[rcr]

Certainly iTunes will remain a separate free download as it drives iPod and Music Store sales.

But is there any evidence to suggest that iPhoto will still be a free separate download, or will it only be a part of the paid iLife package from now on?

[goto11]

I was just going to ask the same thing. As it is, there is no way to download even the old iTunes from the Apple site (or any iLife app, for that matter.) We have to pay for iPhoto and iMovie now?

[you_are_right]

Originally posted by rcr:
Certainly iTunes will remain a separate free download as it drives iPod and Music Store sales.

But is there any evidence to suggest that iPhoto will still be a free separate download, or will it only be a part of the paid iLife package from now on?

Have the same question. Looks as if the apps, except for iTunes, come only in the paid bundle...he said:"it comes free with every new mac".

So they prepared this a year ago, when introducing iLife, but then everything was still available for free as individual downloads. But what is the sense of the package, when u can get the individual apps as a free download.

I would not like it, but i think it is reasonable

[rcr]

Actually, you can still download iTunes:

http://www.apple.com/itunes/download/

[goto11]

Originally posted by rcr:
Actually, you can still download iTunes:

http://www.apple.com/itunes/download/

Oops. I was just looking at the iTunes page. I didn't see that link on there, so I just assumed they didn't allow downloads anymore.

[pete]

he says free with every new mac. Does that mean, free with every copy of Macos X? And does it mean that I will need to buy ilife to upgrade my copy of iphoto which came with 10.3 which I purchased just a month ago? That would be crazy! I want iphoto 4 NOW - through the software update button! I've been living with its slowness, providing feedback to Apple for so long. And I'm rewarded for my feedback with the privilege to BUY a copy?

the road apple is travelling will alienate a lot of people - I understand the need to make money, but packaged deals are better than this kind of messy business. They need to clarify how this will work.

[you_are_right]

Originally posted by pete:
he says free with every new mac. Does that mean, free with every copy of Macos X? And does it mean that I will need to buy ilife to upgrade my copy of iphoto which came with 10.3 which I purchased just a month ago? That would be crazy! I want iphoto 4 NOW - through the software update button! I've been living with its slowness, providing feedback to Apple for so long. And I'm rewarded for my feedback with the privilege to BUY a copy?

the road apple is travelling will alienate a lot of people - I understand the need to make money, but packaged deals are better than this kind of messy business. They need to clarify how this will work.

Maybe they keep it open and wait how many people will complain...then come up with a compromise like every mac bought after ....

But as of now i think it means every mac bought from now on and no free downloads except for iTunes.

Or he just did not make it clear and everything will remain as before, and only garageband and iDVD must be paid...we will see

[pete]

"You’ll experience this amazing speed everywhere. When you resize images. And when you delete them. It’s faster to switch between albums and faster to switch between modes — from Import to Organize to Edit to Book. In short, everything from launching to quitting is faster in iPhoto." (from Apple's website)

Does this mean that they suddenly had a huge breakthrough in programming? Or were previous efforts just sloppy? Or are they just trying to get us sucker iphoto beta testers to buy the package?

anyway....

[rblanchette]

I just bought my Powerbook and I am not really thrilled about forking over $50 for ilife 4. Let's hope they come up with some kind of upgrade plan for recent buyers.

[Thinine]

Upgrade plan for $49 software? Ok...

[dfiler]

Originally posted by pete:
Does this mean that they suddenly had a huge breakthrough in programming? Or were previous efforts just sloppy? Or are they just trying to get us sucker iphoto beta testers to buy the package?

I'd say: none of the above.

It's to be expected that mature applications have more optimized code. Also, it seems that Apple was simply not charging customers for iPhoto until it was a polished, quality product.

To me, this is software development done right, not a predatory business practice.

[Hoosier_1701]

One question, is it iPhoto 4 or iPhoto '04? If it is the former, I must have been sleeping through the entire product life cycle of iPhoto 3. I don't remember Apple playing those kinds of games with version numbers before (example: Word for Windows jumping from version 2.0 to 6.0).

[Anand]

The entire package is $29 for education buyers. Not bad in my mind.

[RayK]

Only iTunes is free now.... called the Apple Store and found out for sure. I think personally it stinks that what was included with the OS 2 months ago cost an extra $50. I hope 10.3.3 doesn't cost anything. I'd hate to have to pay for bug fixes.

[turtle777]

Originally posted by Thinine:
Upgrade plan for $49 software...

*lol*
THAT was funny !!!

You guys, GarageBand ALONE is worth more than $49 !

-t

[turtle777]

Originally posted by RayK:
Only iTunes is free now.... called the Apple Store and found out for sure. I think personally it stinks that what was included with the OS 2 months ago cost an extra $50. I hope 10.3.3 doesn't cost anything. I'd hate to have to pay for bug fixes.

BS !

iLife WAS NOT INCLUDED 2 months ago with ANY OS !
GarageBand = Bugfix ! Oh shut up...
You get NEW & EXTENDED software and functionality !

Gosh, I hate that mentality that expects everythings to be free.
Get a grip and stop whining !


-t

[axlepin]

Originally posted by dfiler:
...it seems that Apple was simply not charging customers for iPhoto until it was a polished, quality product.

Plus, when you look at the whole iLife package, that is one HECK of a lot of value and functionality for $49!!!

can anyone name a *single* $49 app, let alone an integrated suite for $49 that works as well and offers as much?

Can you say: "Jam-packed?"

a

[driven]

Originally posted by Hoosier_1701:
One question, is it iPhoto 4 or iPhoto '04? If it is the former, I must have been sleeping through the entire product life cycle of iPhoto 3. I don't remember Apple playing those kinds of games with version numbers before (example: Word for Windows jumping from version 2.0 to 6.0).

I believe it's '04


Any one of these apps would be a value at $49.00. (Also: I can get an educational discount so it should be even less.) I'm as cheap as they come (still on my 4 year old Mac) and I'm not complaining.

[Visnaut]

I believe the point of contention here is, what if certain users don't care for any of the iLife suite of apps except for iPhoto?

Without a doubt, the price is right for the whole package. iDVD and GarageBand are awesome apps of course, but I, and I assume others, have absolutely no use for them. I don't use iMovie at all.

I can easily afford iLife. That's not a problem. Question is, if I only ever use Word, would i buy Office? No, not really. At least you can buy Word separately, or download a demo. Not the case with iPhoto "04".

[OwlBoy]

Yeah, I use iMovie, and iTunes, and soon iPhoto.

But I have no DVD Burner, and Garage Band would just be a novelty for me to play with.

The 3 I use (and will be) have always been free downloads... why stop now!?

[edit: I take that back, iMovie use to only come with macs, and sold separate, during the time when few macs had firewire. , Then it was free. But still, don't pull a .mac on this one, there is no excuse for iMovie... unless it comes with a few DVDs full of stock footage.

-Owl

[::maroma::]

Originally posted by Visnaut:
At least you can buy Word separately, or download a demo. Not the case with iPhoto "04".

I agree with this. Apple should sell some if not all of the apps separately (at a cheaper price of course). But then make it worth while to get the whole package. I think each of those apps are easily worth $50 on their own (as someone else said). So say offer iPhoto for $25 or so, the others slightly higher if warranted. then the whole iLife suite would look like a steal (which I think it is already).

And I'm pretty sure it's iPhoto 4, not '04. Apple refers to it as "iPhoto 4" on it's page.

And, does anyone know if there is an upgrade price for previous iLife owners? And if not, will there be when these apps get updated again?

[poocat]

nah.

it doesn't suck.
they're allowed to do whatever they want.

and yes, iphoto and itunes ARE included with the os, yes, the os we BOUGHT last month.

that's LAME.

charge for imovie.
charge for idvd
charge (please!) for garageband.

but for iphoto?
the "hub" of the digital photography studio?
what?

i mean, what's up with that being a selling point for panther YESTERDAY and a PURCHASED separately feature TODAY?

uh. i feel like i missed the bus. they can do whatever they want, and they will, but that was the worst keynote i've ever seen.

"hi. i'm steve. no new hardware here, just small ipods. they're cheap, too! they're EXACTLY as cheap as the money you'll need to spend on the software you paid for LAST MONTH!"

thanks steve.

this isn't that big a deal. i hate iphoto2 anyway. i was about to delete it and go back to image capture, but i hoped it might get fixed.

it did. and it's still going in the trash.

single pricing? $10 for a photo program that doesn't suck? something? i really don't care at all about imovie (no vidcam) or idvd (no dvd burner) or garageband (no musical equipment) but i'd kinda like... my photo album fixed.

i mean, whatever. there are a million of these rants, and if i'd just bought a new mac yesterday... i'd be REAL mad. as is, it was just the os, and that was last month. so... i'm only a bit confused.

hi. buy our os. it comes with great software.
what? we said that? no way man, you totally have to pay for that stuff.

what?!

coming next month: new versions of preview, image capture, and THE FINDER. upgrade fees apply. no longer 10.3.3, now 10.3 '04!

sweet. i llloooove me some apple, but that was the least exhilarating thing i've ever seen.

pc.

[eevyl]

Like the iApps? Buy them or wait till next new Mac.

Don't like them? Don't buy them, use the free ones provided with your Mac, look for alternatives, cheaper (if you can find a bunch of software like iLife for less than 50 bucks, tell me) and/or better and use it.

It seems a pretty nice deal to me.

[new newton]

The sense of entitlement here seems pretty strong. So you've got an old version--did it come with anything promising you free upgrades? My copy of 10.2 shipped with the original iChat. Did I feel I should get iChatAV for nothing? Nope. It was nice of Apple to bundle it with 10.3.

The comments that I find really embarrassing are the "but it's faster and more capable than my iPhoto 2!" Yeah, one would hope. That's the nature of software. Do you think those improvements happen magically? Apple has to pay programmers and engineers.

If you think the measly amount of money they're charging is worth more to you than the added functionality, don't make the purchase. It's really that simple. Apple isn't forcing you to upgrade. There's still people out there using *gasp* 10.1. Or 9. Or 8.6. Or System 7. Get a grip.

Steve Jobs is not my sugar daddy. He's a guy that sells me products.

[Mr Scruff]

Originally posted by eevyl:
Like the iApps? Buy them or wait till next new Mac.

Don't like them? Don't buy them, use the free ones provided with your Mac, look for alternatives, cheaper (if you can find a bunch of software like iLife for less than 50 bucks, tell me) and/or better and use it.

It seems a pretty nice deal to me.

I think the problem here is that iPhoto is Apple's annointed photo management software - it's how you are expected to manage photos in OS X - the 'built in' solution if you will.

So many people are tied to it already. But it's never really worked correctly - and it would appear they've finally done the profiling and performance enhancement that should have been there in V1.0

So they are now expecting people to pay extra to get the software that they only used because it was the 'Apple approved' default solution work in the way it should have done from the beginning.

If Microsoft acted in this manner, you guys would be all over them. I think Apple's dropped the ball here.

[Mr Scruff]

Originally posted by new newton:
The comments that I find really embarrassing are the "but it's faster and more capable than my iPhoto 2!" Yeah, one would hope. That's the nature of software. Do you think those improvements happen magically? Apple has to pay programmers and engineers.

This would be legitimate if iPhoto had ever worked as it should do - but it's always been the 'ugly duckling' iApp. Acceptable performance shouldn't be a v3.0 feature, it should be a V1.0 feature.

The fact is (without labouring the point) Apple has achieved dominant market share with iPhoto not through quality of the product but through bundling with the OS. Now they release an upgrade that fixes the main issues with the product and charge for it.

Imagine the following:

The DV editor MS ships with XP (Windows Movie Maker or something) is a POS app, woefully underfeatured and not a patch on iMovie. But it will have a massive marketshare because it is the default solution on a Windows system.

What if Microsoft came out tomorrow and said "here's the new version of Movie Maker which finally has all the features and performance you'd expect, but you have to pay $49 for it". Somehow I think you guys would be sceptical.

[new newton]

Originally posted by Mr Scruff:
This would be legitimate if iPhoto had ever worked as it should do - but it's always been the 'ugly duckling' iApp. Acceptable performance shouldn't be a v3.0 feature, it should be a V1.0 feature.

If the performance was not satisfactory for you, why were you using it? For my needs iPhoto 2 was sufficient. That's a couple thousand photos of which about half are 2 megapixel or better. I had a pretty tough time complaining about it as it did what I wanted it to do, and was free.

Now they've significantly improved the performance and capabilities. That's good. It's not free. That's acceptable to me, and given your position should certainly be acceptable to you--you said that the free version wasn't acceptable to you. Now that it's been improved to the point where you find it acceptable you're complaining that it's no longer free?

If you want free software you have to accept that you're getting what you pay for. If you want great software, sometimes you have to pay for it. That's always been the case.

It was nice of Apple to make it a freebie for so long. Now they've want to *gasp* charge for their software. Either pay for it or don't, but don't bitch about something costing money.

People purchasing new Macs should not be expected to bear the burden of subsidizing Apple's iApps for the rest of us. If you like the software--pay for it!

[Mr Scruff]

Originally posted by new newton:
If the performance was not satisfactory for you, why were you using it? For my needs iPhoto 2 was sufficient. That's a couple thousand photos of which about half are 2 megapixel or better. I had a pretty tough time complaining about it as it did what I wanted it to do, and was free.

I wasn't using it, I don't have a digital camera. My other half does however, and when I've used iPhoto on her mac (and on my parents mac) the performance has been among the worst of any app on the machine.

The fact that you didn't pay for the software directly has no bearing on it's innate value. All Apple customers are paying for the development - the iApps have always been considered by users (and marketed by apple) as 'value added' to our hardware purchase and choice of platform.

Now they've significantly improved the performance and capabilities. That's good. It's not free. That's acceptable to me, and given your position should certainly be acceptable to you--you said that the free version wasn't acceptable to you. Now that it's been improved to the point where you find it acceptable you're complaining that it's no longer free?

If you want free software you have to accept that you're getting what you pay for. If you want great software, sometimes you have to pay for it. That's always been the case.

It was nice of Apple to make it a freebie for so long. Now they've want to *gasp* charge for their software. Either pay for it or don't, but don't bitch about something costing money.

Forgive me, but I feel you're missing the subtext here. The majority of Mac users use iPhoto not because it's free, and not because it's the best app out there. They use it because it's the Apple bundled (and hence best integrated) solution. Also, they have the warm feeling of looking forward to future free upgrades of these iApps, an uncertain thing with other products.

Now the rug has been pulled on this. I personally know of several people for who the existance of the iApps (and there continued existance as a free, Apple supported solution) was a factor in their mac/pc purchasing decision. I feel that Apple is being disingenuous with this people.

People purchasing new Macs should not be expected to bear the burden of subsidizing Apple's iApps for the rest of us. If you like the software--pay for it!

If that argument has any legitimacy, I don't recall the hordes of new Mac users on these boards demanding that Apple stop making them pay for the continued development of the iApps.

Last year Apple had a decent argument that iDVD was simply too large to offer for download. They can make a similar argument this year with Garage Band and perhaps iMovie.

iPhoto should remain free.

[new newton]

Originally posted by Mr Scruff:
the iApps have always been considered by users (and marketed by apple) as 'value added' to our hardware purchase and choice of platform.

That's simply not true. The very first iApp wasn't free. iDVD has never been free. It's only been avaible for seperate purchase or by purchasing a Mac that is bundled with it.

Forgive me, but I feel you're missing the subtext here. The majority of Mac users use iPhoto not because it's free, and not because it's the best app out there. They use it because it's the Apple bundled (and hence best integrated) solution.

They use it because it's on their Mac. Will iPhoto 2 be leaving their Mac because Apple has decided to charge for iPhoto 4? No.

Also, they have the warm feeling of looking forward to future free upgrades of these iApps, an uncertain thing with other products.

That's proven to be a rather unrealistic expectation.

I personally know of several people for who the existance of the iApps (and there continued existance as a free, Apple supported solution) was a factor in their mac/pc purchasing decision. I feel that Apple is being disingenuous with this people.

It still bundles iLife with every new Mac. You're trying to say that bundling creates expectations of every new version being free? Please. That's off the deep end.

iPhoto should remain free.

Because a business shouldn't change the price of the goods it creates? Apple never promised these for free, and by all appearances has delivered substantially upgraded products. And yes, if you feel they should be free you're putting the entirety of the development costs on new Mac users. That's not an argument--it's simple accounting.

I'm willing to pay for higher-quality software, just as I'm willing to pay for higher-quality hardware. I'm amazed at the sense of entitlement that some people seem to possess.

[joltguy]

I'm pretty disappointed that iPhoto won't be available as a free download any more myself (if indeed that is the case, wait till Jan16). However, I guess you could look at it as though you're buying iPhoto and getting 4 other great apps for free. iPhoto (with the features they showed off yesterday) is easily worth $49US by itself. As others have mentioned, so are each of the other apps. Apple could charge $49 for each of them individually if they wanted to... they're that good. Getting them all together really is a bargain which is only tainted by the fact that previous versions (which you still have the use of btw) were free.

[Mr Scruff]

Originally posted by new newton:
That's simply not true. The very first iApp wasn't free. iDVD has never been free. It's only been avaible for seperate purchase or by purchasing a Mac that is bundled with it.

Was iDVD the first iApp? I thought it was iTunes? If so I stand corrected. Either way, you don't address my point - most users do consider the iApps as value added to their purchase of a new Mac. Apple understands this - it's why they created the applications in the first place.

They use it because it's on their Mac. Will iPhoto 2 be leaving their Mac because Apple has decided to charge for iPhoto 4? No.

Exactly, they use it because it's on their mac. In the same sense that Windows users use MSN messenger because it's on their PC. Nothing to do with the merits of the software.

The reality is that previous versions of iPhoto have been sub-par. Don't believe me? To quote their iPhoto 4 page:

Take scrolling, for example. Browsing through thousands of photos to find the precise one you wanted used to be, let us say, a poky affair. No more. When you drag the scroll button down the scroll bar now, you’ll scream through your photos. No waiting. No delays. If you’re looking for that photo of your grandfather landing the salmon on the Sun River in Montana last summer, you’ll find it in seconds.

So the strategy appears (whether it's intentional or not), bundle sub-par versions of software with your OS to achieve market domination, then charge for an upgrade that fixes the free versions shortcomings.

It still bundles iLife with every new Mac. You're trying to say that bundling creates expectations of every new version being free? Please. That's off the deep end.

I don't think so - I certainly don't expect Microsoft to start charging for future versions of Windows Movie Maker etc. Also the fact that previous versions were free might have been some indication? The surprise on these boards at the decision would indicate I wasn't alone in my assumption.

Because a business shouldn't change the price of the goods it creates? Apple never promised these for free, and by all appearances has delivered substantially upgraded products. And yes, if you feel they should be free you're putting the entirety of the development costs on new Mac users. That's not an argument--it's simple accounting.

Changing the price and charging for previously free software are different things.

As for the new Mac users subsidising the iApps, well Apple released xGrid to the scientific community yesterday - who's paying for that?

Apple are entitled to invest their earnings however they see fit. Potential Mac owners are entitled to purchase something else if they cannot stand the thought of subsidising the iApps for existing Mac users...

I presume you would advocate Apple charging for future upgrades to iCal, iSync, Safari, Mail...

I'm willing to pay for higher-quality software, just as I'm willing to pay for higher-quality hardware. I'm amazed at the sense of entitlement that some people seem to possess.

I'm willing to pay for my software also. I however don't appreciate it when companies corner a market with a free, OS bundled product and then switch the tactics when they see fit.

[new newton]

Originally posted by Mr Scruff:
Was iDVD the first iApp? I thought it was iTunes?

Nope, it was iMovie. Apple only began giving it away when it came out with the OS X version.

Either way, you don't address my point - most users do consider the iApps as value added to their purchase of a new Mac.

What would you like me to say? Nothing has changed when it comes to the purchase of a new Mac. You understand that, don't you? If comes with iLife.

The reality is that previous versions of iPhoto have been sub-par.

Sub-par as compared to what? iPhoto was the first of its kind. It's inspired a wide range of programs that serve the same function on the PC. Software continues to evolve, and it should be expected that a new version is considerably improved over the old. Just because the old version has limits does not mean it isn't function--it just means there are limits, particularly when compared to newer software. This isn't unusual.

So the strategy appears (whether it's intentional or not), bundle sub-par versions of software with your OS to achieve market domination, then charge for an upgrade that fixes the free versions shortcomings.

You certainly choose to see the worst in things, don't you? Apple didn't force any other companies out of the market--there wasn't anything like iPhoto prior to its introduction. If you're trying to create an argument that Apple is stiffling inovation by providing their own applications, you'll fail miserably. Putting a price on iPhoto creates a market for competitors to produce a superior product.

I don't think so - I certainly don't expect Microsoft to start charging for future versions of Windows Movie Maker etc.

Let me get this straight--you believe software bundled with a computer purchase entitles the buyer to free upgrades for the life of the product? You're really losing credibility here. I don't expect any bundled applications to include anything other than what I received when I bought the product. When was the last time Intuit sent you a brand new version of Quicken just because the old version came on your iMac? Are you trying to say that there's a difference because Apple is the company that builds the hardware and OS? There isn't.

Changing the price and charging for previously free software are different things.

No, they aren't. Don't try to argue against simple ideas that have no room for interpretation. $0 is just as valid as a price as any other cost you might associate with a product.

I presume you would advocate Apple charging for future upgrades to iCal, iSync, Safari, Mail...

If you haven't noticed, they do charge for some of those. They're considered parts of the OS.

I'm willing to pay for my software also. I however don't appreciate it when companies corner a market with a free, OS bundled product and then switch the tactics when they see fit.

So you would have rather been paying for the software all along? You're not helping your argument with that.

What it boils down to is this: Apple's charging for the product now. Do you think $49 is too much? Then don't buy it. What's so tough to swallow about that? It's the same choice we all make about all potential purchases every day of our lives. Yesterday gas was $1.49, and today it's $1.55. Am I going to complain and moan about it? Nope. Are you?

"When I bought this car it had gas in the tank..."

[poocat]

uh.

the part someone's missing is that i have to pay $49 for iPhoto.

i have no dvd burner.
i have a 500 mhz g3.
i have no vidcam.

why, oh why, should i pay $49 for iPhoto?
it WAS a reason i bought panther. that cost me $129.
it sucks.
it's a dog, performance wise, like NO other app on the platform. i'm not saying i DESERVE anything. i'm saying it SUCKS.

i'd at the very least consider paying $15 for a working version.
$49?! for three other programs i will never install? WHY?

i think people are overlooking the lack of NEW at this keynote, and the focus on money.

pretty lame.

btw, aren't you guys worried about Safari yet?
iChat? you already have to pay for it, but it COMES with panther. hmmm. just like iPhoto.
until steve's next keynote.
then it's pay again, or stick.

seriously. this could happen to ANY app.

pc.

[new newton]

Originally posted by poocat:
seriously. this could happen to ANY app.

Yup. That's life. Sucks, don't it?

I remember the days when the OS was free. That changed. I remember the days when phone support was free for the life of the computer. That changed.

Of course, things weren't nearly as functional back then. It was a bitch to set up TCP/IP, multitasking was a nice idea, Quicktime would play full-screen without paying for a Pro version, and there wasn't anything remotely like iPhoto.

Costs for computing have gone down on the whole, and you get a whole lot more for your money now. Back in the dark days there were no bundled apps. Perhaps I'm not as willing to commiserate with you guys because I remember all that.

I paid $50 for Adobe Photoshop Album for my father. In another year and a half he'll pay $20 or whatever to get it updated. If you want the latest and greatest you've got to pay for it. Was it nice of Apple to give the software away for a while? Yup. It sure was.

[Arkham_c]

Originally posted by poocat:
uh.

the part someone's missing is that i have to pay $49 for iPhoto.

Umm, no, you don't. You can keep your $49, keep your working iPhoto 2, and go about your life as usual.

Apple never said "iPhoto is free and will always be free" like they did with .mac. They simply said "10.3 comes with iPhoto 2.0, which is a lot better than iPhoto 1.0". This was a true statement, and still is.

I use iPhoto 2.0 all the time, on an iBook/600 no less, with over 2000 photos, and performance is acceptable. GarageBand is worthless to me, I've used iMovie twice, and never used iDVD (even though my G5 has a Superdrive and I have a miniDV camcorder, I've just never had the time or interest).

I will probably buy the new iLife all the same though, because the new iPhoto looks nice, and I may use iMovie and iDVD sometime in the future.

And unlike the new iPods, $50 is nothing of consequence. It's about an hour and a half at work. I can spend $50 and never feel it.

[smitty825]

While I don't agree with Apple now charging $49/$79 for the iLife package, it is their right to do so...

However, if you were a prospective first time "switcher", what would you think about the following "costs" to keep your system "up-to-date"

1. Mac OS X Licenses: $129/year (or $199 for up to 5 computers)
2. .Mac $99/year to get full use out of iSync, iPhoto and iCal, etc
3. iLife: $49/$79 year for those apps

That is on top of having to pay for new hardware and software (ie MS Office) to run stuff off of the old computer.

If I was in that position, I doubt I would switch. It would feel like I would be "Nickel and Dimed" just to be a Mac user.

[new newton]

Where are you getting the $79?

If I were a switcher or anyone else I'd not feel obligated to upgrade each and every time. Why do people act as though they have to do that?

I bought 10 back in May of 2001. I got 10.1 for nothing. I bought 10.2 when it came out, which would have been just fine for me for a while. 10.3 didn't really offer anything that compelled me to purchase it. I've got it now (came on my new PB), but I certainly never felt as though my computer would be obsolete and unworkable if I didn't buy it. In other words I've spent about $250 in the last 3 years on OS software, which is about what I would expect.

Are y'all below the poverty line? We're not talking about large amounts of money here. This stuff is a bargain for the use you get out of it.

[scottiB]

I believe the $79 is for a home license, like the $199 for a five seat license of OS X.

[Hydra]

I fail to see how people can complain about the price of $49 for iLife. If you have iPhoto 2.0 and hate it and don't think the $50 is worth it when some of the other apps are useless to you as well, then don't buy it. If you have iPhoto and like it but don't like the $50 price of admission feel free to use the FREE 2.0 version as it will remain useful to you even after 4.0 is out. If you love iPhoto and think $50 is fair then buy iLife and enjoy.

I seem to remember that I had to pay to get iDVD 2.0 for my dual 800 (at the time) when it came out and that was $50 just for iDVD and worth every penny to me. Adobe sells their Photoshop Album software, which I personally find uninspired, and people gladly plunk down $50 a pop for that and that alone. Here is a description from Adobe reprinted from CompUSA's site:

"Adobe® Photoshop® Album software helps you instantly organize and find your digital photos so you can share your memories and experiences with virtually anyone, anywhere.

Features:
Get photos with one click: Get photos from your digital camera with a single click, and easily grab photos from CDs, your scanner, or your computer.
See all of your photos: Access your entire collection of photos — even your video and audio clips — in one place, no matter where they're stored.
Find photos by date: Quickly locate any photo by the date it was taken using the sliding timeline or Calendar View, which lets you see your pictures by day, month, week, or year.
Use revolutionary keyword tags: Create visual keyword tags to quickly categorize your photos by the people, places, and events in them. Search using one or more tags to instantly find the photos you want.
Improve photos with one click: Automatically fix basic photo problems with a single click, or use intuitive tools that make it easy to remove red eye, adjust brightness, and ensure your photos look their best.
Crop photos: Zero in on the best part of a photo by cropping out the areas you don't want.
Have fun creating keepsakes: Create custom slide shows, cards and calendars, photo books, and more using templates that are easy to personalize with your own photos and words.
Share photos with anyone Send your favorite photos by e-mail or even to mobile phones, display them in 3D Web galleries, or view them on your TV or Palm OS® handheld.
Share in universal Adobe PDF: Easily share photos and slide shows in Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) so virtually anyone can view them with free Adobe Reader® software.
Print online or at home: Automatically upload photos to professional online services*** to order prints, photo albums, and more. Or print at home using a variety of convenient picture packages.
Safeguard your memories: Protect your collection from computer crashes by backing up your photos, keyword tags, and creations in a few simple clicks.
Archive on CD: Burn photos onto CD right from Photoshop Album — no other software is required!"

Sound familiar? I like the "revolutionary keyword tags" I wish Apple had though of that one

How long til Adobe copies the new features in iPhoto as well. Also all the people who drop $700 on PS should complain to Adobe that they should get Photoshop Album free because they already paid for a more advanced photo editor from the same company

-Jerry C.

[Eriamjh]

If you don't want to pay for the software then why don't you just steal it?

Apple owes nobody anything. Apple can charge people anything they want for anything they want.

Do we have to listen to the "I want it free" trolls everytime something free becomes better and Apple expects you to pay for it?

And, no, don't care that you only use one app and don't think it's worth $49. Use something else. The apps are becoming so cross-integrated that perhaps Apple no longer wants them to exist seperately? No more downloads (except iTunes, of course).

I am disappointed that Apple is no longer giving away its best iLife tools for free. However, NO ONE can say that this was unexpected. NO ONE can say they were screwed over. The old software still works. No one is forcing you to buy it or upgrade.

Eventually, iLife might cost $79, or $99, but that's life. That's iLife.

[Mr Scruff]

Originally posted by Eriamjh:
Do we have to listen to the "I want it free" trolls everytime something free becomes better and Apple expects you to pay for it?

Is every person that has a view not directly in agreement with your own a troll?

Personally I don't care even slightly about having to pay for iPhoto. As I have already stated, I don't have a digital camera. I have no use for iPhoto either way.

However I do care about the success of the Mac platform, and the perception of Apple by potential customers. You may be able to legitimise Apples conduct here, but in the end it doesn't matter.

Until yesterday iPhoto was a free app (like iTunes). Now it isn't. For some people (people who aren't quite so inclined to rush to Apples defence) this will look bad.

Anyway, last post (I promise).