorly at that.

Typical Apple Business Model (4, Insightful)

hey! (33014) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974938)

So, Apple charges the user for updates to its operating sytems and applications, but delivers capabilities that are attractive to the users.

This is typical for Apple. Not to bash MS, but it's useful to contrast Apple's situation with Microsofts. Apple's customers are its users, MS's customers are the OEMs and large IT operations.

Consequently , Apple updates have to pay for themselves, and give end users a sense of value received for their upgrade fee. MS updates simply have to keep the monopoly rolling so its core business continues to make money. MS would like home users and hobbyists to pay for upgrades and be happy with them, but in the grand scheme of things it is not all that important. Which is why you get update series like 95->98->98SE->ME.

In any closed source application, you can't have every possible permutation you might wish for. The owner has to package things so maintenance and marketing costs are reasonable, and that it provides a good value for its most important customers. It would be nice that if you only needed one tiny slice of the update you could buy it a la carte, but you have to accept that Apple is going to package their software in a way that maximizes revenue and reduces costs.

Re:Typical Apple Business Model (1)

tackaberry (694121) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975289)

The only problem that I have with this is that Apple has created two revenue streams. The $129 upgrade to the operating system (or $199 for the 5-pack) -- and -- the $49 (or $79 for the 5-pack) upgrade to the bundled applications that come with the operating system. Or should we not be thinking of the iLife apps as bundled apps?!?

Last year when Apple released a retail box of iLife for $49 it was due to the iDVD update, which they claimed was too large for downloading

This year the $49 upgrade is mostly likely due to the inclusion of GarageBand, as well as upgrades to the other apps. Again the arguement could be made that they are too big for downloading - then why require a family pack for multiple installs

I'll wait to see whether or not Apple is making the new iPhoto available via software update. If it is then chances are I'll skip this upgrade, as I did for the last iDVD upgrade. Hopefully the new version of iPhoto is really much snappier.

Re:Typical Apple Business Model (2, Interesting)

geoffspear (692508) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975832)

iDVD was never a free product (although it does come bundled with every SuperDrive-equipped Mac). I'm not aware of Apple ever claiming the $50 for iLife was to cover distribution costs because iDVD was too big to download; IIRC they were selling iDVD before they created the iLife bundle in the first place.

In any case, the iLife applications are not bundled with the operating system, they're bundled with new computers. If you buy an iMac or iBook, do you expect to get new versions of AppleWorks for free?

Re:Typical Apple Business Model (2, Insightful)

jfw25 (618692) | more than 10 years ago | (#7976901)

If you buy an iMac or iBook, do you expect to get new versions of AppleWorks for free?

Hell, I'd be happy to get new versions of AppleWorks, period!

No problem (4, Insightful)

eyeball (17206) | more than 10 years ago | (#7974994)

I don't see a problem spending $50 for iLife, or for that matter, $130 (or so) for every next major OSX release. We pay for the latest and greatest video card, CPU, TV, Car, portable MP3 player, etc.. Why shouldn't software be the same?

Re:No problem (2, Funny)

useosx (693652) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977166)

Cause you can't download a video card off P2P. We're working on getting an alpha of this up in running by next quarter. The Car plugin should be available sometime in '05.

FWIW, free with a new Mac (1)

mblase (200735) | more than 10 years ago | (#7978041)

Like the Panther OS, iLife '04 is free with all new Macs starting Friday. In that regard, iLife is as much an incentive to buy a new SuperDrive-equipped G5 as it is to spend cash on formerly-free software.

It's starting to work, too. My mom recently got a 1.8GHz G5 tower for $1,799 (discounted since it was replaced with the dual 1.8GHz), and my current G4 Mac is SuperDrive-less.

One wish (3, Interesting)

fr0dicus (641320) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975001)

That the new iDVD supported external non-Apple firewire DVD writers (I haven't checked whether it does or not, but the old version didn't). It would be well worth it then....

Bitch bitch bitch (1)

spooje (582773) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975052)

So they charge? Big deal. Remember when MS word was free? Then once it got popular MS started intergrating it with other apps they started selling it. Standard business practice really. Why shouldn't a company get some compensation for the thousands they put out on their products. Sure I would never buy iPhoto or iTunes, but iMovie, iDVD and now GarageBand are great full featured apps for the every day user. Almost all Mac owners can pony up an extra $50 if they wanted to. Also what are your alternatives? Add up the cost of Premier or FinalCut Express, Acid Pro or Sound Track and DVD authoring software and you end up spending a lot more. I think it's really a great value, I just wish they would roll back the free upgrade offer to Christmas since that's when I bought my PowerBook.

Re:Bitch bitch bitch (1)

eak_the_freak (689526) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975801)

MS Word was free? When?

Re:Bitch bitch bitch (1)

spooje (582773) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977705)

I'm old. As I recall around the mid eighties. Somewheres about 85 or 86. It was their way to get business people to abandon Word Perfect.

Also remember... (4, Informative)

90XDoubleSide (522791) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975108)

That Apple's consumer software has huge educational discounts. The student price on the iLife DVD is $29.

Re:Also remember... (1)

tbmaddux (145207) | more than 10 years ago | (#7978332)

The student price on the iLife DVD is $29.
That's the education price. Not just students, but teachers, faculty, staff. Students can get even bigger discounts [apple.com] on some items (but not iLife) by signing up as student developers. [apple.com]

They should atleast offer it free to .Mac members (4, Interesting)

shr1n1 (263515) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975149)

This should be at least downloadable free for us .mac subscribers. It would make me want to continue my subscription.

Re:They should atleast offer it free to .Mac membe (1)

Niherlas (171927) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975388)

Downloadable?

iDVD and GarageBand, if you haven't heard, require a DVD drive to install. Not because Apple's trying to make you buy combo-drive machines, but because there's so much damn stuff (themes for iDVD, music and loops for GB) that otherwise you'd be schlepping through 7-8 CDs to install 'em.

Yeah, right. Download that.

Re:They should atleast offer it free to .Mac membe (1)

MoneyT (548795) | more than 10 years ago | (#7978100)

I don't know why Garageband would require a DVD burner, but iDVD does not require a DVD drive to install.

Best deal in software (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7975154)

Christ, you can barely get an oil-change for the price of iTunes+iMovie+iDVD+GarageBand etc etc etc.

Quit your bitching and drop the $50, people.

Come now, those aren't the only dependencies... (1)

prodos (50696) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975163)

If the goal were really to make sure you had the latest versions, they could simply make the latest iMovie require the latest iDVD.

Let's be at least a little more realistic here. Clearly most of the iLife apps leverage iTunes with the little mini-iTunes browsers to choose songs for slideshows etc. You'll note that all the new transitions in iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD are the same, so those are probably shared between them. It's very possible that the entire slideshow code is partially shared between iPhoto and iMovie, with the later just recording the result. Finally, this is speculation, but since iMovie allows imports from SoundTrack (complete with a SoundTrack-like view of the audio which I would bet is a shared control), I wouldn't be at all surprised if it also worked the same way with GarageBand.

I'm not saying this is a good excuse to force people to buy the whole suite, but at least admit that the interdependencies stretch farther than iMovie and iDVD. It is reasonable for Apple to be concerned with users having the latest and greatest versions of all these apps when there is so much emphasis on their interconnectivity. If they aren't careful, they could wind up with their own version of "DLL Hell."

Just Curious (1)

billybarty (741469) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975233)

Can anyone give me a comparison of Garageband vs Protools as far as their feature sets? I wonder how much Protool free edition has in common with Garageband? http://secure.digidesign.com/index.cfm?page=produc t_index&categoryid=11

Re: comparisons and discussions (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7975392)

You might find some info. in these discussion threads:
http://forums.macrumors.com/forumdisplay .php?s=&fo rumid=65

And if you're interested, a Soundtrack vs. GarageBand editorial -
http://www.emotionent.com/perl/yabb/YaBB.cgi?bo ard =audio;action=display;num=1073846311

Re:Just Curious (1)

so1omon (577498) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977823)

Protools Free doesn't work in OSX. Also, it only supports 8 tracks of audio, and won't work with outboard gear. It will only work through the audio in ports. That means that you can only record 2 tracks of audio at a time. I don't know all the details about Garageband's features, but from the looks of things, it beats the hell out of Protools Free.

My Troll of the Day (0, Flamebait)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975252)

So someone complains that Apple is now charging for what they used to give away for free.

And Apple users responses? So predictable. So what, pay for it, Steve says so, Steve is God, he knows whats best for us, and we should be GRATEFUL to pay for this stuff.

Apple users aren't users, they're cult members.

Re:My Troll of the Day (1)

MoneyT (548795) | more than 10 years ago | (#7978139)

No, we just know business, and business says you can't keep developing software for free. Developers have to eat. Look, it's $50 for programs that would normaly cost >$150 all together, and on top of that, you can STILL DOWNLOAD the old versions if you are so inclined. As another poster said, MS used to give word away for free too.

Lots of "punish me harder" comments (4, Insightful)

Gizzmonic (412910) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975274)

I'm reading a lot of "that's okay, the apps are great" Mac apology here, and as a Mac user, I gotta say that it's a bad attitude to take.

Personally, I chose a Mac because I demanded more out of a computer. You pay more at the start, you pay more for system upgrades, but you get a machine that does exactly what you tell it (for the most part) and doesn't break for no reason.

I found the "yearly OS upgrade" strategy for Mac OS X pretty suspect. And now that the "iApps" are being pruned from the OS, how could they possibly justify $130 per annum?

Mac users, you don't have to take this. I recommend contacting Apple and telling them exactly how you feel about this. The OS price should drop to $50 if they're going to pull this, or there should be free upgrades to the iApps for at least a few years with the price of system software.

Then again, let's not forget the "chilling effect" that iApps have had on competitors. Safari kills MS internet explorer, iPhoto kills Photoshop Elements, etc...maybe charging for them will open up another window of opportunity for companies other than Apple to produce great Mac software. It seems like it's been awhile...

Re:Lots of "punish me harder" comments (1)

Niherlas (171927) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975419)

iPhoto never "killed" Photoshop Elements - iPhoto came out before Photoshop Elements was ever released, and there was never a Mac version of PE. If anything, iPhoto created the demand for Photoshop Elements, as Windows users were casting about for an iPhoto-like app on their platform.

Re:Lots of "punish me harder" comments (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7975482)

iPhoto came out before Photoshop Elements was ever released, and there was never a Mac version of PE.
[adobe.com]
dumbass.

Re:Lots of "punish me harder" comments (1)

PsychoSpunk (11534) | more than 10 years ago | (#7976582)

Wow, a correction to the original poster that is entirely wrong!

IIRC, Photoshop Elements was introduced at MWNY02, along with Jaguar and an update to iPhoto 1. This update included a new button that allowed you to select the action to perform when you double click a photo in iPhoto. One of the cool things you could do is open it in a different application to do other image processing that iPhoto didn't handle at the time. Photoshop Elements was introduced in early August 2002 to the market, as a PC/Mac OS X application in the same box (similar to WC3 a month before).

The application that you are looking for (that was mentioned explicitly in the keynote. You did watch the keynote, right?) is Photoshop Album.

Re:Lots of "punish me harder" comments (1)

mellon (7048) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975656)

I'll tell you how I feel about it. I feel like I get to pay about one two-hundred-and-fiftieth of my salary every year for some really nice software that Just Works (that's MacOS X + iLife). This is software that I use literally every day. Software that's a joy to use. Software that *works*.

The latest iLife solves one of my big gripes about the previous version (not enough compression options), gives me a new app that I think will be very useful to me (GarageBand), and costs less than just about any other software package I've ever purchased.

Those bastards! How dare they actually charge me money for this stuff?!?

Re:Lots of "punish me harder" comments (1)

.com b4 .storm (581701) | more than 10 years ago | (#7976006)

iPhoto kills Photoshop Elements

That's definitely not the case. iPhoto, while it has been great for organizing my photos and doing really basic operations (rotate, crop, output to QuickTime movie, etc.), is no replacement for Photoshop Elements. For any significant retouching or color correction, iPhoto (in its current incarnation, I don't know about the '04 version yet) definitely cannot touch Elements.

For those who aren't familiar with it, Elements is basically Photoshop 7 without CMYK and a handful of other professional features that grandma and grandpa Mac user won't miss. It also has some handy built-in stuff for novices, like the 'recipes' that tell you how to perform various retouching and enhancement options that might not be obvious to Photoshop newcomers.

I love iPhoto, and with the upcoming performance enhancements I'll love it even more. But it is first and foremost a photo album app, skilled at keeping your pictures organized and making them available to the other iLife apps. It is definitely not a Photoshop killer on even the novice level.

Re:Lots of "punish me harder" comments (1)

American AC in Paris (230456) | more than 10 years ago | (#7976150)

I found the "yearly OS upgrade" strategy for Mac OS X pretty suspect. And now that the "iApps" are being pruned from the OS, how could they possibly justify $130 per annum?

Oh, I dunno. Maybe their developers and engineers insisted on getting paid for their work or something.

Acquiring and retaining the caliber of employee necessary to develop "a machine that does exactly what you tell it and doesn't break for no reason" is expensive. Cut too many corners and you start losing your talent, starting with the best people you've got. Once you start losing your talent base, it becomes harder and harder to regain that base, as the overall quality of your product drops, your reputation suffers, and you start losing income from sales--forcing you to cut even more corners than before.

That said, nobody is holding a gun to your head, ordering you to upgrade to the latest versions. Your Mac will continue to operate as it always has for as long as you want to keep it running.

If you want to benefit from the continued efforts of Apple's software development team, why is it so onerous to expect to pay for it? They don't disable the version you've already got, after all.

Re:Lots of "punish me harder" comments (1)

Gizzmonic (412910) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977023)

When Steve Jobs was at NeXT, some magazine interviewer asked "What would you do if you were running Apple again?" Steve thought for a minute, and answered "I'd milk it for all it's worth."

And that's what's happening today at Apple. There have been a disturbing number of bait-and-switches under Jobs. Mac OS X 10 vs 10.1, iTools vs .Mac, and now, iApps vs iLife Suite. Money, money, money, money, baby!

Pulling the bait-and-switch is NOT essential to doing business, in fact, it's quite illegal. Apple has already lost a suit with a group of G3 Powerbook users who were similarly deceived (Apple claimed that Mac OS X would be 'optimized for the G3 processor'-what a whopper that was).

Yeah, Apple's not forcing me to buy the latest upgrades. As a matter of fact, they are encouraging me NOT to buy them. Just answer this question: if new and exciting upgrades to the iApps justified the cost of system upgrades before, why isn't the OS X pricing dropping now?

And don't give me this "it's worth 5 times that, easily!" Because it sounds a lot like "punish me harder, Apple! PLEASE!"

Re:Lots of "punish me harder" comments (0, Flamebait)

Delphiki (646425) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977480)

I never heard any commitments from Apple to continue releasing new versions of the applications in the iLife suite and distributing them for free for all eternity throughout the universe and so on and so forth. If you don't think OS X upgrades are worth it without iLife, don't fucking buy them. Buy a fucking PC and install Linux on it and never pay for an update again. Linux forums will be even more friendly to your bitching about prices than slashdot is anyway. None of the things you mentioned are actually immoral. Offering something for free to start off with then charging for it later isn't any worse than charging for it from the beginning. OS X 10 was essentially beta software, so once someone gives software out to beta testers they can never charge for a later version? That's news. The old iApps works as well as they ever did. Just keep using them if you don't want to pay for updates.

Re:Lots of "punish me harder" comments (2, Insightful)

American AC in Paris (230456) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977688)

When Steve Jobs was at NeXT, some magazine interviewer asked "What would you do if you were running Apple again?" Steve thought for a minute, and answered "I'd milk it for all it's worth."

...actually, the complete quote was "If I were running Apple, I would milk the Macintosh for all it's worth--and get busy on the next great thing." The quote is from early 1996. Think back to early 1996 and the state of the Macintosh--the storm clouds were rapidly gathering, Windows 95 was taking off like a bottle rocket, and Apple wasn't really doing anything about it. Jobs was right to say that. And, to be perfectly honest, Steve has already done what he said he would do--he's taken Apple on to "the next big thing" with OS X and the entire "Digital Hub" concept. The Macintosh of 1996 is milked and gone.

Calling for-fee upgrade versions "Bait and Switch" is a bit rich. Did Apple ever claim that they'd never charge for future versions of their software?

Just answer this question: if new and exciting upgrades to the iApps justified the cost of system upgrades before, why isn't the OS X pricing dropping now?

Perhaps because the system continues to grow in complexity, thus requiring even more dilligence and attention. The larger and more complex something gets, the more it costs to maintain. Microsoft has a tradition of shirking on this point, and it shows--the more "advanced" their systems get, the more a computer gets bogged down with cruft and flotsam. Contrast this to Apple: not only did 10.3 have a whole bunch of new features and fixes, it was significantly faster than 10.2. This is neither easy nor cheap, and it gets harder and more expensive the more advanced something gets.

Anyhow, I get the feeling I'm not going to be changing any minds. You're clearly so incensed at Apple that you're finished buying their products. Enjoy the one you have!

Then don't upgrade... (1)

mbessey (304651) | more than 10 years ago | (#7976492)

If you think that the price asked for OS and iLife upgrades is unreasonable, then don't upgrade. Of the 5 Macintoshes I use on a regular basis:
1 runs Mac OS 10.1.5
2 run Mac OS X 10.2.8
2 run Mac OS X 10.3.2
Admittedly, I'm probably a special case, but the general point I'm trying to make is that you're not required to pay for upgrades unless you need the new features.

I also note that iLife '04 runs on Mac OS 10.2 as well as 10.3, so you don't have to buy the latest OS to run the new iLife.

-Mark

Re:Lots of "punish me harder" comments (1)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 10 years ago | (#7976948)

I found the "yearly OS upgrade" strategy for Mac OS X pretty suspect.
$130 is for a new copy of the latest operating system. It's not a subscription price. If you don't particularly like the new features Panther offers you, you can keep your money in your pocket and continue to use Jaguar.
And now that the "iApps" are being pruned from the OS
The previous generation iApps (except iDVD) are still bundled with Panther. You can download iMovie. I think you could come up with an arguement that instead of bundling with the OS, new versions of iMovie and iPhoto are being bundled with GarageBand and iDVD, either of which are, assuming they're what they're claimed to be, worth rather more than $50 by themselves.
Mac users, you don't have to take this. I recommend contacting Apple and telling them exactly how you feel about this. The OS price should drop to $50 if they're going to pull this, or there should be free upgrades to the iApps for at least a few years with the price of system software.
$130 for OS X still looks like a bargain compared to the alternatives; the current version is shipped with the previous-generation iApps. I mean, I'd like it if they dropped the prices, don't get me wrong, but I just don't seem to be able to muster-up enough outrage over the pricing. I'm more bothered (literally) about not having the source code than I am about the present prices.

Re:Lots of "punish me harder" comments (2, Interesting)

MoneyT (548795) | more than 10 years ago | (#7978190)

Where did the iApps get pulled out of the OS? The only one that didn't come with the OS was iDVD.

$50 (2, Insightful)

ExileOnHoth (53325) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975282)

If you think you can find something better out there for free, use that instead.

If you don't, you can (a) buy apple's software, or you can (b) write some yourself and give it away!

What's the gripe? They owe you nothing.

Get over it (2, Insightful)

skinfitz (564041) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975375)

Too bad I just had to have the iBook G4 the second it was released!

Dude, it's only $49. If you can afford to run out and buy an iBook G4 the second it's released then you can afford $49.

It's not like the old software has stopped working - it will continue to work just fine. If you want the updated software then you buy it.

Are you using iApps now? (1)

crawdad62 (308893) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975468)

I'm saying Apple charging now for what was once free (I however think it's a fair price). But if you're using iMovie, etc. now then just keep using that version and be done with it. No one says you have to update to the latest versions. If however you want them then pay. Your "freebies" are working so I don't see the problem.

GB is worth the 50 bucks to me alone. All the other stuff is just gravy. And they never gave GB away anyway.

Some things people are forgetting: (4, Informative)

thedbp (443047) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975775)

1. Apple never said that the iLife apps would be free for the duration of YOUR iLife.

2. iMovie 2 was a $20 upgrade from iMovie 1, so the precedent to charge for iLife upgrades has already been set.

3. iDVD has only ever been available as either a pre-installed app or as part or the iLife bundle, it has NEVER been a free download. The fact that the price point for the new iLife is the same but they've added a whole new (and fairly incredible) app called GarageBand goes to show that they are ADDING VALUE, NOT ADDING COST.

4. If you buy a new Mac, its free. And chances are that on the next OS update, these apps will be included. I can't say that for certain, but when you buy Panther, all the then-current iApps are included.

5. $50 for the functionality you're getting is a bargain. I doubt it covers the R&D they put into it, let alone the packaging, distribution, etc.

6. They haven't removed the free ones from the distribution chain. You can still use the current versions for free ad infinitum. No one promised free updates for life.

This reminds me of when they started charging for .Mac. People bitched and complained because it was no longer free, but the cost of the service (a little over $8/mo.) pales in comparison to its benefits and features. For instance, currently .Mac members get a free $80 photo editing program. .Mac only costs $99/year. And that isn't the only free software they've given away with .Mac. Plus you still get the email account, the 100MB online server space, the integration w/ iPhoto, Virex, Backup, etc.

Whenever Apple decides to charge for something, trust me, its usually well worth the cost.

Re:Some things people are forgetting: (1)

zbrimhall (741562) | more than 10 years ago | (#7978101)

I could be quite mistaken, but I believe the case of .Mac is a little different. The main bitch in that fiasco was that when Jobs announced the service, he said it would be free for life.

Personally, I signed up for the (then free) service, poked around for ten minutes, and haven't wanted to use it since. GarageBand, however, makes me want to be a musician just so I can justify buying the suite.

Maybe your 50 bucks will be put to good use!! (1)

inblosam (581789) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975790)

I think the $50 investment isn't just to pay for this app suite, but it also goes towards new innovation, research, etc. that will one day benefit you too! I can't believe people are so surprised they charge for software. This sofware is worth hundreds, but they practically give it away for $50. If you complain, go cry home and buy a Dell. Then you will really be hating life.

What about iPhoto? (2, Insightful)

njfuzzy (734116) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975899)

A lot of the arguments here are talking about why it is justifiable for Apple to charge for the suite in general. However, I would like to take a step back, and look at one specific application.

I do not find it acceptable that Apple is now charging for the latest version of iPhoto, even if they include it with new Macs. The reason is a very simple one that I think will make sense to anyone who has worked in software development...

iPhoto 4 is a big fix release.

I will say it again. The latest version if iPhoto, 4.0, is a bug fix release. The most appealing feature of his version is that it fixes a problem that has been present in iPhoto since version 1.0, the ridiculously slow speeds with large photo libraries.

It is common practice that major bugs should be fixed as part of free, bug-fix releases. It just isn't right to release buggy software, and then charge people when you make it work the way you promised all along.

Unless Apple makes a revised version of iPhoto 3 available, that works with reasonably-sized photo libraries, it is unethical for them to be charging for iPhoto 4.

Re:What about iPhoto? (1)

dtfarmer (548183) | more than 10 years ago | (#7976792)

I will say it again. The latest version if iPhoto, 4.0, is a bug fix release. The most appealing feature of his version is that it fixes a problem that has been present in iPhoto since version 1.0, the ridiculously slow speeds with large photo libraries.

Just a minute ... so you're saying poor performance is a bug?

Sweet! My Palm with a 33MHz processor is kinda sluggish, is that a bug? If I write you a simple flat file database, that works flawlessly, but slowly due to using bubble sorts, is that a bug? If I subsequently write an optimized b-tree sort to improve performance of the database, is that a bug fix?

no, it's not.

It is a feature/enhancement as the output of the program is the same, it just gets to the end result faster.

A bug is when something doesn't work properly, not when something works, albeit slowly. While bugs can cause slowness, you'll have a tough time convincing me that iPhoto was sped up by fixing a bug, rather than the more plausable explanation that Apple put serious development effort into rewriting code to use new algorithms and optimizations....

Re:What about iPhoto? (3, Insightful)

njfuzzy (734116) | more than 10 years ago | (#7976896)

Have you ever used iPhoto with, say, 1000 photos in the library? Or 25,000? The performance isn't just bad, it's alarmingly bad. A program for viewing files, that can't view files in any reasonable time-frame, is buggy. I accept that not all performance issues are on this level, of course, but there comes a point where a product needs to be improved to live up to its basic promise.

Re:What about iPhoto? (1)

dtfarmer (548183) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977976)

that can't view files in any reasonable time-frame, is buggy... a product needs to be improved to live up to its basic promise.

who's the one to decide reasonable and basic promise? Just because Apple didn't put a hard cap on the number of photos you can import into iPhoto doesn't mean they have an obligation to improve performance for anyone who exceedes the program's performance limits.

Apple gave us a free program that hasn't yet stopped working. It has some limitations, sure, but you get what you pay for right? Now you have the choice of keeping what you've currently got, or paying for a better version. Apple's also charging for this new app called GarageBand. Oh, and they're charging for an update to iMovie (which they've done before). Also they're charging for an update to iDVD (which they've done before). Oh, but as you already know instead of charging $29 or more for each of these upgrades/new programs, you can get them all for just $49 ($29 if you're a student) - or just stick with the free versions you've already got.

Re:What about iPhoto? (1)

gerardrj (207690) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977912)

Slow performance in general is not a bug, what is a bug is the way Apple implimented the data structures for iPhoto.
If you've never looked at them, let me bring you up to speed.

All of the photo information (image file location, thumnail file location (both full pahtnames), size, title, description, import date, modification date) is stored in a plain text XML file. To open iPhoto, the entire flat file must be parsed.
Every time you make a change to a photo in almost any way, the entire flat file must be re-written. This style of file handling is fine for reading infrequently updated data like a list of emails or an application's preference, but it not acceptable for dealing with interactive data.

This is basic program design. No-one I know would ever write a program like this when it's supposed to update the file many times durting a session. Tou do things like that in at worst, linked lists or individual files. Ideally this would all be put in a "true" database via SQL or even something written specifically for the task.

Its interesting that Apple uses a more easily updated binary format for the information about albums and some of the more esoteric information about indivual images, like the EXIF data.

I've got about 1,200 photos in my library, most are not commented. The two data main files from iPhoto are about 1MB and 2.9MB for the XML and binary files repectively. In the XML file, if I remove all the actual data add leave just the XML structure, the file size shrinks to about 1/3 the size (300KB).

Granted, I learned to program in assembly language on a 4KB machine so perhaps I am a little more concious of data structure sizes, but to add over 33% to a file that you'll need to manupulate many times in a session is just careless.

Perhaps you can't call this a "bug", but it is a serious design flaw in the program. I want iPhoto 3 to be updated with better data handling, not because I'm not willing to pay $50 for iLife, but because iPhoto is the only app in iLife that I care about. My beige G3 can't run iDVD or iMovie for squat, it's well below the specs for Garage Band, and iTunes is already free and will continue to be free as long as the music store drives iPod sales.
If I owned a G4 and could use the other apps in iLife, I'd drop $50 in a heartbeat for iPhoto 4 and consider the other apps a nice toy. But I'm not willing to shell out $50 for iPhoto to work the way it should have in the first place.

Re:What about iPhoto? (0, Flamebait)

DebianDog (472284) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977812)

Obviously you do not spend a lot of time with the other iApps!! Cripes man I have a page dedicated to iMovie 3 bugs and issues [danslagle.com] and a website devoted to work arounds and you wantta bitch about iPhoto?!?!

Are you mad!. I could do the same for iDVD, if I wanted to take the time. I have over 2000 photos and iPhoto with 1.25 gigs of memory behind it runs like a champ. You need to find another gripe, that one is "weak", at best.

--
Daniel C. Slagle
Keeper of the "Unofficial" iMovie FAQ [danslagle.com]

Re:What about iPhoto? (0)

Box Checker (710832) | more than 10 years ago | (#7978140)

i agree, iphoto is a piece of shit. plain and simple. i don't plan to drop fiddy bones on an app that very well may continue to be a piece of shit. apple should release iphoto4 as a free download to persude non-users to buy future revisions.

whatever.

good music software for $50 is CHEAP (1)

v_1matst (166486) | more than 10 years ago | (#7975938)

Look, just tell yourself that you are buying garage band and that you are getting the "once free" applications as a bonus. -good- music creation/editing software with a very slim learning curve is a rare find and here Apple is offering it bundled with other application for $50. Stop complaining and just buy it. If you have no interest in garage band then just continue to use the free versions.

GarageBand (1)

Michael.Forman (169981) | more than 10 years ago | (#7976710)


I attended MacWorld in San Francisco a week ago and was able to demo the new iLife applications first hand. When I returned home that evening, I immediately went to the Apple Store and purchased iLife. While the incremental upgrades certainly justify the cost, the reason for the immediate purchase was special.

What is so special? GarageBand [apple.com] !

I've been looking for a similar program on MacOS for about a year and have been frustrated to find that they typically cost hundreds of dollars. Now apple releases GarageBand for a fraction of the cost and they throw in improvements to all their other applications. As a music enthusiast with beginer's skills I cannot wait to make my own music tracks using prerecorded loops and my own samples.

I left MacWorld not questioning why they would charge for iLife but wondering how they can afford to put out such high-quality software at such a low price. (My guess is subsidies from their hardware.)

Michael. [michael-forman.com]

divided iLife falls (1)

sunrein (580805) | more than 10 years ago | (#7976969)

I can see why they'd only want to sell the suite together. $49 is pretty cheap to begin with for that many useful applications.

If there was a universe where Apple sold each application separately, they could charge $10, maybe $15 at best given the pricing of the suite as a whole. The costs of manufacturing, distributing, and warehousing this even cheaper software would certainly eat into Apple's margins. I'm not trained in business, so this is just my brain working out the logic of the matter.

Anyway, it's only 49 bucks. You bought an Apple, so you clearly don't have a problem paying for quality merchandise.

Included in the next OS X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7977003)

I think the real question is whether the new iLife programs will be included in the next version of OS X. If they are, then the cost of OS X becomes much less; a $120 upgrade ends up being a $70 OS upgrade with a $50 bundled iLife upgrade. Alternatively, the $50 iLife upgrade ends up being a tax on the people who can't wait for the next version of OS X.

iDVD should support 3rd party drives now (4, Interesting)

finelinebob (635638) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977223)

I remember all the shrieking back when Apple started charging for the yearly OS updates, then people began to realize just how much progress Apple was making with each of the updates and many of those folk (including me) started to accept that the cost may be worth it (and then some). I'm hoping the same holds true for the iLife apps -- if everyone is going to have to start contributing some $$$ for them, we should be assured of a fairly quick upgrade cycle with some significant improvements for each new donation.

HOWEVER, since these are no longer free, I think it's reasonable for Apple to start supporting DVD writers other than built-in Superdrives. Quite frankly, I don't have a couple grand to drop on a new G5. I'd love to spend a few hundred, tho, on a DVD burner ... and I'd be more than happy to kick out an extra $50 for the latest iLife suite. Apple might want to think about talking to some third-party drive manufacturers about bundling drives and iLife for sale at the Apple Store. I imagine there are a good number of others out there like me who aren't in the market for a new desktop (so Apple isn't going to cut its throat by doing this) but would be willing to purchase a bundle like this (getting Apple some extra cash and making their 3rd-party developers happy).

... otherwise, I really don't see the need to pay for an upgrade where many of the major changes benefit people with DVD burners.

17 Million people (1)

DebianDog (472284) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977581)

We went round and round with this on the Apple Discussion boards [apple.com] last week. You should consider yourselves lucky since it almost cost us LAST time [thinksecret.com] .

17 million is not "chump change" if the estimation is correct. If it makes you feel better think of it this way: iLife 4 costs the same paltry $49 as the previous iLife that was released last Jan. Lets see...for one year that's

$4.08 per month
13.4 per day

I am hoping most of the $17,000,000 goes to a few good iMovie developers, myself. Damned finicky program that version 3!

--
Daniel C. Slagle
Keeper of the "Unofficial" iMovie FAQ [danslagle.com]

Complaining about $50? (1)

abacsalmasi (643483) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977977)

Think how much you spend a month on prOn, booze, NyQuil, ink, coffee, paper clips and post-it's and you can't even part with a little cash for apps that are quite remarkable? I really don't see any news here, there must be something better to talk about. That romote controled monkey idea sounds great.

I don't get $49 worth (1)

mblase (200735) | more than 10 years ago | (#7977978)

One of the small-print notices I found on Apple's site is that both iDVD and GarageBand require a DVD-ROM to install them. Since I don't have one of those, I can only install iPhoto 4 and iMovie 4 on my Mac (I've already got iTunes 4 as a free download).

This is mildly annoying, since I'd love to be able to work on iDVD projects and take them to another Mac to burn them, and my daughter would have a huge amount of fun fiddling with GarageBand. As it is, I'd be getting two out of four apps worth -- which may still be worth $49 in many people's minds, but I still feel cheated.

my beef (1)

jrstewart (46866) | more than 10 years ago | (#7978262)

I bought a mac one month ago. There were a lot of reasons I bought a mac, but iPhoto was one of them. It turns out iPhoto really sucks for me because it's performance is terrible. With only 700 photos it takes like a minute to load on my G4 iBook. I consider this a serious bug, and I don't want to have to pay $50 just to fix broken software. Sure there are other features to the new iLife. But I'm so peeved at having to pay $50 for a bug fix for software I just bought a month ago that I can't look past that to see if iLife '04 is a good value.

So I'll probably be buying it, and I might be glad I got all of those new features, but right now I feel like I'm getting my arm twisted.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...