Of course, their graphing calculator comparison neglects the fact that graphing calculators are only priced so high because they have a captive audience, like college textbooks. You can't effectively compete with TI for graphing calculators because school districts outlaw competition.
With the exception of solving integrals, diff eqs, or other CAS things, is Wolfram Alpha particularly useful when you'd have google at your disposal? I would think no, but that's just my experience.
Who is downvoting this comment!? It's a non-inflammatory, relatively accurate portrayal of Alpha. WA does some things well (sure, more than just CAS) but at the end of the day its cool factor far exceeds its useful factor for the vast majority of people---especially because of several problems with its UI that have been discussed at length in the past.
But how often do people actually compute? The majority of all computer use is for information retrieval/display. If wolfram alpha had a spreadsheet interface then maybe people would use it, but once again right now there isn't that much that people compute.
That last sentence is misleading. The web app that they're interfacing is only free because they made the mistake of making it free. If this iPhone app was the only available interface to Alpha, and they hadn't blown their marketing wad on a huge marketing launch for the free web version, $50 wouldn't seem nearly as "unreasonable" as it does now.
Maybe it could have then been positioned as portable mathematica + cool data sets.
BTW: I don't get all the contempt for Wolfram. He's accomplished more than most (all?) of us. I think he's entitled to as many mistakes and delusions as it takes in between accomplishments. And we'd all do better if we followed his example, of optimistic experimenting.
He's the last of many of a long tradition of mathematicians that thought their mathematical work to be the solution to everything. A bit grandiose in his claims.
I've read criticisms that he makes it appear as though certain ideas are of his own creation, but beyond that, I think the guy is quite brilliant. His work on cellular automata as Turing machines is very intriguing. I think more people should give him his due.
Does it strike anyone else here as ironic that people with $600 phones that cost $100 a month with a two-year contractual minimums would look at software priced more than $5 as conspicuous consumption?
Considering that WA's iPhone app seems to be little more than a wrapper around their free offering, it seems entirely reasonable to question the $50 price tag.
In other words, if they didn't offer the free website, or if their iPhone app didn't require a net connection, I'd easily consider the $50 price justifiable.
he's not really exaggerating, though. i bought my iphone in the first few days after release, and i did indeed pay 600 bucks for it. it has come down since then, but there are those of us who paid that.
i can't remember the exact details, but the cost for the data plan went up after they introduced 3g support, and dropped the 200 free text messages per month.
Actually it's a signifier in two status orders at once. It says "$50 is nothing to me." and "I am smart enough and knowledgeable enough to find this useful."
That was my thought also, in which case they haven't miscalculated at all. Expensive enough that TechCrunch will want to ridicule them, but cheap enough that a few people will grab it for the hell of it.
I think they priced the iphone app high so people will think their free web version is a bargain and actually worth using. "Hey, I can get it for free on their website!" Even though they weren't using it at all before.
This is another example of a company trying to price software like its a physical product.
The justification for the price is laughable; just because it contains more features than an unrelated product (for which it is not even a feasible replacement) is not going to convince someone to pay for an iPhone app 25-50x the normal going price.
I'm venturing a guess here by saying that a good portion of the market for graphing calculators is comprised of high school and college students, and I don't know of one teacher who would allow an iPhone during a calculus or physics test.
Personally I think more high-school/college tests should be given with the students using computers & the internet while taking them, since that's how the world works now. Not all tests by any means, but more than currently. But until that point, letting some students use their iphones because it's also their graphing calculator, on a test where most students don't have access to the internet and their friends and other test takers with iphones, is an invitation for cheating.
I have a feeling this is all a publicity stunt. The hype has pretty much died down. What better way to get people talking about your Service and your iPhone app (beside apple rejecting it) than to grossly overprice it (see "I am rich" app)? At least you get to see if people will actually pay for it and the free press.
Edit: I'm pretty sure they'll lower the price, which in turn will trigger more press. Seems to me a good marketing ploy, but how far can you go before you dilute your brand message?
Wolfram is not the sort of company the engages in marketing ploys. They've always charged a hefty amount for their products, from Mathematica to their crazy prices for API calls. They get away with it because they create niche products that are usually paid for by the user's employer.
At least for students, a graphing calculator on an iphone won't be much use, since most teachers probably won't let students whip out an iPhone on a test.
TIs are standardized and profs know what it can and can't do. No professor is going let students whip out arbitrary applications to aide them on a test, especially one that can almost solve word problems.
A note on price — it is listed at $49.99, which is basically less than 1/2 the price of a graphing calculator with inferior functionality in comparison, which is how the company came to that number.
That's a bit disingenuous, considering that the hardware doesn't come free.
I find it humorous that the Tech Crunch author notes a typo while creating a few of his own, e.g., by spelling "default" incorrectly. One who notes a typo should to not to create one of their own, if only to save face.
$50 isn't much for professionals who pay hundreds of dollars for reference manuals ... or are on location in NE Turkey without laptop Mathematica access.
I'm guess W intends an access lite for later.
For decades, most tech products coming on the market start out high-priced (HD TV's for a recent one). Why should Wolfram look like it's low-balling? They know you've got a $200+ phone and are paying $1K a year to use it. Mathematica isn't cheap either: how much will the App cut into sales?
The iPhone application still requires Internet access. If you seriously needed to reference Wolfram Alpha for your work, then you would most likely be within reach of an actual computer. This app is nothing more than a novelty and is ridiculously priced.
