Apple to require iTunes account for iPhone service

By Justin Mann on June 13, 2007, 12:20 PM
According to an article on InfoWorld, Apple has a bit of a surprise in for iPhone adopters. It seems in order to use the phone, you will need an iTunes account. Need? Force? It seems that on top of your contract with AT&T, the sole distributor of the iPhone at first, you'll need a contract with Apple as well. While Apple isn't commenting directly on the situation, they are clearly are making it obvious that it will be required on their site.

With a $500-600 pricetag, the units impending release in 16 days already has many things going against it. Why does Apple want to complicate the situation further more? For billing, apparently:

Apple will require customers to establish a separate account with its online media service in addition to one with AT&T Wireless Services Inc., which has signed an exclusive U.S. distribution deal for the iPhone.
The move will allow Apple to create its own billing relationship with iPhone customers, rather than collecting payments for any iTunes purchases they make via the mobile operator.

Will this extra step impede sales? Some might find it a bit distasteful. With their goal of 10 million iPhones sold by the end of next year, one must wonder.




User Comments: 2

Got something to say? Post a comment
windmill007 said:
Another crazy company move..Sure it has the cool factor but who uses AT&T network or even has it available for that matter. It should work with any network then they might have a chance but that price is way crazy. Only the people who must look cool to there friends at any cost will buy this. Don't even get me started on Itunes. BLAH!! Whoever pays for DRM infested music is crazy. I'm getting MP3 320 quality music that sounds better and I can do what I want with it. The only people hwo buy into itunes are those who buy ipods and don't know better. I don't own a ipod and never will. I hate the company that much. If apple ruled the world we couldn't do much of anything and would be paying out the butt.I think the songs should be around .50 or less as High Quality MP3's. If you make them cheap enuff no one would pirate it. But they are greedy so alas piracy will live on.[Edited by windmill007 on 2007-06-14 12:43:29][Edited by windmill007 on 2007-06-14 12:44:24]
vnf4ultra said:
I do agree it should be unlocked and useable on any network, and the price is pretty high. It however does look really slick on the demos. If it was unlocked and about $299, I'd get one.Regarding iTunes and DRM, the issue is the labels, not apple. EMI is allowing their music to be DRM free, so apple is selling them drm free. [url]http://www.techspot.com/news/25476-drmfree-tracks-now-a
ailable-on-itunes-plus.html[/url]I buy iTunes music and don't have an ipod (shock). It's the easiest (legal) service to use and has good selection. I buy cds if I can, but buying just a few tracks is nice to be able to do.Even with DRM music if you have to use it on another device, then burn it to cd and rip it(all of my purchased DRM music I've ripped to mp3).I think most people are pirates however, so what does it matter. Pricing doesn't affect piracy much IMO. It's much "easier" to get something free than have to pay anything for it(even $0.01), so that's what people do.
Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.