Murdoch doesn't own the Times. You may be thinking of The Wall Street Journal and its publisher Dow Jones which was purchased by Murdoch's News Corporation in 2007.
Actually, I wasn't. But I has mistakenly assumed he had finally won that battle. Apparently he settled on the WSJ purchase that you mentioned. He has steadily attacked the Times, from a business point, for the last three years in an attempt to still force a bargain basement sale.
Either way, once he owns anything, it may be highly profitable, but morally it turns to crap.
And in your case, I would just point out that Murdoch bought the Wall Street Journal, not the New York Times (But yes, even the WSJ was able to get worse since Murdoch bought i.t)
Yep, you are right. As I posted above, he has continually attacked the NYT to weaken their business position ever since the 2007 WSJ purchase. I had always just assumed he won it in the first round.
You are in need of serious help. All smart phones show this effect to some degree, didn't you listen to what he said....I am tired of all the crying, spoiled babies who spout off when they occasionally drop a call, or have to wait an hour because of a delayed flight, etc. etc...no technology is perfect, but what we have is pretty amzing these days, you should be thankful.
If this was to me then I can only say that I have never said that the i4 is not an amazing device. As far as dropped calls go, although I don't own a 4 (I have a 3GS), I have provided support to several people (6 and counting) over this issue. The genius desk folk and the support line provided little if any help. None of the people I helped have returned their phones and none are calling the support desk any more. Why throw out the baby with the bath?
I live in an area with some of the best overall cell coverage in North America. Still, when you live in the country, coverage and fringe signal reception is important. When there is sufficient signal to support a call and the call drops because the phone is being held in the hand and in a normal manner, then that is a problem. Coverage is there; phone antenna design sucks. Period. This isn't crying, whinging or bleating. It is just a problem.
It also isn't sacrilege to complain about it. That is the feedback that makes things better.
These devices are also not miracles: they are fancy walkie talkies with a huge amount of functionality crammed in. The result is amazing but not a miracle.
Along the way, design compromises are made. In this case, I think marketing eye-candy was given priority over functional design. People called Apple on it and Apple has responded properly, after much prodding but still they have finally done the right thing.
If you're going to bother to reply at least don't put words in my mouth. I never said the iPhone was completely flawless. You obviously don't have a valid argument when you have to resort to completely making things up.
With their stellar command of the English language, perhaps they are on the editorial staff of the NYT?
Since I am not an easily swayed idiot, like the vast majority in this country, I normally rely on credible word of mouth for product recommendations, and not the biased bleatings of bloggers and haters with huge axes to grind. I currently have an iPhone 3GS, which I like quite a bit, but if I am going to upgrade in the next six months or so, I will get an iPhone 4. Where I live, both Verizon and ATT cell coverage suck, which is why I keep my copper land line. I am carrier agnostic, and if any of them meet all my needs, within reason, the differentiator will be the handset, and in this case, as far as I am concerned, the iPhone wins. I'm not sorry to antagonize all the Apple-haters out there, and think that providing grist for their whining mill is a good thing, given that it keeps them from molesting small furry mammals.
I see no reason why you wouldn't have an absolutely wonderful experience with the iPhone 4.
ALL of the iPhone 4s have this problem even if not everyone notices it. That is a 100% failure rate, although failure really is not the correct category.
The call rate of 0.55% for a single issue is high for a new product and I don't know of any support centre that would be happy with this rate. As an engineering team leader I know that I would be called on the carpet for this single-issue rate on a mass produced consumer product. At 5000 calls per week (3 weeks, 0.55% of customers) and $50 per call to handle (conservative figure for a personal call back type support process), that is $250,000 per week of support expense for a single problem. This is ugly. Cuts deeply into the support profits.
The X-Box 360 failure rate is a joke. It is an utter disaster. This is a comparison that does not lead to any insight. One is a production issue and the other is a built in design issue approved by an executive that should know better. The iPhone 4 is a great device and, mostly, an excellent phone. The design issue is obvious; any RF engineer would call attention to a bare metal antenna array that is bridgable by the user's hand.
This is why Apple should be red-faced and contrite over the antenna problem.
Good thing is that the issue is well defined and very fixable. Good on Apple to stop denying and to provide a free work-around.
Good gucka mucka. You are just sooooo full of shist!
It's my car and no damned car company is going to tell me the right way to hold it.
If I have an accident due to not holding it the "right" way I'm suing them because it proves 100% of cars are defective.
Yes... now I have to drive with my pinkies extended because Der Jobs has said that is now the new normal.
It's like the old Microsoft joke: how many MicroSquash engineers does it take to change a light bulb?
Ans: none. The standards department has re-defined normal to be dark.
Well, it was funny at the time. Why is it so hard for some folk to accept that sometimes Apple screws up?
Doesn't mean their products are bad or that you shouldn't buy from them. Just means they screwed up. Its a tough business and things happen. So what if they are not perfect; at least they have stopped denying and deflecting and are publicly dealing with the root cause.
Give Apple and Mr. J a pat on the back for doing the right thing. They still have some trouble with full admission but what the heck.... so do my teenage kids!
I was being sarcastic. But since so many seem incredibly and desperately offended by anything remotely I guess you gotta be careful what you say around here or the apple defence league's thunderin hooves will pummel me to submission in no time flat.
Absolutely agree with you. There are a few folk here who are easily put off by discussion that does align with their world view. Name calling and offensive language is the last resort of those with no position to defend.
I work in engineering and mass production of consumer services and products. We are often in a situation where it is important to give cost and risk analysis based on limited and insufficient information. The usual method is to make some assumptions and extrapolate to deliver cost estimates. In a formalized response, we vary the assumptions and provide several scenarios. Costs and resultant risks are documented and sent up the line with recommendations for executive types to evaluate. The process usually spins around a few times to deal with associated issues and to factor in new knowledge.
That is all I am trying to do here: show that the antenna problem is/was real and represented a profit risk to Apple and their partners.
Somehow, that kind of analysis is considered a troll. \
...those were the days, before all this consumer rights stuff.
Ho, ho, ho.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pinkybrain
Absolutely agree with you. There are a few folk here who are easily put off by discussion that does align with their world view. Name calling and offensive language is the last resort of those with no position to defend.
I work in engineering and mass production of consumer services and products. We are often in a situation where it is important to give cost and risk analysis based on limited and insufficient information. The usual method is to make some assumptions and extrapolate to deliver cost estimates. In a formalized response, we vary the assumptions and provide several scenarios. Costs and resultant risks are documented and sent up the line with recommendations for executive types to evaluate. The process usually spins around a few times to deal with associated issues and to factor in new knowledge.
That is all I am trying to do here: show that the antenna problem is/was real and represented a profit risk to Apple and their partners.
Somehow, that kind of analysis is considered a troll. \
Looks like a big reporting error somewhere, unless there were two separate conversations.
Engadget's report: Steve: "Maybe it's human nature -- when you're doing well, people want to tear you down. I see it happening with Google, people trying to tear them down. And I don't understand it... what would you prefer? That we were a korean company, that we were here in America leading the world with these products... maybe it's just that people want to get eyeballs on their sites."
So is Steve talking about people tearing down a great company, Google, or about Google tearing Apple down? It seems to be more in line with what Engadget reported. If so, and you're covering the same discussion here, you might want to revise the article.
It's called tall poppy syndrome and we here in New Zealand are the masters of it. It's the only thing I hate about New Zealand.
Essentially when someone gets to successful we try our best to bring them down. The sentiment is good in that we're trying to keep the successful grounded so that things don't go to their head but at the same time we push them away which is stupid. Many successful people leave New Zealand to go elsewhere then we whinge and moan because all the successful people are leaving New Zealand.
It's the same here with Apple and Google who are hugely successful companies and while people want them to be grounded and not forget where they came from they decide the best way to do that is to go at them with torches and spears. I fully concur with Jobs' assessment.
how many didn't bother to call? It's well known the numbers of people who actually call to complain about issue such as this is much lower than those who actually have it.
A whole bunch of pomp and ceremony, our phone is as bad as their phone's reception, blah blah blah.
The reason Apple was crucified in the media is because look at it, the we're the king of the castle and yer the dirty rascal kind of thing you get from the apple crowd (frig I'm in it I can see it) makes it even more a target.
The more smug the grins, the more people want to wipe them. Issue or no issue, that all it really is.
Yeah and instead they whinge and moan about it in forums instead of going to get the issue looked at and then complain that Apple is not doing anything to fix the problem.
I'm going to side with Apple who have tonnes of resources to look into the problem as we've seen than some bloggers too stupid to want to help themselves.
Want something fixed? Log a job. That's what we tell our customers and not because we're trying to pass the buck but it's because we want to find what issues are out there so that we can look at the problem as a collective whole rather than a bunch of one off cases. That's good engineering practice but when Apple does it it's a bad thing?
...those were the days, before all this consumer rights stuff.
Ho, ho, ho.
Cost benefit analysis is always done. In the case of the Pinto and other situations where life was put at risk, the true value of human life was underestimated or purposely suppressed. Otherwise, different design decisions would have been made.
With shuttle O rings, non-engineering pressures forced a flawed decision. Again, the true cost and risk analysis was not performed.
Both of these cases support making sure that risks and costs are not suppressed because of a blue sky mentality.
All car designs have limits as to the safety features that are installed. That is why all of the auto makers support standards. It means that they can design to a limit that society in general (via government agencies) has set as an appropriate design limit.
Apple, Microsoft, HP, IBM are all publicly owned companies and as such they have their main focus set in the laws defining their incorporation. That focus emphasizes return to the shareholder and the executive generally has added incentive in the form of share based bonuses.
As a result, at the executive level, it is almost all dollars and profit. There are ego and pride factors as well (we are talking about people), but most certainly Apple would not respond the way they have unless it was beneficial for them to do so. ie: the cost/benefit numbers work.
For a class action suit like this to be approved, they have to prove a flaw in the product and they have to accept any reasonable "fix" the company provides. It's not carte blanche to suck money out of the company. It also has to be the case that you are "stuck" with the product (it's late in the cycle and it can't be returned).
With this press conference alone, Apple seems to have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that:
- there is no flaw (relative to other phones)
- iPhone 4 actually has better reception than any other phone.
- anyone that doesn't like it can bring it back for a full refund
- they will give out a free "fix" (case) to anyone that asks
They even got the other case manufacturers onboard so the "suffering" have a choice of cases, and got the carriers to promise not to screw people over the contract or charge fees for the change.
No judge in their right mind will let the class action suit even begin to move forward.
If you are so unhappy...why not just go to AT&T and return the phone.
Then you can use your superior intelligence to go out and buy the phone that is more wonderful than the iPHone. And of course you know what that phone is...right? That's why you bought the iPHone...because there was a better choice.
You jackass (notice that I did not capitalize jackass..you do not deserve it.)
Hey, Sky say hello to Penny for me. How's that Cessna 310 working' out for you?
Listen pal, you are one rude SOB. Why don't you just get a life and calm down. Anytime anyone says anything that might be construed as a criticism you practically have a shit herrmorage. A criticism is a just a criticism. And anyone in business knows not every unsatisfied customer calls. It's biz 101 dude.
Take a chill pill and stop being damn rude.
Listen pal, you are one rude SOB. Why don't you just get a life and calm down...oh, sorry!
Comments
It's my car and no damned car company is going to tell me the right way to hold it.
If I have an accident due to not holding it the "right" way I'm suing them because it proves 100% of cars are defective.
I guess its due to the climate I live in and the fact that I feel compelled to hold on to the steering wheel in a normal manner.
Murdoch doesn't own the Times. You may be thinking of The Wall Street Journal and its publisher Dow Jones which was purchased by Murdoch's News Corporation in 2007.
Actually, I wasn't. But I has mistakenly assumed he had finally won that battle. Apparently he settled on the WSJ purchase that you mentioned. He has steadily attacked the Times, from a business point, for the last three years in an attempt to still force a bargain basement sale.
Either way, once he owns anything, it may be highly profitable, but morally it turns to crap.
He will change the laws of physics by sheer will if he has to.
And in your case, I would just point out that Murdoch bought the Wall Street Journal, not the New York Times (But yes, even the WSJ was able to get worse since Murdoch bought i.t)
Yep, you are right. As I posted above, he has continually attacked the NYT to weaken their business position ever since the 2007 WSJ purchase. I had always just assumed he won it in the first round.
You are in need of serious help. All smart phones show this effect to some degree, didn't you listen to what he said....I am tired of all the crying, spoiled babies who spout off when they occasionally drop a call, or have to wait an hour because of a delayed flight, etc. etc...no technology is perfect, but what we have is pretty amzing these days, you should be thankful.
If this was to me then I can only say that I have never said that the i4 is not an amazing device. As far as dropped calls go, although I don't own a 4 (I have a 3GS), I have provided support to several people (6 and counting) over this issue. The genius desk folk and the support line provided little if any help. None of the people I helped have returned their phones and none are calling the support desk any more. Why throw out the baby with the bath?
I live in an area with some of the best overall cell coverage in North America. Still, when you live in the country, coverage and fringe signal reception is important. When there is sufficient signal to support a call and the call drops because the phone is being held in the hand and in a normal manner, then that is a problem. Coverage is there; phone antenna design sucks. Period. This isn't crying, whinging or bleating. It is just a problem.
It also isn't sacrilege to complain about it. That is the feedback that makes things better.
These devices are also not miracles: they are fancy walkie talkies with a huge amount of functionality crammed in. The result is amazing but not a miracle.
Along the way, design compromises are made. In this case, I think marketing eye-candy was given priority over functional design. People called Apple on it and Apple has responded properly, after much prodding but still they have finally done the right thing.
Why is this such a sensitive issue to you?
If you're going to bother to reply at least don't put words in my mouth. I never said the iPhone was completely flawless. You obviously don't have a valid argument when you have to resort to completely making things up.
With their stellar command of the English language, perhaps they are on the editorial staff of the NYT?
I can't wait for the iPhone 5. Steve is so peeved now that he will make sure the next iPhone will have such good reception it will need 6 bars.
He will change the laws of physics by sheer will if he has to.
Hahahahaha!
... but it goes to 11!
Since I am not an easily swayed idiot, like the vast majority in this country, I normally rely on credible word of mouth for product recommendations, and not the biased bleatings of bloggers and haters with huge axes to grind. I currently have an iPhone 3GS, which I like quite a bit, but if I am going to upgrade in the next six months or so, I will get an iPhone 4. Where I live, both Verizon and ATT cell coverage suck, which is why I keep my copper land line. I am carrier agnostic, and if any of them meet all my needs, within reason, the differentiator will be the handset, and in this case, as far as I am concerned, the iPhone wins. I'm not sorry to antagonize all the Apple-haters out there, and think that providing grist for their whining mill is a good thing, given that it keeps them from molesting small furry mammals.
I see no reason why you wouldn't have an absolutely wonderful experience with the iPhone 4.
Go for it.
ALL of the iPhone 4s have this problem even if not everyone notices it. That is a 100% failure rate, although failure really is not the correct category.
The call rate of 0.55% for a single issue is high for a new product and I don't know of any support centre that would be happy with this rate. As an engineering team leader I know that I would be called on the carpet for this single-issue rate on a mass produced consumer product. At 5000 calls per week (3 weeks, 0.55% of customers) and $50 per call to handle (conservative figure for a personal call back type support process), that is $250,000 per week of support expense for a single problem. This is ugly. Cuts deeply into the support profits.
The X-Box 360 failure rate is a joke. It is an utter disaster. This is a comparison that does not lead to any insight. One is a production issue and the other is a built in design issue approved by an executive that should know better. The iPhone 4 is a great device and, mostly, an excellent phone. The design issue is obvious; any RF engineer would call attention to a bare metal antenna array that is bridgable by the user's hand.
This is why Apple should be red-faced and contrite over the antenna problem.
Good thing is that the issue is well defined and very fixable. Good on Apple to stop denying and to provide a free work-around.
Good gucka mucka. You are just sooooo full of shist!
Why should I hold a car by the steering wheel?
It's my car and no damned car company is going to tell me the right way to hold it.
If I have an accident due to not holding it the "right" way I'm suing them because it proves 100% of cars are defective.
Yes... now I have to drive with my pinkies extended because Der Jobs has said that is now the new normal.
It's like the old Microsoft joke: how many MicroSquash engineers does it take to change a light bulb?
Ans: none. The standards department has re-defined normal to be dark.
Well, it was funny at the time. Why is it so hard for some folk to accept that sometimes Apple screws up?
Doesn't mean their products are bad or that you shouldn't buy from them. Just means they screwed up. Its a tough business and things happen. So what if they are not perfect; at least they have stopped denying and deflecting and are publicly dealing with the root cause.
Give Apple and Mr. J a pat on the back for doing the right thing. They still have some trouble with full admission but what the heck.... so do my teenage kids!
Good gucka mucka. You are just sooooo full of shist!
Well thought out response. Mind if I quote you some time?
TTFN
You do not represent the people I know who use Apple products.
uuuuhhhh.... ok. Sure.
I was being sarcastic. But since so many seem incredibly and desperately offended by anything remotely I guess you gotta be careful what you say around here or the apple defence league's thunderin hooves will pummel me to submission in no time flat.
Absolutely agree with you. There are a few folk here who are easily put off by discussion that does align with their world view. Name calling and offensive language is the last resort of those with no position to defend.
I work in engineering and mass production of consumer services and products. We are often in a situation where it is important to give cost and risk analysis based on limited and insufficient information. The usual method is to make some assumptions and extrapolate to deliver cost estimates. In a formalized response, we vary the assumptions and provide several scenarios. Costs and resultant risks are documented and sent up the line with recommendations for executive types to evaluate. The process usually spins around a few times to deal with associated issues and to factor in new knowledge.
That is all I am trying to do here: show that the antenna problem is/was real and represented a profit risk to Apple and their partners.
Somehow, that kind of analysis is considered a troll.
...those were the days, before all this consumer rights stuff.
Ho, ho, ho.
Absolutely agree with you. There are a few folk here who are easily put off by discussion that does align with their world view. Name calling and offensive language is the last resort of those with no position to defend.
I work in engineering and mass production of consumer services and products. We are often in a situation where it is important to give cost and risk analysis based on limited and insufficient information. The usual method is to make some assumptions and extrapolate to deliver cost estimates. In a formalized response, we vary the assumptions and provide several scenarios. Costs and resultant risks are documented and sent up the line with recommendations for executive types to evaluate. The process usually spins around a few times to deal with associated issues and to factor in new knowledge.
That is all I am trying to do here: show that the antenna problem is/was real and represented a profit risk to Apple and their partners.
Somehow, that kind of analysis is considered a troll.
Looks like a big reporting error somewhere, unless there were two separate conversations.
Engadget's report: Steve: "Maybe it's human nature -- when you're doing well, people want to tear you down. I see it happening with Google, people trying to tear them down. And I don't understand it... what would you prefer? That we were a korean company, that we were here in America leading the world with these products... maybe it's just that people want to get eyeballs on their sites."
So is Steve talking about people tearing down a great company, Google, or about Google tearing Apple down? It seems to be more in line with what Engadget reported. If so, and you're covering the same discussion here, you might want to revise the article.
It's called tall poppy syndrome and we here in New Zealand are the masters of it. It's the only thing I hate about New Zealand.
Essentially when someone gets to successful we try our best to bring them down. The sentiment is good in that we're trying to keep the successful grounded so that things don't go to their head but at the same time we push them away which is stupid. Many successful people leave New Zealand to go elsewhere then we whinge and moan because all the successful people are leaving New Zealand.
It's the same here with Apple and Google who are hugely successful companies and while people want them to be grounded and not forget where they came from they decide the best way to do that is to go at them with torches and spears. I fully concur with Jobs' assessment.
how many didn't bother to call? It's well known the numbers of people who actually call to complain about issue such as this is much lower than those who actually have it.
A whole bunch of pomp and ceremony, our phone is as bad as their phone's reception, blah blah blah.
The reason Apple was crucified in the media is because look at it, the we're the king of the castle and yer the dirty rascal kind of thing you get from the apple crowd (frig I'm in it I can see it) makes it even more a target.
The more smug the grins, the more people want to wipe them. Issue or no issue, that all it really is.
Yeah and instead they whinge and moan about it in forums instead of going to get the issue looked at and then complain that Apple is not doing anything to fix the problem.
I'm going to side with Apple who have tonnes of resources to look into the problem as we've seen than some bloggers too stupid to want to help themselves.
Want something fixed? Log a job. That's what we tell our customers and not because we're trying to pass the buck but it's because we want to find what issues are out there so that we can look at the problem as a collective whole rather than a bunch of one off cases. That's good engineering practice but when Apple does it it's a bad thing?
I guess people really can't help themselves.
That was the method Ford used for the Pinto...
...those were the days, before all this consumer rights stuff.
Ho, ho, ho.
Cost benefit analysis is always done. In the case of the Pinto and other situations where life was put at risk, the true value of human life was underestimated or purposely suppressed. Otherwise, different design decisions would have been made.
With shuttle O rings, non-engineering pressures forced a flawed decision. Again, the true cost and risk analysis was not performed.
Both of these cases support making sure that risks and costs are not suppressed because of a blue sky mentality.
All car designs have limits as to the safety features that are installed. That is why all of the auto makers support standards. It means that they can design to a limit that society in general (via government agencies) has set as an appropriate design limit.
Apple, Microsoft, HP, IBM are all publicly owned companies and as such they have their main focus set in the laws defining their incorporation. That focus emphasizes return to the shareholder and the executive generally has added incentive in the form of share based bonuses.
As a result, at the executive level, it is almost all dollars and profit. There are ego and pride factors as well (we are talking about people), but most certainly Apple would not respond the way they have unless it was beneficial for them to do so. ie: the cost/benefit numbers work.
This is normal. There is nothing wrong with this.
It will never go to trial.
For a class action suit like this to be approved, they have to prove a flaw in the product and they have to accept any reasonable "fix" the company provides. It's not carte blanche to suck money out of the company. It also has to be the case that you are "stuck" with the product (it's late in the cycle and it can't be returned).
With this press conference alone, Apple seems to have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that:
- there is no flaw (relative to other phones)
- iPhone 4 actually has better reception than any other phone.
- anyone that doesn't like it can bring it back for a full refund
- they will give out a free "fix" (case) to anyone that asks
They even got the other case manufacturers onboard so the "suffering" have a choice of cases, and got the carriers to promise not to screw people over the contract or charge fees for the change.
No judge in their right mind will let the class action suit even begin to move forward.
It's over.
+++ QFT
It's over.
.
If you are so unhappy...why not just go to AT&T and return the phone.
Then you can use your superior intelligence to go out and buy the phone that is more wonderful than the iPHone. And of course you know what that phone is...right? That's why you bought the iPHone...because there was a better choice.
You jackass (notice that I did not capitalize jackass..you do not deserve it.)
Hey, Sky say hello to Penny for me. How's that Cessna 310 working' out for you?
.
Listen pal, you are one rude SOB. Why don't you just get a life and calm down. Anytime anyone says anything that might be construed as a criticism you practically have a shit herrmorage. A criticism is a just a criticism. And anyone in business knows not every unsatisfied customer calls. It's biz 101 dude.
Take a chill pill and stop being damn rude.
Listen pal, you are one rude SOB. Why don't you just get a life and calm down...oh, sorry!
.