Maybe the survey's authors and AI should start with some statistics. Last year was 83 and this year was 80. With an error margin of /- 2% (estimated), it's not meaningful to say that the scores are down.
The same could be said of the other companies, though. It's all relative.
So, regardless, either Apple is down or the others are up.
I feel the same way about iTunes. The search was never good. With iTunes 11 it is even worse. The general search produces way too many results, most are irrelevant, the back button works very poorly, there is no way to do a parallel search, no confirmation asking if you really want to purchase, no check for duplicates, no advanced search, and on.
It is Apple's new way to get money. Horrible. Apple is heading in the wrong direction in my view.
I doubt that the three point difference in rating from last year to this year is statistically significant.
And I also agree that bad ratings can be much more than about the site. Some people choose to be negative about any company they choose not to like and other people will downrate the site if they have any complaint about Apple in general. And I bet some people downrate the Apple.com site because they don't like iTunes.
Having said that, browsing for products on their site is fine. Search for products, especially third party accessories, is not so great. And on the Tech Specs pages, they no longer list model numbers, which I found useful to make sure that if I go to a retailer (Apple or otherwise), I'm looking at or pricing the same machine I looked at online.
Searching for solutions to problems is also poor. When you go to their user forums, if you search for an issue and find it, and then want to comment, you have to sign-in. Once you sign-in, you lose where you were and have to search all over again. That's simply not acceptable.
Complaining about Apple's prices for third-party products may be legit, but I don't think it's a valid reason to say it's LESS satisfying because Apple always charged list price for third party accessories. When I see people buying such accessories in an Apple physical store, I always wonder why they do so (unless they look like a "money is no object" person) because the same products are available in lots of other retailers for far less money. Personally, I think anyone who pays $35 for an iPhone case is insane.
As a bit of an aside, I'm with Fido in Canada, and updated my iPhone to 6.0.2. Yesterday I went to use my wifi hotspot for the first time since the upgrade, to tether my iPad, and nothing happened. I went to try it again, and the option for 'personal hotspot' was gone! Anyone else have encountered this?
Off topic, but.....
Mine disappeared and I found it in another settings menu (forgot which one). Once I turned my phone off/on it came back to the main page of the settings menu. This was on Rogers.
The same could be said of the other companies, though. It's all relative.
So, regardless, either Apple is down or the others are up.
You misunderstand statistical sampling error.
EVEN IF the samples were random and representative, a sampling error of +/- 2% means that any observed difference less than that amount is insignificant. That is, Apple's result last year could have been between 81% and 85% and this year between 78% and 82%. Since the ranges overlap, it is entirely possible that Apple's performance actually went up (just as the others who appear to have gone up might have actually gone down if their change was less than 4%f).
Now, that's using standard confidence limits. One could say that with an 70% confidence limit (rather than the standard 95%) that Apple's performance actually has gone down, but with that low of a confidence limit, it is better to say that it has probably gone down rather than a blanket statement that it has.
Beyond that, of course, are the question of what it means. How much of an impact was caused by the fact that so many of Apple's products have long lead times this year-considerably more than last year. So are consumers reacting to the wait rather than the actual performance or usability of the site? This survey doesn't tell you that.
EVEN IF the samples were random and representative, a sampling error of +/- 2% means that any observed difference less than that amount is insignificant. That is, Apple's result last year could have been between 81% and 85% and this year between 78% and 82%. Since the ranges overlap, it is entirely possible that Apple's performance actually went up (just as the others who appear to have gone up might have actually gone down if their change was less than 4%f).
Now, that's using standard confidence limits. One could say that with an 70% confidence limit (rather than the standard 95%) that Apple's performance actually has gone down, but with that low of a confidence limit, it is better to say that it has probably gone down rather than a blanket statement that it has.
Beyond that, of course, are the question of what it means. How much of an impact was caused by the fact that so many of Apple's products have long lead times this year-considerably more than last year. So are consumers reacting to the wait rather than the actual performance or usability of the site? This survey doesn't tell you that.
Relative to the other companies, though, Apple is 14th in line instead of 2nd.
No matter how you cut it, Apple is still further down on the list than last year... unless you are going to say that the statistics for 12 other companies is wrong and only Apple's is right.
Sampling error might bring them up to 6th but it still aint going to get them to 2nd.
Relative to the other companies, though, Apple is 14th in line instead of 2nd.
No matter how you cut it, Apple is still further down on the list than last year... unless you are going to say that the statistics for 12 other companies is wrong and only Apple's is right.
Sampling error might bring them up to 6th but it still aint going to get them to 2nd.
I think the point is that, if they are all within the error (x2) of each other, the ranking isn't reliable, that in fact, it could be reversed for all we know. Or, it could be up for some, but down for others, there's no way to know. In other words, statistically, it's a dead heat, and ranking them at all is misleading since the numbers aren't precise enough or the differences large enough to distinguish them in a particular order.
So, for example, in the Reuters article linked to (I'm not sure where the original data or margin of error info is), it says, "LLBean.com had the second-highest ranking, 85, up 4 points from a year earlier." But, if the margin of error is ±2 points, statistically, you can't even say that LLBean had any change from last year. Or, they may have actually had an 8 point change, because last year was measured 2 points high, and this year 2 points low. (Unless I just confused myself there.)
I find it frustrating what Apple charges you for upgrades! $200 on an iMac to go from 8GB to 16GB? I can purchase a complete set of 4 fast top of the line Corsair CAS 9 modules making a total of 32GB for less than the price of getting 8GB in upgrade from Apple. This is ridiculous! And now they've made the iMacs where you can't even upgrade the memory yourself? $200 to upgrade to the Core i7??? I can buy that processor outright off the shelf for $259... This is gouging! Trying times, I'll tell you... I know, I know... I can't run Mac OS X on a machine I build myself, but it just irks me what Apple charges you for the upgrades!
I find it frustrating what Apple charges you for upgrades! $200 on an iMac to go from 8GB to 16GB? I can purchase a complete set of 4 fast top of the line Corsair CAS 9 modules making a total of 32GB for less than the price of getting 8GB in upgrade from Apple. This is ridiculous!
So go do that instead.
And now they've made the iMacs where you can't even upgrade the memory yourself? $200 to upgrade to the Core i7??? I can buy that processor outright off the shelf for $259... This is gouging!
It happens that I have been with Apple products much longer than iPhone and iPad exists (my first iPod was 2nd gen and at that time I ran Mac OS X and OS 9 home).
Oh oh
Yes I know how to find it with number of clicks, but not everybody does.
I would consider for you to disconnect yourself from these people you mention.
Similarily, Apple forgets naming iLife its name
I don't think Apple is capable of that
Things like that confuse customers and there is no clear vision in Apple online store.
But you're not confused, are you?
Also I would add regular Apple Stores to dropping in quality. I walk to major one in state of NJ where I live and I stray as much as I want looking for some specific technical help, but no help.
Make an appointment with a Genius.
I can only play with all that equipment that I already know or I am not interested in.
You could also ask someone, just a thought.
I waste 15-30 minutes untill geek comes to me... and he cannot answer my tech question sending me somewhere else. So what quality is this?
So he was helpful by showing you the way. I'd say that is helpful. And, were the directions any good? Did you get help? Was someone able to answer your question?
So instead of being blind and offending people of being from different camp (while they may be not) listen, watch so you will learn about facts.
Ehm, thanks, I guess.
On top of this many Apple products are overpriced
They are? I don't think so. "Hello world! What do you think?" "We don't think so"
due to licensing and patenting madness
Ah, so that's the reason!
rather than to actual cost of manufacturing so Amazan offers knockoffs and sometimes they even work the same way as original once from Apple? How is this possible? Not all merchandise fell of the truck. Com'n.
Do you think talented people are still there? Usually the smartest ones get out first.
I find it very offensive. How many companies did you work for that you have this kind of conclusions? I happen to work with 12 so I can write a book on mergers, take overs, leaving, consulting, employment, ups, downs being VP and a regular employee e.t.c. I may even write a book on offensive people who do not know first thing and base their knwoledge on popular opinions from social circles rather than facts.
The choices people make (or have to make) vary so much that you have no idea. Talented people sometimes stay long... very long and you will not understand why unless you get more life experience.
Wiki gave me one positive and one negative tiddybit just now:
1. Rumors indicated that the company would look to Android to save its business woes, however in an interview with The Telegraph; Research In Motion CEO Thorsten Heins stated that ”If you look at other suppliers’ ability to differentiate, there’s very little wiggle room. We looked at it seriously – but if you understand what the promise of BlackBerry is to its user base it’s all about getting stuff done. Games, media, we have to be good at it but we have to support those guys who are ahead of the game. Very little time to consume and enjoy content – if you stay true to that purpose you have to build on that basis. And if we want to serve that segment we can’t do it on a me-too approach.”
2. On November 22, 2012, shares of RIM surged 18%, the largest gain of the stock in over three years. This was due to National Bank of Canada analyst Kris Thompson's announcement that the new BB10 devices were expected to sell better than anticipated; along with raising the target stock price.
I find it frustrating what Apple charges you for upgrades! $200 on an iMac to go from 8GB to 16GB? I can purchase a complete set of 4 fast top of the line Corsair CAS 9 modules making a total of 32GB for less than the price of getting 8GB in upgrade from Apple. This is ridiculous! And now they've made the iMacs where you can't even upgrade the memory yourself? $200 to upgrade to the Core i7??? I can buy that processor outright off the shelf for $259... This is gouging! Trying times, I'll tell you... I know, I know... I can't run Mac OS X on a machine I build myself, but it just irks me what Apple charges you for the upgrades!
Then purchase it and install it yourself. If you go to Best Buy and have a tech do the work they're little Geek Squad will charge you nearly $200 for the service.
I find it laughable that people think Apple should give inexpensive memory upgrades when it's one of the simplest augmentations for an owner to do themselves.
You want Newegg memory price upgrades, but want Apple to do it for you. Not going to happen. It doesn't happen from Newegg, either. They'll sell you the stick to put it in yourself.
Less satisfying? Seriously? I wonder why they said it was less satisfying as opposed to other years. Sounds like some crap PR junk used to sulify Apple's image.
Apple should present comparison charts earlier in the buying process...not make the consumer click on "buy now" first.
If I click on iPod touch, yes, it's filled with nice photos and all, but the photos/illustrations are giant and I feel like I have to scroll down those massive illustrations to get to more/better information.
Just present the damn comparison charts (and selections) earlier. Then have the "buy now" button at the top and the bottom of the chart.
Why would I want to click "buy now" in order to then get comparisons...it's counter-intuitive.
...I'm guessing that most consumers are not Apple purists who relate only to design/layout...instead, give us information in a more readily available format in which to buy things!
Interesting that people think Amazon does a good job. Maybe it's just me but I find it frustrating that international shipping costs aren't calculated on the fly and there is no way to only display items that will ship to my country.
I find it frustrating what Apple charges you for upgrades! $200 on an iMac to go from 8GB to 16GB? I can purchase a complete set of 4 fast top of the line Corsair CAS 9 modules making a total of 32GB for less than the price of getting 8GB in upgrade from Apple. This is ridiculous! And now they've made the iMacs where you can't even upgrade the memory yourself? $200 to upgrade to the Core i7??? I can buy that processor outright off the shelf for $259... This is gouging! Trying times, I'll tell you... I know, I know... I can't run Mac OS X on a machine I build myself, but it just irks me what Apple charges you for the upgrades!
You've clearly come into this with the idea that Apple has somehow created it's profit margins up front and any upgrades should be down at some magical, near cost value you've imagined in your head. That isn't how reality works. You can't walk up to a bus or train and say "I don't have a ticket, but since you're going that way why not give me a ride?" just as as you can't say "I have already configured an iMac, now I want to add a couple upgrades so why not give them to me at cost? I'll even through an extra $5 because I'm a nice guy." That's fucking bullshit!
And what if I told you that's because the standard config iMacs are sold at less than their optimal sale value to achieve a lower starting price? Well, you'd probably erroneously call that bait-and-switch. You'd be wrong, of course. Bottom line is they figure out everything long before it goes on sale so they can try to make their profit margin. If you only want to support companies that don't how to make a profit instead of buying equipment that suits your particular needs then Apple isn't for you. In fact, talking about how you should be able to change out your components tells me the iMac certainly isn't for you.
Note that Intel's current price list has the Core i7-3770 (8M cache, 4 Cores, 8 Threads, 3.40 GHz. 22nm) at $294 and the Core i5-3470 (6M cache, 4 Cores, 4 Threads, 3.20 GHz, 22nm) at $184. That's a $110 difference. Yeah, right, Apple doesn't pay that, but the point is the difference in price. Sure, right, it will vary but which do you think Apple gets a better deal on the more expensive on in the BTO 27" iMac that they buy less of or one that is a standard build processor? That's right, the chances are that they get a bigger discount on the cheaper processor so that $110 difference could potentially be greater.
PS: It's only the 21.5" iMac that doesn't user accessible RAM, not iMacs.
PPS: If you want to build your own Hackintosh there are plenty of sites that detail how to do it and which HW is best supported. If you don't like the support they have then write your own drivers to better support your particular wishes but complaining about a company charging you for an upgrade is ridiculous.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Maybe the survey's authors and AI should start with some statistics. Last year was 83 and this year was 80. With an error margin of /- 2% (estimated), it's not meaningful to say that the scores are down.
The same could be said of the other companies, though. It's all relative.
So, regardless, either Apple is down or the others are up.
I feel the same way about iTunes. The search was never good. With iTunes 11 it is even worse. The general search produces way too many results, most are irrelevant, the back button works very poorly, there is no way to do a parallel search, no confirmation asking if you really want to purchase, no check for duplicates, no advanced search, and on.
It is Apple's new way to get money. Horrible. Apple is heading in the wrong direction in my view.
And I also agree that bad ratings can be much more than about the site. Some people choose to be negative about any company they choose not to like and other people will downrate the site if they have any complaint about Apple in general. And I bet some people downrate the Apple.com site because they don't like iTunes.
Having said that, browsing for products on their site is fine. Search for products, especially third party accessories, is not so great. And on the Tech Specs pages, they no longer list model numbers, which I found useful to make sure that if I go to a retailer (Apple or otherwise), I'm looking at or pricing the same machine I looked at online.
Searching for solutions to problems is also poor. When you go to their user forums, if you search for an issue and find it, and then want to comment, you have to sign-in. Once you sign-in, you lose where you were and have to search all over again. That's simply not acceptable.
Complaining about Apple's prices for third-party products may be legit, but I don't think it's a valid reason to say it's LESS satisfying because Apple always charged list price for third party accessories. When I see people buying such accessories in an Apple physical store, I always wonder why they do so (unless they look like a "money is no object" person) because the same products are available in lots of other retailers for far less money. Personally, I think anyone who pays $35 for an iPhone case is insane.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dwilly
Just hire the person from Amazon
It wouldn't be the first hire from Amazon put in charge of a project.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/10/15/apple-hires-amazon-executive-to-head-its-siri-search-team
http://www.forbes.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2012/10/15/apple-hires-amazon-search-guru-stasior-to-oversee-siri/
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maecvs
As a bit of an aside, I'm with Fido in Canada, and updated my iPhone to 6.0.2. Yesterday I went to use my wifi hotspot for the first time since the upgrade, to tether my iPad, and nothing happened. I went to try it again, and the option for 'personal hotspot' was gone! Anyone else have encountered this?
Off topic, but.....
Mine disappeared and I found it in another settings menu (forgot which one). Once I turned my phone off/on it came back to the main page of the settings menu. This was on Rogers.
Originally Posted by island hermit
Yeah, right.
So what's your belief, or do you even have one?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
So what's your belief, or do you even have one?
Oh, I'm sure you know my belief.
You misunderstand statistical sampling error.
EVEN IF the samples were random and representative, a sampling error of +/- 2% means that any observed difference less than that amount is insignificant. That is, Apple's result last year could have been between 81% and 85% and this year between 78% and 82%. Since the ranges overlap, it is entirely possible that Apple's performance actually went up (just as the others who appear to have gone up might have actually gone down if their change was less than 4%f).
Now, that's using standard confidence limits. One could say that with an 70% confidence limit (rather than the standard 95%) that Apple's performance actually has gone down, but with that low of a confidence limit, it is better to say that it has probably gone down rather than a blanket statement that it has.
Beyond that, of course, are the question of what it means. How much of an impact was caused by the fact that so many of Apple's products have long lead times this year-considerably more than last year. So are consumers reacting to the wait rather than the actual performance or usability of the site? This survey doesn't tell you that.
Originally Posted by island hermit
Oh, I'm sure you know my belief.
That all trolls aren't. Yep.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
You misunderstand statistical sampling error.
EVEN IF the samples were random and representative, a sampling error of +/- 2% means that any observed difference less than that amount is insignificant. That is, Apple's result last year could have been between 81% and 85% and this year between 78% and 82%. Since the ranges overlap, it is entirely possible that Apple's performance actually went up (just as the others who appear to have gone up might have actually gone down if their change was less than 4%f).
Now, that's using standard confidence limits. One could say that with an 70% confidence limit (rather than the standard 95%) that Apple's performance actually has gone down, but with that low of a confidence limit, it is better to say that it has probably gone down rather than a blanket statement that it has.
Beyond that, of course, are the question of what it means. How much of an impact was caused by the fact that so many of Apple's products have long lead times this year-considerably more than last year. So are consumers reacting to the wait rather than the actual performance or usability of the site? This survey doesn't tell you that.
Relative to the other companies, though, Apple is 14th in line instead of 2nd.
No matter how you cut it, Apple is still further down on the list than last year... unless you are going to say that the statistics for 12 other companies is wrong and only Apple's is right.
Sampling error might bring them up to 6th but it still aint going to get them to 2nd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
Relative to the other companies, though, Apple is 14th in line instead of 2nd.
No matter how you cut it, Apple is still further down on the list than last year... unless you are going to say that the statistics for 12 other companies is wrong and only Apple's is right.
Sampling error might bring them up to 6th but it still aint going to get them to 2nd.
I think the point is that, if they are all within the error (x2) of each other, the ranking isn't reliable, that in fact, it could be reversed for all we know. Or, it could be up for some, but down for others, there's no way to know. In other words, statistically, it's a dead heat, and ranking them at all is misleading since the numbers aren't precise enough or the differences large enough to distinguish them in a particular order.
So, for example, in the Reuters article linked to (I'm not sure where the original data or margin of error info is), it says, "LLBean.com had the second-highest ranking, 85, up 4 points from a year earlier." But, if the margin of error is ±2 points, statistically, you can't even say that LLBean had any change from last year. Or, they may have actually had an 8 point change, because last year was measured 2 points high, and this year 2 points low. (Unless I just confused myself there.)
Originally Posted by ruel24
I find it frustrating what Apple charges you for upgrades! $200 on an iMac to go from 8GB to 16GB? I can purchase a complete set of 4 fast top of the line Corsair CAS 9 modules making a total of 32GB for less than the price of getting 8GB in upgrade from Apple. This is ridiculous!
So go do that instead.
And now they've made the iMacs where you can't even upgrade the memory yourself? $200 to upgrade to the Core i7??? I can buy that processor outright off the shelf for $259... This is gouging!
No, not really.
Oh oh
I would consider for you to disconnect yourself from these people you mention.
I don't think Apple is capable of that
But you're not confused, are you?
Make an appointment with a Genius.
You could also ask someone, just a thought.
So he was helpful by showing you the way. I'd say that is helpful. And, were the directions any good? Did you get help? Was someone able to answer your question?
Ehm, thanks, I guess.
They are? I don't think so. "Hello world! What do you think?" "We don't think so"
Ah, so that's the reason!
You lost me here. Actually, earlier.
Wow. Just wow.
<sarcasm>
Not the Fuel Cell Patent??
</sarcasm>
Wiki gave me one positive and one negative tiddybit just now:
1. Rumors indicated that the company would look to Android to save its business woes, however in an interview with The Telegraph; Research In Motion CEO Thorsten Heins stated that ”If you look at other suppliers’ ability to differentiate, there’s very little wiggle room. We looked at it seriously – but if you understand what the promise of BlackBerry is to its user base it’s all about getting stuff done. Games, media, we have to be good at it but we have to support those guys who are ahead of the game. Very little time to consume and enjoy content – if you stay true to that purpose you have to build on that basis. And if we want to serve that segment we can’t do it on a me-too approach.”
2. On November 22, 2012, shares of RIM surged 18%, the largest gain of the stock in over three years. This was due to National Bank of Canada analyst Kris Thompson's announcement that the new BB10 devices were expected to sell better than anticipated; along with raising the target stock price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruel24
I find it frustrating what Apple charges you for upgrades! $200 on an iMac to go from 8GB to 16GB? I can purchase a complete set of 4 fast top of the line Corsair CAS 9 modules making a total of 32GB for less than the price of getting 8GB in upgrade from Apple. This is ridiculous! And now they've made the iMacs where you can't even upgrade the memory yourself? $200 to upgrade to the Core i7??? I can buy that processor outright off the shelf for $259... This is gouging! Trying times, I'll tell you... I know, I know... I can't run Mac OS X on a machine I build myself, but it just irks me what Apple charges you for the upgrades!
Then purchase it and install it yourself. If you go to Best Buy and have a tech do the work they're little Geek Squad will charge you nearly $200 for the service.
I find it laughable that people think Apple should give inexpensive memory upgrades when it's one of the simplest augmentations for an owner to do themselves.
You want Newegg memory price upgrades, but want Apple to do it for you. Not going to happen. It doesn't happen from Newegg, either. They'll sell you the stick to put it in yourself.
I wonder why they said it was less satisfying as opposed to other years.
Sounds like some crap PR junk used to sulify Apple's image.
Apple should present comparison charts earlier in the buying process...not make the consumer click on "buy now" first.
If I click on iPod touch, yes, it's filled with nice photos and all, but the photos/illustrations are giant and I feel like I have to scroll down those massive illustrations to get to more/better information.
Just present the damn comparison charts (and selections) earlier. Then have the "buy now" button at the top and the bottom of the chart.
Why would I want to click "buy now" in order to then get comparisons...it's counter-intuitive.
...I'm guessing that most consumers are not Apple purists who relate only to design/layout...instead, give us information in a more readily available format in which to buy things!
So endeth the complainings. :-)
You've clearly come into this with the idea that Apple has somehow created it's profit margins up front and any upgrades should be down at some magical, near cost value you've imagined in your head. That isn't how reality works. You can't walk up to a bus or train and say "I don't have a ticket, but since you're going that way why not give me a ride?" just as as you can't say "I have already configured an iMac, now I want to add a couple upgrades so why not give them to me at cost? I'll even through an extra $5 because I'm a nice guy." That's fucking bullshit!
And what if I told you that's because the standard config iMacs are sold at less than their optimal sale value to achieve a lower starting price? Well, you'd probably erroneously call that bait-and-switch. You'd be wrong, of course. Bottom line is they figure out everything long before it goes on sale so they can try to make their profit margin. If you only want to support companies that don't how to make a profit instead of buying equipment that suits your particular needs then Apple isn't for you. In fact, talking about how you should be able to change out your components tells me the iMac certainly isn't for you.
Note that Intel's current price list has the Core i7-3770 (8M cache, 4 Cores, 8 Threads, 3.40 GHz. 22nm) at $294 and the Core i5-3470 (6M cache, 4 Cores, 4 Threads, 3.20 GHz, 22nm) at $184. That's a $110 difference. Yeah, right, Apple doesn't pay that, but the point is the difference in price. Sure, right, it will vary but which do you think Apple gets a better deal on the more expensive on in the BTO 27" iMac that they buy less of or one that is a standard build processor? That's right, the chances are that they get a bigger discount on the cheaper processor so that $110 difference could potentially be greater.
PS: It's only the 21.5" iMac that doesn't user accessible RAM, not iMacs.
PPS: If you want to build your own Hackintosh there are plenty of sites that detail how to do it and which HW is best supported. If you don't like the support they have then write your own drivers to better support your particular wishes but complaining about a company charging you for an upgrade is ridiculous.