|
Definition of Overkill (4/2/98)
|
 
|
| | |
Seems we made a mistake in yesterday's episode when we stated that the distribution license fees for Quicktime 3.0 were reasonable, especially considering that the fee is waived if the installer software installs a promo movie that hawks the upgrade to Quicktime Pro. As faithful viewer Charles Moylan rightly corrects us, the fee waiver requirements are considerably more stringent-- and ridiculous-- than we originally thought. See, it's not that the installer has to put this ad movie on the user's desktop; it's the application itself that needs to do this-- every time it's launched.
Suddenly we understand what all the fuss is about. Imagine that you buy a game that requires Quicktime, so it's on the CD-ROM in case you need to install it. Even if you already have Quicktime installed and you don't even use the copy on the CD, every single time you play that game, a Quicktime movie called something like "Upgrade to Quicktime Pro" appears on your desktop. Every time you trash the file, it reappears when you fire up your new game. And this happens until you actually shell out the $30 to upgrade to Quicktime Pro, which many, many people don't need. This is, without a doubt, the silliest Apple strategy in recent memory. Whose bright idea was it to try to annoy people into buying software they might not need or want?
Odds are, this strategy is only going to hurt Apple in the long run. Fewer developers will use Quicktime (especially on the Windows platform) because they can't justify an extra buck or two per box and they really can't afford to annoy their customers with a respawning ad movie. End users will be upset at having their desktops held hostage for a $29.95 ransom. Note to Apple: the whole licensing scheme makes sense except this silly respawning movie requirement. Change the waiver condition to what we originally thought it was-- require that the installer program put the ad on the desktop, not the application itself. Why guarantee the alienation of hordes of Quicktime users and developers, just when the software is hitting its prime? (Unless it's a genetic self-destructive tendency, or the effects of a voodoo curse, of course.)
| |
| |
 |
SceneLink (590)
|  |
 |
|
And Now For A Word From Our Sponsors |
| | | |
|
| |
|
 | | The above scene was taken from the 4/2/98 episode: April 2, 1998: The Quicktime distribution license fee waiver requirements are considerably goofier than we had erroneously thought. Meanwhile, a small outfit in Austin, TX makes a bid for Apple's recently-buried Newton technology, and the New York Times spouts a colorful fountain of FUD, right on schedule...
Other scenes from that episode: 591: Newtonian Resurrection? (4/2/98) Well, how about that? Just because Apple has no faith in the recently-Steved Newton platform doesn't mean that others out there don't think it's worth saving. Planet Computing of Austin, TX is a small developer of software for handheld computers who says they made an offer to buy the Newton from Apple some three weeks ago, but it seems Apple's not selling... 592: Hurray, Back To Normal (4/2/98) Oy vey, just when it looked like the default Apple-bashing in the media might finally have passed, along comes the New York Times, otherwise known as "Old Faithful" among those who are familiar with its record of Mac-slamming...
Or view the entire episode as originally broadcast... | |  |
|
|
