This only makes sense, since the hardware is the same, there is no reason to track the different generations of classic firmware, they would have to judge it based on HD size, which would be a tricky proposition, especially if someone switched the hard drive out.
As far as the Zunes go, there actually is some difference in the 30 hardware and the 80/120 hardware, its cool that they test it and fix applicable bugs on both platforms.
No Nilay Patel and telepheedian, this only makes sense because this is a feature that APPLE MAKES MONEY OFF.
I don't expect random commenters to use their brains, but Nilay Patel you and the rest of Engadget probably have your heads too far up Apple's ass to be able to use your brains. And this ain't Apple bashing, this goes for any company. Maybe nobody told you this, but Apple is a company and companies are in the business of making money.
How's about next time you take a more critical and professional approach when you're writing about stuff like this? But I forget, this is only a "blog", right?
Fuck's sake, almost as bad as the people who believe David Duchovny actually has a sex-addiction.
Actually, if I'm anything, i'm a microsoft fanboy, running Vista Ultimate, with three Zunes (some received as gifts), and the Zune Pass subscription. I know why apple charges for its updates, its greed. My point is that the new hardware uses the EXACT same motherboard, making it very difficult for Apple to tell whether its a new model or not, especially if the hard drive has been replaced. Considering that this is only the iPod Classic, and the only new feature added was Genius, there would probably be an uproar (even among fanboys) if Apple decided to charge for the update, but at the same time, they still need to be able to make minor updates to the device for when they make changes to iTunes and find various bugs. Plus, there needs to be a file available to flash it with if the iPod needs to be restored. Economically, it would make no sense for them to maintain & bug test two slightly different versions of firmware for almost the exact same product, and even apple knows that selling the update would be a PR disaster. Keeping two separate codebases would probably cost them far more even if they did charge for the update, which is also one of the reasons the Zunes all get new firmware, as they change the software/social to go along with it. Support on two different firmware versions also costs a chunk of change, they do it on the touch because: A) the software is more modular and less embedded and B) they make far more money off of the $10 update than they would off of a $2 or so classic update.
When it comes to bug testing, I think Microsoft have the right idea.
You see, the new firmware could have a big bug in it, but given the fact that Microsoft DOES have a much smaller fanbase prepared to buy a new device from day one, if it shares the new FW with ALL current Zune owners, there's a much larger testing base.
Personally, I'd much rather find out there's a big problem with a firmware by installing it for free (providing it doesn't brick a device) than buying a new product and THEN finding out.
Following the commercial success (and technical disappointment) of the original Wildfire -- which featured a miserly 528MHz CPU and QVGA display -- HTC has returned with the Wildfire S.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
This only makes sense, since the hardware is the same, there is no reason to track the different generations of classic firmware, they would have to judge it based on HD size, which would be a tricky proposition, especially if someone switched the hard drive out.
As far as the Zunes go, there actually is some difference in the 30 hardware and the 80/120 hardware, its cool that they test it and fix applicable bugs on both platforms.
No Nilay Patel and telepheedian, this only makes sense because this is a feature that APPLE MAKES MONEY OFF.
I don't expect random commenters to use their brains, but Nilay Patel you and the rest of Engadget probably have your heads too far up Apple's ass to be able to use your brains. And this ain't Apple bashing, this goes for any company. Maybe nobody told you this, but Apple is a company and companies are in the business of making money.
How's about next time you take a more critical and professional approach when you're writing about stuff like this? But I forget, this is only a "blog", right?
Fuck's sake, almost as bad as the people who believe David Duchovny actually has a sex-addiction.
Actually, if I'm anything, i'm a microsoft fanboy, running Vista Ultimate, with three Zunes (some received as gifts), and the Zune Pass subscription. I know why apple charges for its updates, its greed. My point is that the new hardware uses the EXACT same motherboard, making it very difficult for Apple to tell whether its a new model or not, especially if the hard drive has been replaced.
Considering that this is only the iPod Classic, and the only new feature added was Genius, there would probably be an uproar (even among fanboys) if Apple decided to charge for the update, but at the same time, they still need to be able to make minor updates to the device for when they make changes to iTunes and find various bugs.
Plus, there needs to be a file available to flash it with if the iPod needs to be restored.
Economically, it would make no sense for them to maintain & bug test two slightly different versions of firmware for almost the exact same product, and even apple knows that selling the update would be a PR disaster. Keeping two separate codebases would probably cost them far more even if they did charge for the update, which is also one of the reasons the Zunes all get new firmware, as they change the software/social to go along with it.
Support on two different firmware versions also costs a chunk of change, they do it on the touch because:
A) the software is more modular and less embedded and
B) they make far more money off of the $10 update than they would off of a $2 or so classic update.
When it comes to bug testing, I think Microsoft have the right idea.
You see, the new firmware could have a big bug in it, but given the fact that Microsoft DOES have a much smaller fanbase prepared to buy a new device from day one, if it shares the new FW with ALL current Zune owners, there's a much larger testing base.
Personally, I'd much rather find out there's a big problem with a firmware by installing it for free (providing it doesn't brick a device) than buying a new product and THEN finding out.