Tuesday, January 16, 2007



Read a couple of pests regarding this issue of Apple being forced to charge for a software (http://tinyurl.com/ya8pua) patch that enables 802.11n wifi on Macs (http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2007/1/15/6637) that offer this as an unadvertised feature. (http://tinyurl.com/ya5d2l) Apparently they must charge a fee or offer the patch with an enabling product, like their new Airport Extreme, to avoid conflict with a law that prohibits the recording of profit from the sale of unfinished products. I know of similar laws, so this sounds reasonable enough.

However, as usual, the crowd is getting so worked up about the surface issue (in part because Apple stirs up emotion), the real issue is being overlooked: why didn't Apple advertise this feature? At first glance, one would assume they'd want to advertise a more advanced feature because it would help sales. Probably true, but wouldn't this also boost sales of 802.11n routers? Sure would. Only problem is Apple didn't have one on the shelves yet. But now they do and now the previously unadvertised feature is being advertised. Sneaky way to keep you new Macbook owners from buying someone else's "n" router. Just as sneaky as creating a cover controversy to distract from it.



CateGoogles: general_tech
Mood = unimpressed

Labels:

The truth behind the Mac 802.11n fee


2 Comments:

  1. But my question is still -- why don't they just pay it for their customers? Call it an instant rebate? Your assumption that they waited until they had a router product on the market is probably right. It's all about money in the end -- you can't fault them for that (that's what corps do) -- but charging their customers, even such an insignificant amount such as this, just seems wrong.

    By Blogger Clifford, at 1/19/2007 12:52:00 AM
     

  2. Can't pay a fee for your customer if it's to avoid conflict for recording *profit*. That's the key term. A rebate wouldn't undo the profit they recorded from the sale of unfinished tech. Doesn't mean it's right or even necessary, but the cover story is plausible.

    Again though, it's just a cover, something to distract from their deception to keep customers from switching to someone else's router and to secure instant demand for their new router. They needed to make a splash. Can't do that without firing up some bad emotions. Very easy for them to go back and reduce the fee (and outrage) as they've recently done. Simple but effective ploy.

    By Blogger Sumocat, at 1/19/2007 06:55:00 AM
     

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home




Archive