3 ms·

Saving those $5 could just as possibly make him a millionaire. Now, didn't Apple (or at least its fanboys army) said something like they couldn't legally make

Saving those $5 could just as possibly make him a millionaire. Now, didn't Apple (or at least its fanboys army) said something like they couldn't legally make Xcode free to justify those 5 bucks? I'm perplexed...

chc 15y ago
The reasoning was that they couldn't release Xcode 4 free for Snow Leopard because of Apple's extremely conservative interpretation of Sarbanes-Oxley. Xcode has always been free with new OS versions. They were only charging extra if you wanted to get it for the old OS. (An extremely low price point like $5 is generally a tip-off that Apple is just charging a nominal fee to satisfy accounting rules.)
- statictype 15y ago
  This keeps coming up every now and then. What's the difference between Xcode and iTunes that lets them give iTunes updates for free?
  - chc 15y ago
    That's a good question, but unfortunately I'm not privy to Apple's internal workings to give you an accurate answer. The general metric seems to be "Does it add value to the core product?" This is the same reason iOS updates are free to the iPhone but not to the iPod Touch — the iPhone is viewed as a multi-year investment (and reflected as such in Apple's accounting), while the iPod Touch is a shrinkwrap product that Apple doesn't believe it can add value to without charging for it. But the precise bar for when they feel like they need to charge is something only Apple could tell you, and maybe not even them. Like I said, their interpretation of the law is idiosyncratic.
    - chc 15y ago
      Thinking about it further, I'd bet the distinction is that iTunes is on Windows too, so it's viewed as an independent product, while things like Xcode and FaceTime are tied to Mac OS.
      - jad 15y ago
        This also fits with the fact that they don't charge for new major versions of Safari, which also has a Windows version.
    - stock_toaster 15y ago
      I read something somewhere (can't remember where) that Apple is starting to spread the sale of new macs (starting with machines with Lion on them) over some longer period of time. This would apparently set things up for providing new features (ostensibly iCloud) without having to charge small increments and still adhere to their conservative SOX interpretation. edit: found it. http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/07/19/apple_to_incrementally_deliver_icloud_additional_new_features_for_mac_and_ios_users.html http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/07/19/apple_to_incre...
  - protomyth 15y ago
    The theory is iTunes facilitates the buying of items from the iTunes Store.
- reemrevnivek 15y ago
  Why not $1, if all they're doing is satisfying accounting rules by charging a nominal fee?

chc 15y ago

The reasoning was that they couldn't release Xcode 4 free for Snow Leopard because of Apple's extremely conservative interpretation of Sarbanes-Oxley. Xcode has always been free with new OS versions. They were only charging extra if you wanted to get it for the old OS. (An extremely low price point like $5 is generally a tip-off that Apple is just charging a nominal fee to satisfy accounting rules.)

statictype 15y ago
This keeps coming up every now and then. What's the difference between Xcode and iTunes that lets them give iTunes updates for free?
- chc 15y ago
  That's a good question, but unfortunately I'm not privy to Apple's internal workings to give you an accurate answer. The general metric seems to be "Does it add value to the core product?" This is the same reason iOS updates are free to the iPhone but not to the iPod Touch — the iPhone is viewed as a multi-year investment (and reflected as such in Apple's accounting), while the iPod Touch is a shrinkwrap product that Apple doesn't believe it can add value to without charging for it. But the precise bar for when they feel like they need to charge is something only Apple could tell you, and maybe not even them. Like I said, their interpretation of the law is idiosyncratic.
  - chc 15y ago
    Thinking about it further, I'd bet the distinction is that iTunes is on Windows too, so it's viewed as an independent product, while things like Xcode and FaceTime are tied to Mac OS.
    - jad 15y ago
      This also fits with the fact that they don't charge for new major versions of Safari, which also has a Windows version.
  - stock_toaster 15y ago
    I read something somewhere (can't remember where) that Apple is starting to spread the sale of new macs (starting with machines with Lion on them) over some longer period of time. This would apparently set things up for providing new features (ostensibly iCloud) without having to charge small increments and still adhere to their conservative SOX interpretation. edit: found it. http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/07/19/apple_to_incrementally_deliver_icloud_additional_new_features_for_mac_and_ios_users.html http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/07/19/apple_to_incre...
- protomyth 15y ago
  The theory is iTunes facilitates the buying of items from the iTunes Store.
reemrevnivek 15y ago
Why not $1, if all they're doing is satisfying accounting rules by charging a nominal fee?