As much as I'd love to give Apple a hard time over this, I'm going to put it out there that this is likely just capitulation to publishing companies. You have to pay to re-download MP3s and eBooks, but not apps from the app store. I may not like Apple's philosophy regarding a lot of things, but they're generous by comparison to record labels and publishing companies.
Amazon is better at negotiating with publishers or has more bargaining chips?
I don’t really know whether Apple’s heart is in all this book stuff (Steve Jobs famously said that Americans don’t read anymore), they might not care all that much at the moment. iBooks might just be a fallback solution in case Amazon tries funny stuff (or some other competitor emerges which doesn’t want to play ball with Apple).
I was under the impression that he said that because he didn't have a book reading application yet and was downplaying the kindle until the iPad was out. Similar to how he downplayed the netbooks until the iPad came out. (Yes iPad and the netbooks are different but they are in the same field. I think it's harder to reinvent books compared to small portable computers. Hence why iBook is pretty much the same as all the ebook software).
I think looking at something (netbooks), then turning around and selling 3 million units of a vastly more expensive and higher margin product in a few months, shows that he was right to downplay it and that the iPad does actually offer something fundamentally different that consumers really want.
Perhaps so, but I can't buy into the idea that Apple is helpless in the face of their greed. Apple is a huge company, bigger than many publishers, and Steve Jobs is a business god. If he calls up a publisher and explains that iBooks is like someone installing a new bookshelf for the books they already own, and that making them buy new books for a new bookshelf would be laughable (especially when it might dampen their inclination to make more purchases), they're probably going to pay attention to him. I just can't see him passively sacrificing his new revenue stream on the altar of their technical ignorance.
On the other hand, I can sort of see him telling people 'it's not my fault you wedged all those Ebooks into itunes. Are books tunes? Is e = i? No? Then get with the program!'
Edit: 'bigger than any publishers'. D'oh! They're the second biggest publicly traded company by market cap, so arguably Apple is larger than the whole book publishing sector put together in pure $ terms.
Actually, if you buy an app when it's on sale and then try to download it again after it goes off sale, it won't let you.
I once caught a an app that was temporarily free and got it in iTunes with my account it in one of my computers, expecting it to show up as an available download when I got back to the one I sync my phone with. It doesn't appear and I had to copy the .ipa file there.
I have no experience trying to redownload paid apps that are still the same price, but first thing I did was to add .ipa files to my daily mozy backup.
In my experience if you delete an app you have paid for you have to try and re-buy it and type your password in but just before it would normally do the transaction it tells you that you already have the application and its a free download. I imagine the same thing might have happened if you had tried to buy the app you got on sale again.
If I remember correctly, music on the iTunes store works similarly. They charge you at download and you had better back up your files. The operational concept is that the user downloads the content once and then syncs that content among devices (iPhone, iPad, whatever) using their desktop computer.
"Can I copy my books onto other computers or devices?
Books downloaded from the iBookstore can be placed on up to five computers you own that you’ve authorized with your iTunes Store account. You can sync your books to all iPads, iPhones, and iPod touches you own.1 Audiobooks, PDF files, and ePub files you've added to iTunes will appear in Books under Library. To sync Books to your device, connect it to your computer using the cable it came with. In iTunes, select your device then click the Books tab. Choose the books you would like to read on your device then press Sync. Books will sync to iPad, iPhone, and iPod touch even if iBooks is not installed; to read synced books, download iBooks from the App Store."
"1Requires iPhone and iPod touch with iOS 4 or later. iBooks is not compatible with original iPhone or iPod touch (1st generation)."
> If I remember correctly, music on the iTunes store works similarly.
Interesting, because it definitely doesn't work that way for apps. And I checked with one of the free singles iTunes gives weekly, it does indeed warn me that I'm re-buying the stuff (but detects that I've bought it in the past), it doesn't seem to just launch a re-download.
Cements my decision to never buy any music on iTunes.
"Downloads are only available for a short time after purchase. If you saved the .amz file to your computer, you should "Open" it using the Downloader application immediately after saving it. If you wait to complete your download, it may expire and no longer be available."
> Yep, apps are different. Apps also have update downloads.
Well it's not like anybody's going to update your music files after downloads (though I could see that with books if there is a second edition fixing typos and whatnot)
But what happens when kids find that their favourite band embedded the 'Easter egg' that one of their songs played backwards tells them to worship the devil? How will the recording industry recall/patch those music files?
That's funny, the last time I bought anything on iTunes was several years ago, and I had the opposite problem. I had bought some episodes of Law and Order, and once I was done watching them I deleted them. Every time I started up iTunes it kept automatically trying to redownload the files I had deletes, which was ~1GB of data.
But why? What's the difference to them between redownloading it on your new phone and syncing with your computer to get your books? The bandwidth costs?
And it works fine for apps. I can buy an app over the air, delete it, and redownload it for free, all without my computer ever being involved.
except they have limitations on the amount of devices which can be authorized. And this is the rip mix burn company who didn't care in the past. Why would they care now, most users will just make a cd out of the music anyway to pass it to friends.
I look at Steam as what iTunes should be. With Steam allowing me to download my games, I doubt Apple is suffering because of download costs. I'm pretty sure it's a holdover from their DRM-laden days.
There's an FAQ somewhere on Apple's site which I ran across awhile back that said something to that effect. The deal to require customers to re-buy lost files was part of how they got all the labels to allow the store to even exist in the first place back in the day. Given that music no longer has DRM, this one remaining concession is probably going to be even harder to get dropped because it's one of the only "protections" that the music store offers to the labels now.
You are probably right about this being a concession to the music labels, but that's just music. Not everything in the iTunes store has to work that way. For instance, apps that you buy can be re-downloaded at no charge.
When it comes to apps, Apple is the publisher. They make all the rules and can do as they like.
For music and books Apple has to negotiate contracts with publishers who likely demand certain conditions in return for their content being made available on the various iTunes stores.
Considering Apple's consumer-friendly position on the repeated downloading of apps, it seems reasonable to guess that forcing consumers to pay to redownload books, music and videos is a requirement imposed on them by the content publishers.
Absolutely. Steam's model is great, and the ability to install a fresh new computer, whack on steam and have my whole game library available is a huge incentive for me to keep buying games this way. When I could recently install Steam on my Mac as well, and find games I already owned available cross-platform, well, it's icing on the cake.
Charging for re-downloads is just greedy, and smacks of the bad old Norton Antivirus days. The first time they pulled that on me, I decided I'd never buy one of their products again, and I didn't.
This is not going to work in the era of the iPad-only home. While I understand the technical reasons and humble beginnings of the iTunes store, let's face it, there are a lot of people who don't even own computers now because their iPhone and/or iPad suffices.
EDIT: I can't reply to the thread below so I'm putting my reply here. I have activated a half dozen iPhones on my Mac for friends that don't own computers. While it may not be the smartest thing (no backups), it is certainly doable and both the iPad and the iPhone are still very much useful without a computer.
The only unbiased, quantifiable data I can come up with is a simple Google search:
I think (I'm only guessing) he means this "[L]et's face it, there are a lot of people who don't even own computers now because their iPhone and/or iPad suffices."
To the best of my knowledge you need a computer with iTunes installed to start an iPad at all. A home without any other computer means that your iPad is a flashy paperweight. Also, it's really far too early to tell if the iPad (which is being sold in huge numbers) will replace other things or (as I think Apple hopes) supplement other devices.
Edit: Please notice I say "iPad" above. You respond by talking about the iPhone. They're not the same in this regard, I think. The iPad requires a computer with iTunes to start it initially.
All of that said, I agree that their current model really should change. (Also, the pop-up message in the blog is stunningly obnoxious in wording. It's approaching the "bomb + ok" level of bad.)
That was exactly what I was getting at. It's also not a matter of "is it technically possible" but (s)he claims that it's a popular choice. I don't buy it, but would love to be proven wrong.
The absurd claim about the "iPad only home", given that the iPad requires a computer to activate and manage.
Apple has gone out of its way to make sure the iPad is treated as an additional device, not a sole device for a user. This is important because it allows (or at least helps to allow) the iPad to be judged on its own merit for its own uses, not as if it were the general-purpose computer that some (critically: not Apple) like to claim that it is, much to the iPad's detriment.
I've got a couple of non-techie friends who have pretty much stopped using their computers in favor of their iPhones. They'd cut the computer out entirely if they could.
You have to have access a computer to first turn on an iPad, but my grandmother has gone just fine so far using an iPad with no accompanying computer.
If you don't sync photos/music and use the iPad for watching Netflix, email, and web surfing, there's absolutely no reason to connect the iPad to a computer except for every few months when Apple pushes out an OS update.
Owning a computer is a requirement to use both devices.
It's a rather silly requirement on first boot.
I wonder if the requirement is there only because they want to make the user aware of the iTunes sync feature. At this point in the iDevice life cycle, the PC is an accessory to the device, and not the other way around. It's just a nice-to-have.
Is it? Couldn't I just use someone else's to get it all setup/registered? As far as I know there are no restrictions on the number of devices you can sync to a single computer.
I borrowed a friend's computer to provision my iPod Touch. (I don't have Windows or Mac OS X, so I can't run iTunes.)
I can't sync music/movies/photos to the built-in apps (this wouldn't even be an issue for someone with no computer), but I can use the web browser and third-party apps just fine.
Just tested. Downloaded a book on the phone that I'd bought on the iPad, and it gave me the "you have already purchased this book; press to downloaded it again" message you get from the App Store. If you go into the "purchases" tab it offers to redownload any books you've purchased elsewhere.
What the OP is seeing has to be a bug; after all iBooks does syncing between iPad and iPhone -- they can't expect you to repurchase each time.
"You have already purchased this but it isn't available for redownload. To purchase it again at full price, tap OK"
Given the exact phrasing of the parts I highlighted, I don't think it is a bug. I cannot see in the picture what book it is, but since this does not happen to you for your books, it could be something related to copyright/distribution.
Personally, I'd never buy an eBook, ePub, or whatever. I either invest in a dead tree, get a unDRMed PDF, the web copy, or just check it out from the library.
There are far too many options available today for me to buy into a format that can do less than what I was able to do 5 years ago.
I really hope you change your mind eventually. Dead-tree books are probably on the decline, and if nobody is willing to pay for electronic books because of the prevailing attitude (electronic things are free!) that's going to mess things up.
Don't get me wrong, dead-tree books have their place. In addition to ebooks, I own something like 200lbs of reference books. I'm not blind to the pros of paper. (though you can bet I'll be excited when a real textbook replacement comes along, and I don't have to lug 200lbs around)
Not entirely; books would still be written, that's for certain. Except, the books that are written with no expectation of money whatsoever or as a personal project are either statements for political reasons, or often not worth reading. Most of the popular books and series are written by career authors. Would anyone be a career author if it didn't pay? I don't think anyone tries to be an author for riches, but if it can't pay for food you can hardly do that for a living.
It seems like you presume all the authors will simply continue to write out of passion for writing. Some will, but I feel that's an incredibly narrow-minded and self-interested view.
Now that the ipad and other ebook readers are good enough to read on comfortably, I don't see myself buying a technical book made out of dead trees ever again. I might for fiction because I am a bit of a romantic..
I guess it depends on the technical usage. I still go back to my college era calculus and physics books. Expensive at the time but worth it's weight in gold.
For emerging technologies (hot, new languages) I prefer StackOverflow, Google, and wikis. I'd only give ePubs a shot if the price was substantially cheaper than the dead tree version.
I'd still buy an iPad, but only for light reading and the 100k apps.
Syncing to iTunes sucks. It's been broken for a long time and it's becoming more apparent with the release of the iPad.
It's easily the most frustrating experience I've had managing my iDevices mainly because it's archaic to have to constantly sync to your desktop in 2010.
Google was right: "We discovered something really cool...it's called the Internet."
Real opportunity for Google here to improve on this with Android/Chrome OS devices.
Yet another reason for people to wake up and see how closed and restricted apple is and always will be. I'm actually getting tired of reading about apple screwing people over the same way again and again.
While I hate a lot of the restrictions that Apple places on things, you have to entertain the possibility that the content industries (music,movies,books,etc) heavily push these types of these things when negotiating distribution deals with Apple. As others have mentioned, the things that Apple does control (e.g. Apps) don't have the 'rebuy to redownload' restriction.
but nothing except profits prohibits Apple to stand up for the interests of it's users the way Amazon and Google do, yet Apple seems to always choose it's own short-term interest ahead of it's users' long-term interest.
The solution is called Stanza (owned by Amazon now I believe) and ePub books. I agree that the legitimate selection possilby isn't as good, but I see no advantage to buying books, _books_ for chrissakes, that have DRM.
I actually use Apple's book software a bit here and there, it works fairly nicely, and when they add PDF support I'll probably use it a bit more. But I'm not buying a page from Apple's book store until the DRM situation has changed.
I waited them out on DRMed music, never bought a note before they offered DRM free files. Now I spend money there regularly, among other non-DRMed places. Its a shame the "powers" have to learn this lesson over and over and over and over...
I think iBooks is a better app than Stanza (notes, bookmarks, PDF capability) and you can get your EPUBs in there via iTunes (even ones bought from other stores such as the one my startup runs, fifobooks.com).
Both readers have their strengths and weaknesses, which is why I'm still playing with both. iBooks is certainly the younger of the two and I expect it to pass ahead, especially since the Stanza folks seem to be under the sway of Amazon, which has a vested interest in the fight. PDF capability will certainly be a big plus for iBooks when it comes to the iPad. I'm running the new version on my iPod Touch, but PDFs on such a small screen aren't that useful, at least to me.
Frankly, all the readers I've used fall short when it comes to library management. I want something like iTunes (only better!) both to manage my library and create and manage reading lists. Right now everything just goes into one big pile that takes _forever_ to scroll through (I've around 800 titles in iBooks and several hundred in Stanza). iBook on iPad actually has crashed (!) a couple of times as I've gone scrolling from the top of the alphabet to the bottom. I'll admit I'm pushing iBooks harder, but that's because I expect so much more from Apple ;)
The best desktop solution I've found for PDFs (and cbr/cbz comic files) is a comic book reading program called Comicbook Lover. I use it for PDF management (okay, I manage my digital comic book collection with it too...) It works very much like itunes. If they would add ePub support to it, and change the name, they could rule the world, at least for a while. Unfortunately their iPad and iPhone/iPod Touch app is woefully lacking in the very features that make it work so well on the desktop.
Edit: And I do a slow burn every time I go to add documents to my iPod Touch or iPad. Syncing through iTunes is just _stupid_. I understand this is a problem with _many_ apps on the iOS platform, and that there are political and commercials issues involved, but I don't care. Apple needs to work this out, post-haste...
A lot of Gutenberg books, a lot of science fiction from Feedbooks. I've also been playing with ePub convert software and have been making ePub "books" from various plain text sources. I also went on a late 19th and early 20th century math and geometry book binge a while ago and downloaded a _ton_ of titles from Google books. A lot of them were available in both ePub and PDF format.
Most of the reference titles I have are in PDF format, though. I've been using a couple of different PDF readers on the iPad, none of which do everything that I would like. When the new iBooks comes out for the iPad, I'll give it a go as a PDF reader as well.
The amazing thing is that _all_ the books on the iPad, all 1000+ spread across several programs, take up less than a Gig.
I have been using Stanza on my iPhone for a while now and I think the opposite.
I like the interface and usability of Stanza better. It does have PDF support, annotations and bookmarks. You can load your own ePubs and PDFs into it through iTunes. It has nice dictionary features, brightness controls, themes, support for third-party libraries.
Overall seemed like a much more mature app than iBooks for the short time I spent with iBooks so far.
This must be publisher specific. I purchased a book on my first iPad and when I bought a second (with 3g), I re-downloaded it without having to pay for it.
I can read my Kindle books on my iPhone, iPad, BlackBerry, Mac, and Windows computer (and soon Android). It's still Amazon's software (which, for the desktop computers, sucks), and it's still DRM'd, but you don't have to have a Kindle to enjoy the Kindle library.
