View Poll Results: How much would you be willing to pay?

64. You may not vote on this poll
  • $1 to $5

    6 9.38%
  • $6 to $10

    2 3.13%
  • $11 to $15

    1 1.56%
  • $16 to $20

    2 3.13%
  • $21 to $25

    3 4.69%
  • $25+

    1 1.56%
  • Nothing. Updates should be free.

    49 76.56%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 50
  1.    #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion Antares View Post
    Except Apple already experimented with that once on the iTouches and decided NOT to continue that practice.

    You also have to look to the benefits of not forcing people to pay for updates. If you force people to pay for updates then you have to continue to support the older versions of the software with security updates and tech support. If you make the major version upgrades free then you don't need to continue providing support for older versions.
    Apple experimented with it over two years ago though. Modern smartphones are getting to the point that they can mostly replace a computer.

    You do have a good point about supporting older software. I do think core updates would be better if they were free.
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by sketch42 View Post
    But when you buy software for your desktop you get charged take photoshop or any other software most charge for a vers change, granted it's "discounted" but you still get charged.
    That's different IMO, because it's 'software', not an operating system. I get free updates for Ubuntu, free updates for Vista, and I expect to keep getting free updates for webOS until it can't be updated any further.

    Quote Originally Posted by Garrett92C View Post
    What about when a device gets discontinued? For example: The Sprint Pre. How long should Palm be required to provide free updates for a device that is already so old (in terms of average smartphone life)? What if 2.0 is the last update for the Pre/Plus?

    Paid updates would guarantee that we still get updates in the future (as long as we met the system requirements).

    With mobile hardware innovations pretty much at a standstill, it's all about software now.
    I see what you mean, but I don't think we can really use that as an example. Yes, you could say the Sprint Pre is 'discontinued' but is it not practically the same phone as the Pre Plus (besides memory and a little ram)? If they were to stop pushing updates for the Pre I think they would for the Pre Plus as well (and Pixis). I think it's clear that HP/Palm doesn't really want to have "fragmentation" between the different devices. The ONLY way I see something like this happening is if webOS gets to a point where it simply can't run on the Pre.

    Just my opinions.
  3.    #23  
    Yes, you get free updates for Vista after you buy it in the first place (Ubuntu is different lol)... Those updates are mainly bug fixes and minor improvements. The main upgrade would be Windows7, which you pay for. Almost all apps that run on 7 will run on Vista. So, you don't really NEED to upgrade. You only upgrade if you want the added features, staility, etc...

    Yes, you are right about the Plus models. However, even they are starting to reach EOL status...
    Want to keep up with my exciting new projects? You know where to find me.
  4. djmcgee's Avatar
    626 Posts
    Global Posts
    627 Global Posts
    Phone OS updates must remain free to prevent fragmentation. It is bad enough now with the different carriers, imagine what it would be if you had different versions of the OS out there.

    I think like apple, most manufacturers will discontinue to update older hardware at a certain point.
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by mjkjr View Post
    That's different IMO, because it's software. Not an operating system, I get free updates for Ubuntu, free updates for Vista, and I better keep getting free updates for webOS until it can't be updated any further.

    Actually it's not different. I didn't read the op-ed posted so I don't know if he was advocating charging for minor version updates. I was assuming it was for major version updates as is the generally accepted reason for charging for updates, but then it's actually considered an upgrade.

    If they were going to go to a model for charging for upgrades it would be for major upgrades, not 1.4.1 to 1.4.5 but 1.x to 2.0 would be when they would charge. Especially in the case of an OS.

    But as I stated earlier it then goes back to a case of what kind of after-market support they want to offer. When you're running on a license key system like Windows does then it's more beneficial to offer after-market support for the life of the product even after you end it's sales life and charge for major versions. In the case of mobile OSes though it seems more beneficial to not charge for major versions because the OS is tied to device rather then license based. You don't make money on the OS you make it on the devices powered by the OS. So as long as the device's hardware can support the next major version, it is more beneficial to provide the updates to the older devices so you only need to support one version of the OS. Leaving the device with an older version of the OS and charging to update it means you need to support two extra possible configurations instead of just one extra configuration.
    Last edited by Orion Antares; 11/08/2010 at 01:57 PM.
  6. neutron's Avatar
    76 Posts
    Global Posts
    156 Global Posts
    As long as the carriers dictate which versions of the OS we can install, then the OS updates should be free. The carriers charge enough in terms of overhead fees to more than makeup the cost of testing new OS versions for implementation.

    Remember, the carriers do not develop the OS. The vendors do. It is up to the vendor to develop an OS compatible with a particular carrier's technology. In a truly open market, I would pay to have the software version I want, when I want it, in the specific configuration I want it. I am the end user, and am responsible for how I want my device to operate. Under the current model, the carrier locks us in to a specific revision. If we're lucky we can get preware or jail break. In the case of BB, we can install leaked versions of the OS. Under some cases, we can even downgrade to a previous OS if the vendor hasn't changed the baseband.

    Unless we can control what we get, the upgrades should come free and be the responsibility of the carrier. I won't pay for an upgrade that bricks my device.
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by Garrett92C View Post
    That's why Apple should start it first. Once they do, then it will be perfectly acceptable to charge for updates lol
    lol, that is so sad, but it's true. Apple makes everything cool. They make holding your cell phone differently so your calls wont drop look cool; they make forcing you to by a bumper to place around your phone to make calls look cool. I don't see why they can't make paying for software updates for your iPhone, iPods, & iPads look cool too.
  8. #28  
    Windows gets major updates via Service packs which come at no cost. Service packs aren't simply security updates. Many times large updates come out mid life or even end of life on Windows' OS's. (Posessive form of Windows and plural form of OS.... )
    If you like my Themes, please donate! Thanks!
  9. neutron's Avatar
    76 Posts
    Global Posts
    156 Global Posts
    You may be thinking about desktop windows. Here's a link to some WM history:

    Windows Mobile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    My experience with WM (PPC 2002, 2003, WM 5, and WM6) has been extremely negative. Unlike the desktop windows which can be updated to the latest SPs via automatic updates, WM OS updates were developed by MS and then provided to the various vendors for application to specific platforms. Once a vendor, such as Samsung, had ported the OS to its existing hardware, it then went to the carrier for final testing and release.

    I remember wanting to buy a Samsung SCH-i730 device. The entire time the device was offered by VZW, it only included PPC 2003. There were rumored leaks that an update to the WM5, then the state of the art WM OS, was shortly coming. It never did.

    Unless the OS updates are pushed directly to you, such as Apple does via iTunes, your update future is entirely at the whim of the carrier. Which may never be. You could always install a cooked ROM. At your own expense.
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by pogeypre View Post
    Windows gets major updates via Service packs which come at no cost. Service packs aren't simply security updates. Many times large updates come out mid life or even end of life on Windows' OS's. (Posessive form of Windows and plural form of OS.... )
    Those aren't major versions. A major version is the move from XP to Vista to 7. The Service Packs are a roll up of previous minor updates and sometimes contain some functionality changes. They aren't major version upgrades though, it's a different concept. It's more like the coming iOS update that will move from 4.1 to 4.2, they're minor version updates.
  11. #31  
    That's what I mean. The udpates that come out on Mobile OS's are more like service packs that shouldn't have a charge. Now, with major OS updates, you will usually get a new device which I think counts as your upgrade fee.
    If you like my Themes, please donate! Thanks!
  12. #32  
    I hope it doesn't come to paying for updates, but if I had to I would.
  13. #33  
    I don't know about that. Personally I'd consider the update from 1.4.1 to 1.4.5 more akin to a "Service Pack" update given the functionality changes it provided for app development.

    But semantics aside, your business model really determines what you give out for updates and what you make people purchase for upgrades. If the more updates you give, the fewer versions you have to give customer support to for a period of time beyond their shelf life.
  14. #34  
    OS updates should be free. New OS's are what we pay for on desktops, not the updates. The updates to OS's should always be free because most OS's are built in production under a philosophy termed incremental delivery. The updates are planned functionality that has not been rolled out yet or bug fixes that have been identified in production.
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by Garrett92C View Post
    Not quite true. When you buy a smartphone, do you enter into a contract that requires Palm to provide you with free updates and added features? You buy a phone "as is". It's not smart to buy a phone in hopes the features you want are added in the future for free.
    in the palm general user guide, important safety and legal information packet that came with my pixi (underneath EVERYTHING) it says:

    SOFTWARE UPDATES: from time to time, you may receive software updates for your palm device through either tangible media, download link or over the air (a "software update"). such software updates either will be mandatory and free of additional charge ("mandatory software update") or may require an additional fee ("paid software update").

    so, in the end, it IS possible to have a paid software update. would I pay for it? maybe. I'd have to see some leaks, features, etc.
    but, all in all, I think that the company has a right to charge fees for their software. I mean, it is there software after all, and it is our choice if we download it.
    it's all up to palm.
    personally, I always read manuals, and I came across this before I even turned on my pixi, so I've been aware of this for a while. but, I guess I'm ok with it. and with all the major updates they've handed out to me, I don't see a bill yet! so I'm fine. : )
    Last edited by cmilette; 11/08/2010 at 03:32 PM. Reason: to specify which user guide
  16. #36  
    i look at Garmin, they charge, for updates, for a variety of products, and some hefty price tags as well. you end up with people who either wont, cant buy them, than you have people migrating to other platforms. which is something Garmin is experiancing right now. All it takes is one company to offer it up for free, and the business charging gets hammered.
    Life is short, Play hard, and enjoy every moment as if it was your last.
  17. #37  
    You will notice that the Palm Pre 2 released with WebOS 2.0. Sounds like the upgrade model everyone else follows. The nice thing is that the costs involved in legacy Palm phones is not that much considering the OS internals haven't changed that much.

    Still though, if you want 2.0 to run well, you will upgrade your phone. This system works and generates more revenue than a restrictive pay for update model.
    If you like my Themes, please donate! Thanks!
  18. #38  
    I'd pay for better hardware.
    Achill3s' Palm Pre: Modded and patched to death!!
  19. jwinn35's Avatar
    390 Posts
    Global Posts
    396 Global Posts
    I'd say that once a phone has reached the end of it's life paying for an update might be okay. Like say after 2.0 and I'm still rocking my pre minus 6 months down the line I could see them saying pay up or get a new webOS device and it not making me terribly angry.
  20. #40  
    I say we all sneak over to Garrett's house and throw him a soap bar party !!! No pay for updates !! Lol ltm ltm
    Here is a direct link to webOS Doc for all carriers
    P.S. if i have helped you and you are thankful please hit the thanks button to the right---->
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions