Apple

So why did they do it? Now that we are, hopefully, convinced of the fact that it was an intentional move on Apple s part and not a legal restriction that made them attach a price tag to these applications, let us discuss why it is unethical. It is the company s hardware and they ve sold it to the customer. So why can t they charge for it when they have new applications to sell? Isn t it exactly like selling iWork or Final Cut Pro for a Mac? No, it isn t.

When you buy a Mac, you know that if new software or major upgrades to software already bought are released in the future, you will have to pay for them. You know that even if you re being given iLife 08 for free, iLife 09 will cost you money. You are prepared to part with the money when you buy the Mac. However, for all intents and purposes, it was assumed by everyone I know that all free upgrades for the iPhone would be free for the iPod touch too.

When Apple released the iPhone, they assured us that they would keep improving it over time by releasing free software upgrades that added major new features. Then they released the iPod touch a few months later, a somewhat stripped down version of the same product that we d seen the introduction of a few months ago. Jobs kept reminding us that it was extremely similar to the iPhone, to help the iPod touch ride the wave of the iPhone s popularity to success.

Not many people would ve been willing to pay $399 for a 16GB iPod, but they did because it was an iPhone without the phone and the AT T contract. It was assumed that it was the only point of difference between the two products. I agree that Apple never so much as mentioned that upgrades for the iPod touch would be free as for the iPhone, but they made sure that people assumed that they would be so they bought those iPod touches. And now they ve exploited the loophole.