Just thought I'd add my two cents.
I have somewhat mixed feelings about iLife. To give you some idea of my background, I am about the only person I know in my area who always buys their software (rather than getting things pirated), would only use shareware that I'd pay for, and does not download MP3s illegally. I'm definitely not being self-righteous, I just want to illustrate that I do indeed live by my feeling that software is a product like anything else and should be paid for. Just because it is not tangible like a house or a car or a TV does not mean it should automatically be free, as a lot of development work goes into these products.
Whenever Apple has released totally new software and said we'd have to pay for it, I've always thought: "fair enough." I do not expect Apple's software to be free, as they invest time and money in creating their products. What does bother me though, whether rightly or wrongly, is when an existing "free" product is no longer free. I suppose I'm also bothered because there is a history of this, rather than it being a one-off event.
I remember QuickTime Player being able to edit movies many years ago, for instance. Then Apple shifted those features into QuickTime Pro, which you had to pay for. Though this bugged me, I did at one stage buy a licence for QT Pro, and then shortly afterwards the new version of QT came out, and of course the licence was not transferable, so I'd have to pay up again if I wanted those features (I didn't bother). Now with QT, you also have to pay extra on top for an MPEG-2 module. Then there was of course the whole iTools/.Mac issue. I think if Apple had continued with the iTools accounts for free but added a .Mac service which was greatly enhanced, but you had to pay for it, I would not have been concerned one bit. But as things stood, it
felt, rightly or wrongly, like something was being taken away from me, rather than a new service being offered.
With the OS X updates, I have mixed feelings. The OS has been greatly improved over time and a lot of new features have been added, a minor updates along the way have been included for free. So in one sense it seems fair enough to pay for major updates to the system, but in another way it becomes quite expensive. I know people will say "don't upgrade then," but manufacturers will also of course apply pressure to consumers to upgrade (for instance by making new applications only run under the most recent OS, or whatever). The computing world moves quickly, so I think no one can realistically expect to get away with not updating for long periods (years) and I guess that is just life. But perhaps the issue here is the
frequency of perceived "required" updates. If major expenditure on updates occurred every, I don't know, five years or so, people would not complain as much. If major updates occur incredibly frequently, say every few months or each year, people will start to grumble about the expense and question whether or not these more frequent updates should be free... depending on how major the update is!
Then we have the iApps. When iTunes, iPhoto, and so on were released for free, I was very pleased. It seemed to be one of the benefits of being a Mac user. When iLife first came out, I was a little disappointed, as it felt (again, rightly or wrongly) like a ruse to get us to pay for something that used to be free, saying iDVD was too big to download. I partly agreed, as iDVD is huge, but then again I have downloaded huge files in the past too (OK, though a bit smaller). So, I did not buy iLife. Fair enough, it was my decision. Now, if iLife '04 really will not be available as separate, free downloads, I will be a bit more concerned. Again, this would feel like something has been "taken away," whether or not it really has. This is the funny thing... $49 for GarageBand alone? Sounds a decent deal! Looking at the whole iLife collection: it really does seem like a bargain! But then... it is the fact of now being told the next update for something that used to be free will cost me something (and I'm not likely to use GarageBand ever, so it's really a case of whether I want to pay for the other updates to my existing software). I think this is what has the psychological effect to it.
I assure you there is no anger in this post, I'm more "just thinking out loud" about why these matters get people so hot under the collar. Myself? I feel torn with regards to these issues. It seems fair enough to pay for major updates and for totally new software, but when (in general, not just with respect to one particular product) the updates become frequent, there is sometimes pressure to upgrade (sometimes, but not always), and/or when a free product is no longer freely available, I think it understandably causes murmurings, as people begin to feel (once again: rightly or wrongly) that something has been "taken away" and that the consumer loyalty begins to be taken for granted in the pursuit of greater profits. I don't have strong feelings on the issue and I'm not attacking either point of view, but I guess I do feel a bit "niggled away at" by the slowly increasing costs. Another issue is that these updates are more expensive in the UK than in the USA, so the costs are higher for me each time, and that will obviously affect my views on the topic of paid updates. Anyway, I'm not having a rant in the slightest and I'm not wanting to fan any flames. I just wondered whether this explains the strong feelings involed in people each time something like this occurs.
Erm, sorry this turned out to be so long... !
