Apple's curious PR problem
Senior VP Phil Schiller. Image: Apple Inc.
The tech press is buzzing this week with the news that a senior Apple (AAPL) vice president took the time to e-mail a blogger.
The senior VP was Phil Schiller, one of Steve Jobs' top lieutenants. The blogger was Daring Fireball's John Gruber, one of Apple's staunchest defenders. The issue was Apple's apparent censorship of an iPhone dictionary called Ninjawords that included some four letter words you won't find in Webster's Collegiate.
But this isn't really about a bawdy dictionary. It's about a public relations problem that has already triggered a federal investigation and now threatens to spin out of control.
The problem is that Apple Inc. has two faces, and the mask that hides the side that's not so nice has started to slip.
The computer and gadget-buying public sees Apple, by and large, as well-managed company extraordinarily attentive to its needs, from Apple's user-friendly operating systems to its legions of hand-holding retail and support staff.
Apple's suppliers know it as something quite different: a tough, no-nonsense, hard-bargaining client that demands total secrecy and takes no prisoners when things go wrong.
It has always been thus with Apple, at least as long as Jobs was running the show. What's changed is that the iPhone App Store has dramatically expanded the population of Apple suppliers to include thousands of independent software publishers — 16,765 of them, to be precise, as of Friday morning.
Suddenly we're hearing a lot more about the darker side of Apple.
We've covered some of the developers' complaints in the year that the App Store has been open — the overcrowding, the unexplained delays, the arbitrary approval process, the summary rejection of programs that might compete with Apple's own.
Ninjawords' problems were the least of it. They weren't even Cupertino's fault, which may be why Schiller — in a rare moment of Apple's transparency — decided to tell Gruber what had happened.
What Schiller is not talking about is the far more serious issue of Apple's rejection of Google Voice, the voice-mail management system that threatened to cut into AT&T (T) revenue stream and upset Apple's relations with its overseas carriers. That's the issue that triggered an inquiry by the Federal Communications Commission and may have precipitated the resignation of Google (GOOG) CEO Eric Schmidt from Apple's board of directors.
The FCC is asking Apple and Google all the right questions
To get a feel for how serious a PR problem this has become, check out the tone of New York Times columnist David Pogue's latest e-mail newsletter.
Pogue is a huge Apple booster. He gets preferential access to Apple's newest products and makes millions from his Apple Hidden Manual series. He was also a great fan of Google Voice; he predicted it would do for telephony what Google search did for the Web.
On Thursday Pogue wrote angrily about the behavior of Apple's not-so-nice side. It's not just ham-fisted, he says, but futile:
"[W]hat Apple and AT&T have accomplished with their heavy-handed, Soviet information-control style is not to bury these useful apps. Instead, Apple/AT&T have elevated them to martyr status—and, in effect, thrown down a worldwide challenge to programmers everywhere.
'Get around THIS,' they're saying.
But guess what? It won't take long. They've put a rock in the river, but the water will just find a way around it." (link)
Reconciling the two faces of Apple may not be so easy.
For the people complaining about Apple not fixing their malfunctioning iPod's, etc…. you must not have spoken to the right people:
I have had ipods and laptops replaced/repaired by them free of cost OUT OF WARRANTY! I have received a brand new Macbook Pro when the Applecare was 2 months shy of expiring because I sent in my Powerbook to have one usb port fixed that wasn't working correctly (only because I wanted everything to be perfect when the Applecare did run out) and the part they needed was backordered a month. A brand new Macbook Pro, with Leopard for an almost-perfect Powerbook with Tiger. They also called and emailed me after I received my new Macbook Pro to make sure I was happy with it… they also did the same thing for a friend of mine a few months before and his Powerbook was out of warranty!
I also recently had them replace the HD in my iMac for free… it was out of warranty too…. yeah, they're complete bastards.
Like all malignant narcissists Apple builds the case that they are the people's choice against Big Brother (1984) and oppression (Lemmings) by making themselves into an oppressive Big Brother. Apple has lost it's soul in exchange for some backdated stock options and the adoration of the ignorant. Hubris is an awful thing…
Okay I get it. This writer Philip has deemed himself as some sort of Apple antagonist. If your read the little blurb under his name, it sounds as if he's put himself on a mission to break Apple down. The only problem with that is now it's more about commentary than objective journalism. We will never be able to read this guy and think that the company is getting a fair shake. I don't mind someone getting on Apple when they need to be chastised like Pogue, but this guy is looking for flaws as it is his mission. In short, he is a hack.
People!
Anti trust is something you encounter in a monopoly situation. When there is no alternative. Apple is in no way involved in any kind of monpoly markets.
You can argue if what they do in the appstore is smart or not, but it is most certainly not illegal. If you don't like the terms, go buy another phone – there's thousands of them.
Regarding Safari bundling: It is not the bundling that has been targeted as unjust in Windows. It is the fact that it was not possible to uninstall Explorer AND at the same time they operated a monopoly. Bundling a browser alone is hardly illegal – you'll need it to get an alternative anyway.
"If Microst did anything, even remotely to this, they would be sued that hour and sanctioned by the EU.
And why is OSX still bundled with Safari ? Isn’t that illegal by EU standards?!!"
EU competition law (y'all call it 'anti trust') is a curious beasty.
In order to fall foul of the law, you need to be a "dominant" force in the market, which roughly means having 40% plus market share of your industry.
Now that is a very rough approximation of the law, and that is as good as you will get because the law itself is pretty up in the air. How the court decides where the boundaries of "your industry" fall, and therefore whether you are dominant within it, is just one of those mysteries of the EUSSR that delight communists and feudal lords, and which infuriate the suckers who still believe in market economics.
So the bottom line is this: behaviour that is illegal and punishable with massive fines for one company is NOT illegal and punishable by fines for a smaller company. In fact, what is illegal and morally corrupt for microsoft is actually really good business behaviour for Apple.
If Apple did not take advantage of every commercial advantage they possess, their directors would be guilty of breaching the corporate duty to shareholders to maximize profits. This is all good law within the EU.
If you think this is crazy, you're not alone, but you are almost certainly a dreadfully common sort of person who does not have a title such as 'Baron' or 'Duke', and you probably don't receive vast sums of taxpayers money simply because your noble family owns huge tracts of farming land in Europe.
And for Americans who find this class based behaviour disgusting, remember that it was you guys who stopped Stalin cleaning house in western Europe. America perpetuated feudal aristocracies in order to prevent communist aristocracies, and every good EU-ropean hates you for it.
And hence microsoft must be punished.
Frankly, as an Apple fan who's also a marketer (professional copywriter), I hugely appreciate the work they've put into building and protecting both their brand and the quality standard that makes that success possible. And as a shareholder, I'm glad they seem to be as attentive and meticulous about the details of their business as they are about the all-around goodness of just about every product they release.
P.S. David Pogue, you're great. You do good work. And I like your sense of humor too. Don't let the critics get you down.
Dave, boulder, colorado:
I have uninstalled IE on my XP and was able to use Firefox alone without any issues. I had to install IE again as often come across websites which are designed/optimized for IE only.
Yeah, but what Google Voice does is take advantage of the unlimited data plans, with a kind of scaling per-use voice plans. If google hijacks it all to the data plans, it's not free. The networks aren't free. Their operation isn't free. And moving all voice to the data side won't be either. We'll discover that, soon.
Google Voice is a cool idea. Its success will change things for the better. But it'll change things for the worse too. We'll get data caps and per-MB charges.
I just hope everyone begging for GV is grown up enough to accept the consequences that'll necessarily follow.
Hey: Jabberwolf, San Francisco: Anti-Trust.
I can uninstall Safari form my Mac. Not very difficult actually. My Mac will keep on running, no problems. It would be smart to install an alternate browser fist though.
Do us a favor. "Try" and uninstall IE from a Windows machine. We will expect your response to this question after you've re-installed your Windows OS, so we understand if your response is slow in coming.
I understand the the issue with apps that circumvent paying for text messages and using minutes, but what about all the other apps being denied that have nothing to do with that. So what if the content is questionable or appropriate for all users. Have a rating system and parental controls. Apple is sounding like China right now. THANKS MOTHER APPLE!
Business is business. I don't currently own an iPhone but hope to purchase one in the next year or so. I feel that Apple has every right to block Google Voice. The iPhone is meant first of all to be a mobile phone. Google Voice turns it into a internet device. If you are making a phone call then you should have to use your cell phone minutes.
Perhaps they could do something where they allowed Google Voice on an iPod Touch so that you could use it with WiFi. (I am not sure if the current iPod touch would work with this, we have an older model). Then I would see no conflict.
As for Apple banning certain Apps I applaud them. There are not many places that I can go these days and not run into inappropriate things. The fact that Apple wants to make the App store one of them is great. You also don't have to worry about your children downloading things from it this way. If you want to download something morally wrong then do it to your computer…leave at least one thing in your life free of that kind of trash.
You write: "Pogue is a huge Apple booster. He gets preferential access to Apple’s newest products and makes millions from his Apple Hidden Manual series."
***
That remark is deceptive for two reasons. First, I am not an Apple booster, any more than I am a Google booster or TiVo booster or Sonos booster. That is, I write positive reviews when the product is good, and negative reviews when the product is bad.
Apple by no means gets a free ride from me. Here are 40 recent examples when I slammed Apple–because it deserved slamming:
http://www.davidpogue.com/bio_photos/fanboy.html
Second, there are far more Missing Manuals about Windows topics than there are about Apple products. So to call our books "Apple Missing Manuals" is misleading in all kinds of ways.
–David Pogue
ex ped: I would never call you a fanboy, David. Your reviews are fair and balanced in the original sense of the words. But you are enthusiastic about the technology you like and I don't think anyone would come away from your printed reviews and musical videos thinking you didn't like the stuff the company makes. Nearly a dozen of your Missing Manuals are about Apple products, which is why I called them Apple Missing Manuals. Didn't mean to mislead. Anyway, thanks for visiting.
Apple fans dont get it… they never will.
People aren't angry that Apple has success, but that they are able to use anti-trust tactics. Everyone else must adhere to the law and standards, but apparently not Apple.
This is why everyone is getting fed up, it has NOTHING TO DO WITH IPHONE SUCCESS!
So stop using that as a straw-man argument, use your brain, and at least come up with something else.
The funniest and blatant example of Apple violating the copyright misuse doctrine was and iTunes update that purposely sabotaged the Palm Pre's ability to sync with it.
If Microst did anything, even remotely to this, they would be sued that hour and sanctioned by the EU.
And why is OSX still bundled with Safari ? Isn't that illegal by EU standards?!!
apologies in advance if this has been mentioned here already, but is it really bad business to initially qualify or disallow apps if they are going to cut into or disrupt the business which Apple and ATT have entered into? Once the entire US cell market is challenged by the new advanced/changes in telephony, every service provider will work to protect their revenue stream. Are phones such as Palm Pre, also and exclusive to another network – Sprint, going to allow Google Voice or any other service that circumvents their ability to make money? I wouldn't think so. If Google and its carrier partners have worked out that issue then they are the pioneers in changing telephony, but pioneers aren't always the "winners" or revenue earners in the tech world. Apple's point of view seems valid to me. They should be allowed to travel down the path which works best for them. Recent history shows that they make good decisions and introduce things when they know they will succeed. I for one, as a consumer, have benefitted from their decisions.
Can you say anti-trust? I think this is exactly what Apple is doing. They will not allow another web browser in their App Store because the iPhone already has one. This is exactly what Microsoft dealt with, and they even let you install your own, they were just providing theirs in every copy of Windows. Europe now makes Microsoft provide a copy of Windows that does not include Internet Explorer. Also on the comment about TV ads, I always see adds for one network on another.
Legality is not just decided by an end user agreement, simply put Apple is engaging in anti-competitive practices and the argument “Its just business.” will be irrelevant from an anti-trust stand point. The DOJ did not tolerate Microsoft’s attempt to restrict competitor’s access to Microsoft platforms; How much longer do you think they will tolerate Apple? The only difference is the market maturity; The businesses in the personal computer market were forced to compete more fairly and now it’s time for the mobile devices market. Sadly if Apple does not change its behavior it may find itself in litigation and PR conundrum.
I was trying to think of an example and the Cable/Satalite one is perfect. It also surprises me when the Today show gives American Idol so much coverage! That's probably almost as good.
I agree about the growing pains, I agree about "It's nothing personal, just business". That only worked for the Godfather. It shouldn't happen in the real world.
Let's just hope somebody up there has an epiphany and does what's best for the consumer. There's always hope… as eccentric as some of these guys are you think it would happen to at least one of them.
Matt from Darien, CT states "Would ABC allow NBC to run TV Ads? Nope, not at all."
Apparently, you don't watch TV very often. I can't count the number of ads for Satellite TV on Cable TV and Cable TV ads on Satellite TV.
I think this article and the previous about Google Voice are merited. If you look at Microsoft and rulings in the US and Europe over software use and inclusion/exclusion, Apple's App policies are not consistent with what the rest of the world has accepted. The "it's business" line doesn't cut it given the terms of service. Once Apple invited developers to pay a fee to develop, that opened the door to this pandora's box.
Also, for the person talking about Ipod batteries – my sister and I took her malfunctioning Ipod to the store where they weren't very nice. They offered to send it away for replacement, which would have cost about the same as purchasing a newer, larger harddrive Ipod. A third party battery was roughly 1/3 of the cost. Apple isn't doing itself any favors with costly repairs and minimal customer service when it comes to batteries.
Would ABC allow NBC to run TV Ads? Nope, not at all. Doesn't make good business sense to allow your competitors to advertise in your products. Why is it that Apple and AT&T are immediately painted as evil when they try to protect a product that they brought to market?
Personally, I think Apple is going through growing pains with the App store and people should quit painting them as dark or evil. Apple is groundbreaking with the app store, and anytime you are bold enough to go where no-one has gone before, you are learning how to navigate. Mistakes and all.
Response to "Gibberish" (which may refer to all of us 
Apple picking apps as it chooses is more like a car company disabling your leased car if you use any aftermarket parts. You could reason an upside if they did that because it could cause safety issues. But they'd get probably get in trouble if they did.
HOAs are also a hotly debated subject… I think what it boils down to is people like to customize and do what they want. True, not always for their own good, but we'll whine until we get it…(and whine, and whine, and whine)
It's the fact that the phone is totally capable to do anything. These blocked apps don't tax the system any more than other apps, so the ONLY reason for blocking is a competition issue.
Even with tethering… I downloaded 500MB the first month with my phone watching YouTube, TV.com, downloading apps, etc. The iPhone is more a computer than a phone with 3D graphics, 600mhz processor and 32GB hard drive. Why not hookup another computer to share it's network? It wouldn't be entirely unreasonable to limit the shared bandwidth or something… it may be that the cost is very high that bothers people too.
Google Android will not likely have these issues as it is open source…but watch it fall flat on it's face any way… that would be ironic.
Well, in apple and at&t's world (aka Leningrad) you would just negotiate with your neighbor at gunpoint to both charge exactly the same rent – twice the fair market of course – and be done with it.
Oligopoly price fixing is illegal in the rest of the world, and they are guilty. Apples fanatics seem better brainwashed than mujaheddin.
Apple doesn't sit on a glowing pedestal, get over it.
This is NOT news to me, or many other people coming from a non-Apple past. I think it's more of a surprise to the long-time Apple devotees – "what, my beloved brand won't allow porn on my iPhone? But they gave us iPods with non-replacable batteries, and a Mac OS which won't run on non-Apple hardware, how could they be so restrictive with the iPhone?!?"
Brandon, you can, and you want to because you have an exclusive agreement with Apple. Let's say you own an apartment, but the owner next door decides to rent his out for free. You would complain to the association and block with every means, wouldn't you?
Best comment so far has been "yawn". If an app competes with one of Apple's apps it probably won't make the cut. No conspiricy, just business.============================= If you had an iPod and the battery died and you felt like you had to throw it away you didn't do your homework at all. Apple replaces batteries or you can go to a third party company will do it as well. If you go to the Apple Store they are always nice so saying they are jerks means you never went there and are just talking crap.
The mapping programs (Google Maps, Mapquest) are able to give turn by turn directions, but they don't allow them to easily integrate with the GPS to show exactly when to make turns or use Voice Guidance because AT&T wants to charge you $10 per month for their app.
I can understand blocking security risks, but you can't arbitrarily block programs you want to make money off of.
Voice guidance uses way less bandwidth than Pandora (which I'm very surprised they allow since it has "free" music – competing with iTunes), or You Tube, or TV.com. So it's not a bandwidth issue.
What's up AppleT&T?
In the 80's Apple had a great opsys and great hardware and lost to the far inferior wintel platform. Why? Because they treated developers (I was one) like dirt. So we, reluctantly wrote apps (and games) for windows and then everyone's favorite apps were windows apps so no one bought macs which had few apps.
Now, they are again first mover in the computer space of the future and this time they have been far more friendly to developers. One only hopes this continues but recent issues, as outlined in this excellent article, are showing that apple is still apple — their paranoia might very well cost them dominance and hundreds of billions of dollars.
Apple's aggressive side has always been apparent to consumers who have to deal with warranty issues or repairs — remember the iPod battery issues a few years ago that required legal action for Apple to merely allowed people to not THROW AWAY the iPOd when the battery was worn out. I am involved in throw-down now over a similar issue. It really is a bi-polar company, and as long as things are going well everything is cool. But when things go sideways, they are short-term driven jerks.
The incredible irony is that Apple is today what they said they stood against back in the years when they were competing with IBM. Proprietary as all hell. Of course now IBM is espousing Linux and open source and prospering because of it. Apple grew into what IBM grew out of
The general public – people who don't read the tech blogs – know nothing of the crybaby programmers who are rejected by the app store, or the crybaby reporters whom Apple won't talk to. I don't see much of a widespread PR problem "spinning out of control."
Why do apple fans try to make everything about Microsoft? THis has nothing to do with Microsoft. Yet every time another bad thing comes up about apple screwing everyone over the apple fans start their anti-Microsoft lynch mob.
Apple fans should love Microsoft. Microsoft saved apple from chapter 11 in 1997 (granted it was partially to keep them from getting split up as a monopoly). Microsoft made the apps that gave people a reason to buy a mac when the mac first came out (The mac woulduv bombed if it wasn't for MS's office apps). Microsoft leased apple the applesoft basic compiler that, unlike Apple's basic compiler,, could do floating point calculations, thus saving the platform from death from the competition of Commodore, Atari, TI etc.
The fact is that the success of both companies was solidified by each other throughout the 80s and 90s. Love it or hate it it's the way business played out.
For a long time Apple's motto was Think Different.
Apple's legal definition of "Think Different": Different equals what apple tells you to think.
Most of the app store is by wintards such as Enderle that have been pushing the Microsoft agenda for decades. Apple has control over the App store. If you want to learn dirty words, maybe you will have to learn them the old fashioned way, with your web browser and not an Apple-approved 'app'.
Apple is no doubt working on iPhone 4.0. My guess is that it will be better than Google Voice. Apple just bought a huge facility in NC. Maybe Google can develop for it's handset and let Apple develop for the iPhone, then see which one sells in the competitive market.
Microsoft never innovated and was still allowed to have it's monopoly, even after being found guilty. I really do not see the problem with letting Apple create their own platform and selling it on it's own merits. If you want to partner with them fine, if not, try partnering with others–there are other phones out there.
I hear Windows Mobile has a new update out….
Every company is out to protect their intellectual property and profit margin. This is no parallel to how Microsoft bundled IE because they sell software and their intent was to kill off competition. Apple on the other hand, sell hardware and have every rights to protect their hardware-software IP. Let's see when someone writes a piece of software for MS's Zune that competes with the main feature set (and brand it differently.) This is not being anti-competitive. It is simply protecting one's IP. There is a fine line, but there is a line.
if you read the comments below you can quickly make out that most Apple fanboy's have no working brain.
MS got into trouble by just integrating IE in OS, not rejecting or blocking NetScape. In comparison what Apple is doing is lot more serious.
If Apple has a written policy of what is allowed and what is not allowed on App Store and if they stick to it then probably no issue. But that is not what Apple is doing.
Remember App Store is not a private invitation only community. Imagine if MS makes it difficult for Oracle because they have their own Database (SQL Server), that wouldn't be nice.
@ John in Miami
"Tethered modem? Nope. You should see how fast Apple kills those apps when they pop up from time to time. ATT wants you to BUY bandwidth. Actually using it is out of the question."
er, Apple built tethering into 3.0. If AT&T don't support it that's not Apple's fault. There are over 30 countries in the world where tethering is allowed and used on the iPhone.
It's not just Apple+AT&T arrogance, although that's gotten the most attention. Apple's iTunes store has been dumping more and more popular and useful apps without explanation, or with the whimper that some Big Bad Company (Amazon, for instance) forced the removal of something like PocketPedia which had been on the site for months and was highly rated. This arbitrary NowYouHaveIt/NowYouDon't behavior is not a way to maintain trust either
with the developers whose apps help to make the iPhone so popular or with the users who bought the iPhone or iTouch because of the wonderful apps that expanded its utility.
Pogue is right. Apple put a rock in the river. Remember what a little rock did to Goliath . . ..
Apple should open up their restrictions and architecture to win fans back. I applaud the FCC with their investigation of the monopoly Apple & ATT have created and their skewed marketing, such as unlimited bandwidth. Oh wait, the * says there's a 5gb/month limit and tethering is not allowed.
My solution = Jailbreak
Apple has for years used young, cool people as their staff to create an image that belies their anti-trust violations and power, using these people as a front. It is hard of course, since Apple was the only real alternative to microsoft, and i applaud them fro that. There products are smart, but their antitrust violations (something we simply do not enforce any more), their greed, and their hard handed ways turned me off about the time the iphone came out. It is as evil as nay multi-billion dollar corporation. No one isimune to greed and power, and we should not let their cool "front" fool us. At least Bill Gates is what he appears to be. There is a certain amount of honesty to that.
I am completely amazed that because Apple is successful and the iPhone is so popular that somehow the masses (and maybe more disconcerting – the government) are entitled to weigh in on it's business decissions.
If you don't like the productor the available add on's then do business with someone else – it's the American way.
For me, I am completely thrilled with my iPhone and my service from AT&T.
There are plenty of other phones out there. If people don't like the way Apple do things get a Blackberry, Pre or something else. For me I will stick with Apple. Just think what the consumer electronic market would be right now if it were not for Apple! I see no other company even trying to innovate!
I am sure that people have noticed that the so called 'genius' at the genius bar are very rude. They treat people like dirt and talk down to them. This is exactly what Apple does, treat customers and suppliers like dirt. Having a good product does not mean you can treat people badly or lie about the CEO's health. The same customers will start dumping you and the SEC will get you. I hope they do.
It's also a good thing for consumers when you have access to the best quality applications out there. What's with the rejection of useful apps? I guess when you threaten their own apps, all that openness and friendliness goes away. Didn't Microsoft lose the antitrust case against Netscape when they tried their best to lock them out, but it's okay for Apple to do it without breaking a sweat? Microsoft didn't even control the hardware(PC), just the software(Windows) unlike Apple does(Iphone=hardware and the app store=software). Don't let developers create apps only to have them rejected without good reason, like safety for consumers. Google voice would have brought great value to consumers, but what happen? If you want value, don't buy expensive high end products. There are more affordable laptops and mp3 players that work just as good without paying 3x what Apple charges. Remember, you do pay for marketing.
It's ridiculous for Google to expect Apple to allow Google Voice in its app store. That's like asking CBS to promote the shows on NBC with free advertising. It's like asking Sprint to carry AT&T's wireless calls. It's absurd that the feds are wasting their time and our money on this investigation. Why don't they investigate why Toyota isn't selling brand new Fords in its showrooms?
FCC, everyone get off Apple's back, it's a great company and it provides great products, does it make some decisions that some don't like, you bet; and that's their right, if someone doesn't like it, go get a Sony or Blackberry, there is plenty of competition out there.
My iPhone goes in the canal as soon as my contract is up. Att will get another victim if I sell it; so it's going to be destroyed.
Tethered modem? Nope. You should see how fast Apple kills those apps when they pop up from time to time. ATT wants you to BUY bandwidth. Actually using it is out of the question.
Google voice? Nope. It's better than anything sad little Apple will ever do, make or dream of; and they can't imitate it.
BTW, Apple also took pains to break the existing Google App that executes search by voice with OS version 3.0. It worked perfectly before the OS upgrade and now it hardly ever works.
Ironically the gogle voice powered search app was the best iPhone App and sales tool ever made. I know three people that went and bought iPhones immediately after seeing me demonstrate it. It *was* amazing.
A handful of State Attorneys destroyed Microsoft over browsers that weren't competitive with IE because it was embedded. That was innocent. The Browser *should* be embedded; it works better that way.
Where's iPhone Firefox?
Where's iPhone iE?
You'll never see a competitive browser because Apple doesn't want you to find out that *they* are throttling your iPhone; the speed figures are a sham.
Well at least they're honest about on thing: Apple is pure evil. Just look at the logo.
It's funny how apple is being defended by the fanboys but if this were MS doing this they would be crucified! The bottom line is they are all huge corporations and ultimately they all act the same. Control=money period. I like apple for the innovation but they are not for me. MS gets a bad rap for how they operate but MS doesn't have these issues. If you want to do something on MS you can usually find a work around program to do it.
What is interesting is that Apples privately produced innovations are so good that the public wishes to seize them for their own, and have the government make them available to all. They want iPhone on all networks, App store a free speech forum, etc…
Nationalization of Apple? Very socialist for you Americans!
I like the fact that Apple tightly controls all aspects of their business..software and hardware. That is what makes all their products work so seemlessly together. All the companies whining and bitching are those that want a piece of what Apple has created.
I think that this is a a very well written and important article. I have been a user of Apple products for decades, and watched with horror as they sank into relative obscurity during the battle with Microsoft and the PC in the 80s.
Now, that they have returned to importance with the iPod and iPhone, and crawled back to relevance, I am filled with trepidation that the same heavy-handed behavior will cause their downfall again – and not over anything important to their business model. They are still getting $500 per iPhone – who cares what the interface is used to make phone calls – let that be AT&T's fight. As to the Ninjawords, and their Orwellian oversight – I find that this is just another example of arrogance on their part. No one asked them to be the parents…I know what I can read, and I do not need Apple to tell me to go to bed on time. Create a separate section of the app store, and make it "18 or over", or have a "nontested" section…just don't pay lip service to open source and cooperation, only to act like a censorship board.
Mark my words, this behavior, timed nicely with Google's Android OS, could be the death toll for Apple yet again…
I'm sorry, but Apple's banning of Google Voice, and its refusal to licence any other MP3 player to work with iTunes, is not in the consumer's interest. It's in Apple's interest.
I would point out, however, that few companies I've ever encountered actually allow competitors to use their own networks without a court order or good reason, including Google (can't use Bing on Chrome). Cell phone providers have been doing it for years…
There is something going on here. Some kind of grass roots attack on the app store – I was woken from my slumbers yesterday to hear Rob Enderle of all people spreading misinformation about the app store. He sounded like he was shilling for Google – spreading all kinds of misinformation – some of which was excised from the podcast when broadcast. For anyone from Apple to respond implies that they are finally on it. Which is a good thing.
I find it rather interesting that the very company that in the famous Superbowl commercial showed itself as the little guy fight the Orwellian system is in fact revealing itself to be that very repressive system.
I read a lot of news, and am constantly surfing the CNN, Fortune group of websites on my handy Macbrook Pro (3rd Mac I have owned).
I would just like to say that I love my apple products, despite some of their shortcomings, I am happy that they are committed to making a top notch product.
Maybe I missed this class in Business School but last time I checked driving a hard bargain with your suppliers was a good thing. Not only that, but in the world of ever changing technology you can hardly blame Apple for being secretive.
What I do not like about this website is its unhidden bias against Apple, painting every positive story of Apple negatively, and painting every possible negative story like its the apocalypse.
If anything Apple's Not-nice-side is a good thing for it's consumers. When a company demands the highest quality goods at a low price from its suppliers, and accepts nothing less than the best, that means they are actively pursuing a quality product at a reasonably price.
There is another company that is as not-so-nice and I dont think many people would complain about their quality… Rolex
APPLE HAS ANOTHER PROBLEM WITH IT'S TWO FACES, CALLED CUSTOMER SERVICE!
IF YOU GET SHAFTED BY A 3RD PARTY VENDOR SELLING APPLE PRODUCTS AND YOU TRY TO RETURN A DEFECTIVE PRODUCT TO THIS 3RD PARTY THAT WON'T PLAY SO NICE AND WANTS TO CHARGE YOU A RESTOCKING FEE, WHICH APPLE SHOULD NEVER ALLOW AND YOU TRY TO GO TO APPLE TO HAVE THEM STAND BEHIND THEIR PRODUCT AND GIVE YOU A REFUND INSTEAD, GUESS WHAT?
FORGET IT APPLE ISN'T GOING TO HELP YOU WITH A REFUND, THEIR REPLY, 'YOU DIDN'T BUY IT FROM THEM'.
WHAT A LOAD OF BS, DIDN'T BUY IT FROM APPLE, APPLE IS THE MANUFACTURE AND WHEN A 3RD PARTY IS UNFAIRLY WITH CONSUMERS AND EVEN THEIR OWN APPLE STORES THEN YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GO BACK TO THE MANUFACTURE FOR A REFUND!
OH AND EVEN APPLE HAS BEEN KNOWN TO CHARGE PEOPLE A RESTOCKING FEE ON A DEFECTIVE PRODUCT, EVEN WHEN THAT PERSON SIMPLY WANTS TO EXCHANGE IT FOR ANOTHER PRODUCT!
APPLE IS A SNAKE!