PC Magazine Thinks Apple Gets Upgrades Right

[Vincent Ferrari]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2343326,00.asp' target='_blank'>http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,281...,2343326,00.asp</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"Apple's upgrade strategy helps their users and the company in a bunch of different ways. It lets users buy iPhones with some confidence, knowing that they're not going to get left behind next year. It lets developers aim at the latest platform, without having to worry about supporting the older versions of the iPhone OS. And it keeps users with Apple because they don't enter a new buying cycle, thinking of new choices and potentially churning off to the latest new thing."</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/at/auto/1237551277.usr18053.jpg" /></p><p>Sagan brings up an excellent point.&nbsp; RIM and Microsoft, two of the biggest direct competitors in the Smartphone arena, just can't get more than a point-release out to customers.&nbsp; If you throw in Nokia, you rarely see any groundbreaking upgrades to a phone OS that doesn't require the purchase of new hardware.</p><p>He also hits the nail on the head when he says that it makes customers more confident in the product knowing they won't be left behind if an upgrade comes down the pipeline.&nbsp; That's one of the reasons I so love my iPhone; unlike they myriad other smartphones I've owned, it's still just as useful as the day I got it because of an upgrade to the OS.</p><p>A <strong>free</strong> upgrade to the OS.</p>

[ptyork]

This is something that I agree with 100% (though I have the touch, so I pay $9.95). The upgrade policies of the others suck badly. In WinMo's case, it is the two vendor issue (actually three). In Palm's case, it was lack of real progress on the OS. And in RIM's case, well, apparently they can't seem to think 5 days in the future when it comes to hardware design since every new OS needs a new phone.

I think that it is the store that makes this work for Apple from a revenue perspective. Since new apps require new OS and they make lots of $$ off of new apps, then get the new OS out as quickly as possible. A two-year cycle isn't quick enough.

[Sven Johannsen]

Actually I don't think this is really too tough a concept as long as you totally control the hardware and software, and have the single carrier in a virtual full nelson. Far cry from the company that threw off the draconian shackles of the establishment in 1984. Remember the ad?

As ptyork points out this is a business problem on the MS side, not a technical one. Right or wrong, good or bad, that is the model MS chose to follow. I can tell you that current WM software really doesn't have much problem running on older hardware. Lots of less than official avenues to explore this. Of course you can't go back forever, there has been way more progress in PocketPC hardware since the platforms introduction in 2000, than there has been in the Apple Hardware. Yea the new one has 3G, but it isn't like 3G didn't exist when the 1st Gen came out. Apple just didn't include it...maybe so they could innovate. ;)

[treynolds]

I agree completely, even though I only have the lowly Touch and not the iPhone...

I have been using PDA's in one flavor or another since 1997, and on both Palm and WinMo platforms nothing comes close to the ease of use and dollar value of the Apple upgrades. For all those out there that want to bitch and moan about Apple charging $9.95 for each upgrade (which I am HAPPY to pay), I might remind them of OS upgrades for other devices in the past that were ridiculously priced or never materialised...

It tickles me no end that my 1st Gen Touch is just as useful today with the upcoming OS 3.0 as it was with OS 1.0, and that in turn makes me far, FAR more likely to continue with Apple for my handheld needs. Who know, perhaps someday I might even spring for an iPhone...

:)

Tony