In the media I've read, the Surface and its sales figures have pretty much been panned.
DED really needs to stop with these childish 'the media is biased against Apple!' articles. They're unprofessional as well as fallacious. Apple gets an extraordinary level of media attention, most of it positive.
IF there is truth in the rumor/fact (Frutmor®) that the aluminum shell is responsible for low yields THAN isn't it obvious that Apple had to replace the 5 with something easier to manufacture? Especially if the new 5s model was going to be in the same aluminum shell?
That is, if they can't manufacture enough phones for the demand of the 5s, what would have been the situation if they had to make aluminum shells for the 5c AND 5s?
I think Apple saw this problem and accounted for it brilliantly: Replace the 5 with a very slightly bumped model in high quality plastic. Why not go colorful at the same time?
It was more than the aluminum shell, if you remember when Apple introduced the iPhone 5 they talked about how there were 50 or so slight variations in the small glass panels on the rear side that a robot chose from to make the most precise fit for each individual phone. That along with several other factors were the reasons for such low initial yields. I also believe that costs to assemble them were much, much higher than any previous models.
I predicted that Apple would outright drop the iPhone 5, to allow the iPhone 5s to utilize those assembly lines, and replace it with the 5c. It really was a brilliant move on the part of Tim Cook and Apple to do this.
I also believe that the iPhone 5s will be dropped when the iPhone 6 comes out and replaced with a "6c" or "5cs" (however they plan the naming scheme). The main goal of the iPhone 6 design will be to make it much, much easier to assemble, but still maintain a highly precise design. And, finally, for those watching at home, a design that will allow for a larger display that will not make the overall size of the iPhone much larger than it already is - I'd guess a 4.7", maybe a 4.8" display.
Apple did not design the 5c to destroy its own profitability, or to make the 5s look really expensive in comparison. That would have been really stupid
If that was stupid then the iPad mini was stupid. Apple has continuously said it is prepared to cannibalise itself.
Umm, perhaps you should check yourself first...
Profitability and cannibalism are NOT the same thing. You can in fact cannibalize yourself without eating into your profits. That's what he was talking about. The iPad mini only marginally affects profits, even though it may take a bigger chunk of the market away from its larger sibling. What DED was addressing was that analysts predicted the iPhone 5c would be sold much cheaper and therefore affect margins and profits. He was correctly explaining that Apple would not design and sell a product that would intentionally screw up their profit margins.
I do. The 5C is not intended to be adored by those seeking iPhone 5S power/performance/functionality. Its purpose is to replace the iPhone 5, which did not adequately address the world's LTE networks. The iPhone 5C does and costs less to produce. Doing what it is intended to, (replace the iPhone 5, not compete with the iPhone 5S), the iPhone 5C is a resounding success.
Those that disagree are still smarting over the fact that Apple did not address the sub $400 market (one that Apple isn't interested in), and continue to worship at the altar of market share as the holy grail.
I agree with you, however, I do think Apple is interested in the sub $400 market. I don't think their issue with the "junk" market has anything to do with price; they are more concerned about being able to build a device that lives up to their standards and still be able to sell it that low while still making a decent profit.
I believe once they completely drop the original "5" design and are able to get manufacturing costs down and yields up across their product line, they will be able to drop the price of the 5c low enough to hit that market.
This article is based on a major flaw: it compares the 5c to competitors, but not to Apple's own standard. That's a major mistake. If expected production is cut by 35%, then they mistakenly estimated the demand for the product, and the reasons should have been obvious to any male that worked at Apple. The color scheme appeals to narrow market. I don't know a single straight male of any age that would be caught dead with these things, especially if you're only saving $100 dollars.
as many note, this just proves once again there is a knee jerk Apple FUD bias in the tech media, along with a blatant double standard for all the rest. Nokia just died. RIM is dying. MS is floundering aimlessly. HP has lost its way. Google's invasion of your privacy continues to metastasize. Amazon never makes real profits. all the Asian OEM's except Samsung are bleeding cash. and Apple is even slowly winning the patent war with Samsung.
but the "news" you get are fabricated repots of 5c "disappointment" instead. these guys aren't journalists, they're just hacks and hit whores.
I love 5c, but will prefer 5s with $100 bucks more as I will get 3plus: better processor, aluminum case, finger print feature, plus bonus a better iSight camera feature. So basically 5c is a good one, but with price tag that is only $100 bucks different 5s became a better alternative. If apple is willing to test $200 different at $450 bucks, it will be a big game changer. So the bottom line is the price tag vs alternatives. A plus for Apple if they are willing to do so is that the total sales will be sky rocketed overwhelming the market share of what is now being enjoyed by Samsung and others like HTC and LG. The 5s will find it market segment by itself, it won't affect the sale of 5c. 5c with a more acceptable price level will certainly adopt even more new buyer which are otherwise being taken by the competitors.
It does not have a faster processor than the 5. In some benchmarks it rates slower?
Better facetime camera yes and that's it
5c performs better than 5 in every benchmark I have seen.
it also has a better facetime camera and supports a whole lot of LTE bands (4G for the first time in India yay)
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook
It's not surprising the 5C is doing decently in the US because US customers are blinded by subsidized pricing. I wonder what the picture for the 5C looks like outside the US?
That would be far more telling.
I think I saw a graph that said 35% of the iPhones purchased in UK were 5cs (thats the max)
and yes they do need to sell out the extra stock left on some shelves.
In the media I've read, the Surface and its sales figures have pretty much been panned.
DED really needs to stop with these childish 'the media is biased against Apple!' articles. They're unprofessional as well as fallacious. Apple gets an extraordinary level of media attention, most of it positive.
That’s your response to the facts laid out in the article? The 9 months of garbage published about the Surface that only collapsed once the truth was forced out after the company had to write off nearly a billion all flew over your head, and now doesn’t matter because nobody is saying still saying the Surface was successful over the last year?
It doesn’t occur to you that the media has now reset with "new" expectations for Surface 2 (albeit less gushing)?
Your refusal to look at the facts of what just occurred is part of the reason why we have to relive history over and over without learning from it, because you refuse to learn from facts laid out at your feet. You even feel comfortable calling this information "unprofessional" and basically a lie.
This isn’t an argument about who gets the most favorable attention in the media. It’s about who lies and/or is incompetent at reporting the truth. You have completely failed to grasp not only the facts of the past year, but you attack the very presentation of truth as a lie because you don’t find it entertaining or in line with what you’d like to hear. That says something very bad about you.
1. It is a failure for the simple reason that much of the world's media has suggested that it is. Apple could have sold the iPhone 5 in its place and the sales would have been viewed as largely unimportant; ALL THE FOCUS WOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE 5S. The negative publicity Apple is getting from this is REAL, and this is damaging the Apple brand. For ANY Apple product to be compared to the Microsoft Surface is a total slap in the face. There's a widely used phrase in the marketing industry..."Perception is reality". If the sales come in higher than expected, SOME of this damage will be reversed, but you'd be surprised how hard it is to change perception.
2. Many had assumed that Apple had found the answer to growth in emerging countries by launching a new phone. Once pricing was announced, it was clear that Apple was not pursuing this strategy. While not a flaw per se of the 5c, it is nonetheless an admission that Apple still hasn't found a way of growing in these markets or of damaging the numerous companies who are dominant in those markets, and who will increasingly push upmarket into Apple's demographic.
In the media I've read, the Surface and its sales figures have pretty much been panned.
DED really needs to stop with these childish 'the media is biased against Apple!' articles. They're unprofessional as well as fallacious. Apple gets an extraordinary level of media attention, most of it positive.
He's had two similar rants along that same vein (the 'iOS7 is Apple's buggiest release ever' one and this one). His job basically boils down to writing articles that are very heavily biased in Apple's favor and portraying them as news- so it seems a little dubious that he would jump and down and rant about how anyone who once reported less than glowing news about Apple is biased against them. I've seen quite a few very positive Apple articles in USA Today. At least he stopped short of calling the rest of the press outside of AppleInsider the 'lame-stream' media, but it doesn't seem like he's far from it.
I don't care if the press is 'mean,' or highlights something that is less than glowing about *any* company; the more important question to me would be are the articles right or wrong?
Instead of screaming 'unfair' I'd have liked to see counter articles:
'iOS7 is Apples most robust and bug free release to date' and then back it with the data he claims the other articles didn't research...
or
'iPhone 5c sales poised to soar above expectations' and make an argument for it...
Without countering their fundamental points the articles do come across like a lot of wheel spinning, and in fact end up hurting his cause...
In one article he spends much of his rant comparing the 5c to the Surface. Really??!! I wouldn't be so quick to lump those two together just yet- there is still at least hope for the 5c (and the Surface too- just not the Surface RT).
The other rant basically served to validate the article he was trying to debunk- the comments were littered with Apple users who were encountering issues with iOS7. The press reporting on it isn't 'bias' Finding one article that supports his cause and then using that to claim that that represents 'the rest of the media' isn't highly believable. I recall reading plenty of negative reports on the Surface RT before its release, and back in the day Windows got so much bad press that BSOD became household terminology. I didn't view them as biased against Windows, I viewed them as 'mostly right'
This article is based on a major flaw: it compares the 5c to competitors, but not to Apple's own standard. That's a major mistake. If expected production is cut by 35%, then they mistakenly estimated the demand for the product, and the reasons should have been obvious to any male that worked at Apple. The color scheme appeals to narrow market. I don't know a single straight male of any age that would be caught dead with these things, especially if you're only saving $100 dollars.
You (and much of the media) are basing your assessment of the 5c based on assumptions that [purportedly true reports state] that [production of some number has been cut by a certain percentage] and that [this was not planned in the manufacturing ramp] but was [done in direct relation to sales] and that [the sales prompting production changes have or will have negative consequences].
That’s a string of beliefs that are only possible to hold if you have incredibly credulity and want to think that Apple is teetering on the brink of failure in every respect.
What you should consider is that: [reports of "checks" have been wrong pretty much every time (iPhone 5 production wasn’t cut as reported; products predicted by such checks never appeared)] reports of production cuts [are not possible to fact check and Apple won’t dispute them, as doing so would reveal strategy and/or subject Apple to 24/7 denials of every wrong story that gets invented] and [are part of a complex system that is virtually impossible for outsiders to interpret, even with real access to complete data].
?Imagine somebody seeing one text on your phone and trying to recreate your entire day and explain why you did what you were doing based on that one message. Now turn that into a rumor, so there’s somebody out there saying on Facebook what they think you did based on somebody else’s rumor of having seen your message on your phone, when its likely they weren’t even exposed to your phone.
?That’s how ridiculous this whole story is.
?On top of that, even if iPhone 5c were an Xbox/Surface/Nexus/Honeycomb/Palm Pre/Galaxy Gear type massive failure, it wouldn’t have even have a significant impact on Apple because there is no indication that people are buying 5c alternatives from competitors; the idea is that they are buying the more expensive 5s instead.
That’s right: the worst nightmare for the 2013 iPhone the media can invent is that Apple is making more money selling a higher end product than many originally thought possible.
That’s not how failure works. Only an idiot would think that.
I guess the iPhone is a failure because its screen is too big, doesn’t have a physical keyboard, and is lacking 3G, huh.
“Idiocy isn’t.”
Many were wrong. Simple as that.
Not in the slightest, no. Try again.
Reverting to Ad hominem does not show a strong position. Try actually disputing what I wrote.
I've personally had to develop campaigns to change a perception issue around a product that was not based on reality. It is extremely difficult and expensive to do so and is one of the most difficult things to do in marketing.
I've personally had to develop campaigns to change a perception issue around a product that was not based on reality. It is extremely difficult and expensive to do so and is one of the most difficult things to do in marketing.
So why not just let the product do that itself, like every single Apple product has? No one says boo about Maps anymore, because that was never anything but a lie. No one says boo about antennagate anymore, because that was never anything but a lie. No one says…
He's had two similar rants along that same vein (the 'iOS7 is Apple's buggiest release ever' one and this one). His job basically boils down to writing articles that are very heavily biased in Apple's favor and portraying them as news- so it seems a little dubious that he would jump and down and rant about how anyone who once reported less than glowing news about Apple is biased against them. I've seen quite a few very positive Apple articles in USA Today. At least he stopped short of calling the rest of the press outside of AppleInsider the 'lame-stream' media, but it doesn't seem like he's far from it.
I don't care if the press is 'mean,' or highlights something that is less than glowing about *any* company; the more important question to me would be are the articles right or wrong?
Instead of screaming 'unfair' I'd have liked to see counter articles:
'iOS7 is Apples most robust and bug free release to date' and then back it with the data he claims the other articles didn't research...
or
'iPhone 5c sales poised to soar above expectations' and make an argument for it...
Without countering their fundamental points the articles do come across like a lot of wheel spinning, and in fact end up hurting his cause...
In one article he spends much of his rant comparing the 5c to the Surface. Really??!! I wouldn't be so quick to lump those two together just yet- there is still at least hope for the 5c (and the Surface too- just not the Surface RT).
The other rant basically served to validate the article he was trying to debunk- the comments were littered with Apple users who were encountering issues with iOS7. The press reporting on it isn't 'bias' Finding one article that supports his cause and then using that to claim that that represents 'the rest of the media' isn't highly believable. I recall reading plenty of negative reports on the Surface RT before its release, and back in the day Windows got so much bad press that BSOD became household terminology. I didn't view them as biased against Windows, I viewed them as 'mostly right'
One of your problems Frood, is that you don’t understand the meaning of words you like to use. You also don’t understand basic logic.
"Bias" refers to injecting opinion into what is presented as a pure recounting of facts. When you say that an opinion or editorial has "bias," it instantly indicates that you don’t understand what the concept of bias is. Opinions are supposed to express opinion. News stories are not supposed to forward or propagate an opinion; they are supposed to inform with neutrality.
Also, "bias" doesn’t mean writing something that will equally present the opinions of extremists. A story about Michelle Bachman that fails to portray her has being a nutcase is not "unbiased," but rather biased propaganda seeking to subvert reality by portraying her as less than an unhinged fool incapable of her job.
A national newspaper that prints a hit piece that makes broad, general claims that it fails to support with facts, and which it bases its entire premise on comments from a consultant for competitors, on isolated anecdotes, on soundbites from an (IBB) flack that only ever talks positively about Samsung and casts shadows on Apple, is not an "unbiased report." That makes it suitable for criticism.
Nobody is arguing that iOS 7 is flawless. And one doesn’t have to prove that it is to criticize a major newspaper for making specific claims about it that are simply not true.
Windows had metrics supporting its problems with BSOD, and it was known what caused them: kernel panics and poor isolation of privilege. This occured for many years, through many releases.
Sayign that iOS 7, days after its release, has the "same problem" based on one YouTube video is not reporting facts. It appears that iWork apps can cause hardware/iOS crashes. The camera can. There may be other bugs specific to the 5s. It’s been three weeks. If you’re going to report on these issues, you need to present some metrics that show they are not isolated events, especially if you state as a matter of fact, as USA Today did, that 'iOS 7 has more problems than any other release ever' and equate it with Windows NT.
I've been a registered member for some time. During that time I rarely read posts, and even more rarely posted myself. The past couple days have been different.
What I've learned from reading member's posts in this thread is consistent with all public forums. The first thing is that lack of knowledge doesn't stop the poster from posting.
A great example of that is Island Hermit. Over 4000 posts, and if the others are anything like what he's posted on this thread they are full of emotional, agenda driven, rumor based anger. There is no way that facts/common sense/logic will change his mind. Facts are an annoyance to someone like Island Hermit.
I've wasted enough time reading comments on Apple Insider. I won't do that again. The articles though are first rate. To bad they don't attract more knowledgeable commenters.
Comments
In the media I've read, the Surface and its sales figures have pretty much been panned.
DED really needs to stop with these childish 'the media is biased against Apple!' articles. They're unprofessional as well as fallacious. Apple gets an extraordinary level of media attention, most of it positive.
IF there is truth in the rumor/fact (Frutmor®) that the aluminum shell is responsible for low yields THAN isn't it obvious that Apple had to replace the 5 with something easier to manufacture? Especially if the new 5s model was going to be in the same aluminum shell?
That is, if they can't manufacture enough phones for the demand of the 5s, what would have been the situation if they had to make aluminum shells for the 5c AND 5s?
I think Apple saw this problem and accounted for it brilliantly: Replace the 5 with a very slightly bumped model in high quality plastic. Why not go colorful at the same time?
It was more than the aluminum shell, if you remember when Apple introduced the iPhone 5 they talked about how there were 50 or so slight variations in the small glass panels on the rear side that a robot chose from to make the most precise fit for each individual phone. That along with several other factors were the reasons for such low initial yields. I also believe that costs to assemble them were much, much higher than any previous models.
I predicted that Apple would outright drop the iPhone 5, to allow the iPhone 5s to utilize those assembly lines, and replace it with the 5c. It really was a brilliant move on the part of Tim Cook and Apple to do this.
I also believe that the iPhone 5s will be dropped when the iPhone 6 comes out and replaced with a "6c" or "5cs" (however they plan the naming scheme). The main goal of the iPhone 6 design will be to make it much, much easier to assemble, but still maintain a highly precise design. And, finally, for those watching at home, a design that will allow for a larger display that will not make the overall size of the iPhone much larger than it already is - I'd guess a 4.7", maybe a 4.8" display.
I have been following AppleInsider for at least 10 years, and love the site. It has enriched my life.
I think AppleInsider has steadily improved over the years, and has become a top-notch site without selling out to advertisers.
Thanks DED, and all who make AI be what it is ! ! !
I think AI has improved greatly by removing the trolls and obnoxious people much more quickly.
It was a real zoo for a while and it's actually quite pleasant now.
Apple did not design the 5c to destroy its own profitability, or to make the 5s look really expensive in comparison. That would have been really stupid
If that was stupid then the iPad mini was stupid. Apple has continuously said it is prepared to cannibalise itself.
Umm, perhaps you should check yourself first...
Profitability and cannibalism are NOT the same thing. You can in fact cannibalize yourself without eating into your profits. That's what he was talking about. The iPad mini only marginally affects profits, even though it may take a bigger chunk of the market away from its larger sibling. What DED was addressing was that analysts predicted the iPhone 5c would be sold much cheaper and therefore affect margins and profits. He was correctly explaining that Apple would not design and sell a product that would intentionally screw up their profit margins.
...just like the Zune HD was sold out.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/02/09/microsoft-sells-out-of-surface-pro-just-like-the-zune-hd-did-in-2009
I do. The 5C is not intended to be adored by those seeking iPhone 5S power/performance/functionality. Its purpose is to replace the iPhone 5, which did not adequately address the world's LTE networks. The iPhone 5C does and costs less to produce. Doing what it is intended to, (replace the iPhone 5, not compete with the iPhone 5S), the iPhone 5C is a resounding success.
Those that disagree are still smarting over the fact that Apple did not address the sub $400 market (one that Apple isn't interested in), and continue to worship at the altar of market share as the holy grail.
I agree with you, however, I do think Apple is interested in the sub $400 market. I don't think their issue with the "junk" market has anything to do with price; they are more concerned about being able to build a device that lives up to their standards and still be able to sell it that low while still making a decent profit.
I believe once they completely drop the original "5" design and are able to get manufacturing costs down and yields up across their product line, they will be able to drop the price of the 5c low enough to hit that market.
but the "news" you get are fabricated repots of 5c "disappointment" instead. these guys aren't journalists, they're just hacks and hit whores.
It does not have a faster processor than the 5. In some benchmarks it rates slower?
Better facetime camera yes and that's it
5c performs better than 5 in every benchmark I have seen.
it also has a better facetime camera and supports a whole lot of LTE bands (4G for the first time in India yay)
It's not surprising the 5C is doing decently in the US because US customers are blinded by subsidized pricing. I wonder what the picture for the 5C looks like outside the US?
That would be far more telling.
I think I saw a graph that said 35% of the iPhones purchased in UK were 5cs (thats the max)
and yes they do need to sell out the extra stock left on some shelves.
It is curious the slack given to other company's products and services compared to the thrashing Apple immediately receives.
In the media I've read, the Surface and its sales figures have pretty much been panned.
DED really needs to stop with these childish 'the media is biased against Apple!' articles. They're unprofessional as well as fallacious. Apple gets an extraordinary level of media attention, most of it positive.
That’s your response to the facts laid out in the article? The 9 months of garbage published about the Surface that only collapsed once the truth was forced out after the company had to write off nearly a billion all flew over your head, and now doesn’t matter because nobody is saying still saying the Surface was successful over the last year?
It doesn’t occur to you that the media has now reset with "new" expectations for Surface 2 (albeit less gushing)?
Your refusal to look at the facts of what just occurred is part of the reason why we have to relive history over and over without learning from it, because you refuse to learn from facts laid out at your feet. You even feel comfortable calling this information "unprofessional" and basically a lie.
This isn’t an argument about who gets the most favorable attention in the media. It’s about who lies and/or is incompetent at reporting the truth. You have completely failed to grasp not only the facts of the past year, but you attack the very presentation of truth as a lie because you don’t find it entertaining or in line with what you’d like to hear. That says something very bad about you.
Two observations on the iPhone 5c:
1. It is a failure for the simple reason that much of the world's media has suggested that it is. Apple could have sold the iPhone 5 in its place and the sales would have been viewed as largely unimportant; ALL THE FOCUS WOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE 5S. The negative publicity Apple is getting from this is REAL, and this is damaging the Apple brand. For ANY Apple product to be compared to the Microsoft Surface is a total slap in the face. There's a widely used phrase in the marketing industry..."Perception is reality". If the sales come in higher than expected, SOME of this damage will be reversed, but you'd be surprised how hard it is to change perception.
2. Many had assumed that Apple had found the answer to growth in emerging countries by launching a new phone. Once pricing was announced, it was clear that Apple was not pursuing this strategy. While not a flaw per se of the 5c, it is nonetheless an admission that Apple still hasn't found a way of growing in these markets or of damaging the numerous companies who are dominant in those markets, and who will increasingly push upmarket into Apple's demographic.
1. It is a failure for the simple reason that much of the world's media has suggested that it is.
That’s not how failure works. Only an idiot would think that.
I guess the iPhone is a failure because its screen is too big, doesn’t have a physical keyboard, and is lacking 3G, huh.
"Perception is reality".
“Idiocy isn’t.”
2. Many had assumed that Apple had found the answer to growth in emerging countries by launching a new phone.
Many were wrong. Simple as that.
…it is nonetheless an admission…
Not in the slightest, no. Try again.
In the media I've read, the Surface and its sales figures have pretty much been panned.
DED really needs to stop with these childish 'the media is biased against Apple!' articles. They're unprofessional as well as fallacious. Apple gets an extraordinary level of media attention, most of it positive.
He's had two similar rants along that same vein (the 'iOS7 is Apple's buggiest release ever' one and this one). His job basically boils down to writing articles that are very heavily biased in Apple's favor and portraying them as news- so it seems a little dubious that he would jump and down and rant about how anyone who once reported less than glowing news about Apple is biased against them. I've seen quite a few very positive Apple articles in USA Today. At least he stopped short of calling the rest of the press outside of AppleInsider the 'lame-stream' media, but it doesn't seem like he's far from it.
I don't care if the press is 'mean,' or highlights something that is less than glowing about *any* company; the more important question to me would be are the articles right or wrong?
Instead of screaming 'unfair' I'd have liked to see counter articles:
'iOS7 is Apples most robust and bug free release to date' and then back it with the data he claims the other articles didn't research...
or
'iPhone 5c sales poised to soar above expectations' and make an argument for it...
Without countering their fundamental points the articles do come across like a lot of wheel spinning, and in fact end up hurting his cause...
In one article he spends much of his rant comparing the 5c to the Surface. Really??!! I wouldn't be so quick to lump those two together just yet- there is still at least hope for the 5c (and the Surface too- just not the Surface RT).
The other rant basically served to validate the article he was trying to debunk- the comments were littered with Apple users who were encountering issues with iOS7. The press reporting on it isn't 'bias' Finding one article that supports his cause and then using that to claim that that represents 'the rest of the media' isn't highly believable. I recall reading plenty of negative reports on the Surface RT before its release, and back in the day Windows got so much bad press that BSOD became household terminology. I didn't view them as biased against Windows, I viewed them as 'mostly right'
This article is based on a major flaw: it compares the 5c to competitors, but not to Apple's own standard. That's a major mistake. If expected production is cut by 35%, then they mistakenly estimated the demand for the product, and the reasons should have been obvious to any male that worked at Apple. The color scheme appeals to narrow market. I don't know a single straight male of any age that would be caught dead with these things, especially if you're only saving $100 dollars.
You (and much of the media) are basing your assessment of the 5c based on assumptions that [purportedly true reports state] that [production of some number has been cut by a certain percentage] and that [this was not planned in the manufacturing ramp] but was [done in direct relation to sales] and that [the sales prompting production changes have or will have negative consequences].
That’s a string of beliefs that are only possible to hold if you have incredibly credulity and want to think that Apple is teetering on the brink of failure in every respect.
What you should consider is that: [reports of "checks" have been wrong pretty much every time (iPhone 5 production wasn’t cut as reported; products predicted by such checks never appeared)] reports of production cuts [are not possible to fact check and Apple won’t dispute them, as doing so would reveal strategy and/or subject Apple to 24/7 denials of every wrong story that gets invented] and [are part of a complex system that is virtually impossible for outsiders to interpret, even with real access to complete data].
?Imagine somebody seeing one text on your phone and trying to recreate your entire day and explain why you did what you were doing based on that one message. Now turn that into a rumor, so there’s somebody out there saying on Facebook what they think you did based on somebody else’s rumor of having seen your message on your phone, when its likely they weren’t even exposed to your phone.
?That’s how ridiculous this whole story is.
?On top of that, even if iPhone 5c were an Xbox/Surface/Nexus/Honeycomb/Palm Pre/Galaxy Gear type massive failure, it wouldn’t have even have a significant impact on Apple because there is no indication that people are buying 5c alternatives from competitors; the idea is that they are buying the more expensive 5s instead.
That’s right: the worst nightmare for the 2013 iPhone the media can invent is that Apple is making more money selling a higher end product than many originally thought possible.
That’s not how failure works. Only an idiot would think that.
I guess the iPhone is a failure because its screen is too big, doesn’t have a physical keyboard, and is lacking 3G, huh.
“Idiocy isn’t.”
Many were wrong. Simple as that.
Not in the slightest, no. Try again.
Reverting to Ad hominem does not show a strong position. Try actually disputing what I wrote.
I've personally had to develop campaigns to change a perception issue around a product that was not based on reality. It is extremely difficult and expensive to do so and is one of the most difficult things to do in marketing.
I've personally had to develop campaigns to change a perception issue around a product that was not based on reality. It is extremely difficult and expensive to do so and is one of the most difficult things to do in marketing.
So why not just let the product do that itself, like every single Apple product has? No one says boo about Maps anymore, because that was never anything but a lie. No one says boo about antennagate anymore, because that was never anything but a lie. No one says…
He's had two similar rants along that same vein (the 'iOS7 is Apple's buggiest release ever' one and this one). His job basically boils down to writing articles that are very heavily biased in Apple's favor and portraying them as news- so it seems a little dubious that he would jump and down and rant about how anyone who once reported less than glowing news about Apple is biased against them. I've seen quite a few very positive Apple articles in USA Today. At least he stopped short of calling the rest of the press outside of AppleInsider the 'lame-stream' media, but it doesn't seem like he's far from it.
I don't care if the press is 'mean,' or highlights something that is less than glowing about *any* company; the more important question to me would be are the articles right or wrong?
Instead of screaming 'unfair' I'd have liked to see counter articles:
'iOS7 is Apples most robust and bug free release to date' and then back it with the data he claims the other articles didn't research...
or
'iPhone 5c sales poised to soar above expectations' and make an argument for it...
Without countering their fundamental points the articles do come across like a lot of wheel spinning, and in fact end up hurting his cause...
In one article he spends much of his rant comparing the 5c to the Surface. Really??!! I wouldn't be so quick to lump those two together just yet- there is still at least hope for the 5c (and the Surface too- just not the Surface RT).
The other rant basically served to validate the article he was trying to debunk- the comments were littered with Apple users who were encountering issues with iOS7. The press reporting on it isn't 'bias' Finding one article that supports his cause and then using that to claim that that represents 'the rest of the media' isn't highly believable. I recall reading plenty of negative reports on the Surface RT before its release, and back in the day Windows got so much bad press that BSOD became household terminology. I didn't view them as biased against Windows, I viewed them as 'mostly right'
One of your problems Frood, is that you don’t understand the meaning of words you like to use. You also don’t understand basic logic.
"Bias" refers to injecting opinion into what is presented as a pure recounting of facts. When you say that an opinion or editorial has "bias," it instantly indicates that you don’t understand what the concept of bias is. Opinions are supposed to express opinion. News stories are not supposed to forward or propagate an opinion; they are supposed to inform with neutrality.
Also, "bias" doesn’t mean writing something that will equally present the opinions of extremists. A story about Michelle Bachman that fails to portray her has being a nutcase is not "unbiased," but rather biased propaganda seeking to subvert reality by portraying her as less than an unhinged fool incapable of her job.
A national newspaper that prints a hit piece that makes broad, general claims that it fails to support with facts, and which it bases its entire premise on comments from a consultant for competitors, on isolated anecdotes, on soundbites from an (IBB) flack that only ever talks positively about Samsung and casts shadows on Apple, is not an "unbiased report." That makes it suitable for criticism.
Nobody is arguing that iOS 7 is flawless. And one doesn’t have to prove that it is to criticize a major newspaper for making specific claims about it that are simply not true.
Windows had metrics supporting its problems with BSOD, and it was known what caused them: kernel panics and poor isolation of privilege. This occured for many years, through many releases.
Sayign that iOS 7, days after its release, has the "same problem" based on one YouTube video is not reporting facts. It appears that iWork apps can cause hardware/iOS crashes. The camera can. There may be other bugs specific to the 5s. It’s been three weeks. If you’re going to report on these issues, you need to present some metrics that show they are not isolated events, especially if you state as a matter of fact, as USA Today did, that 'iOS 7 has more problems than any other release ever' and equate it with Windows NT.
I've been a registered member for some time. During that time I rarely read posts, and even more rarely posted myself. The past couple days have been different.
What I've learned from reading member's posts in this thread is consistent with all public forums. The first thing is that lack of knowledge doesn't stop the poster from posting.
A great example of that is Island Hermit. Over 4000 posts, and if the others are anything like what he's posted on this thread they are full of emotional, agenda driven, rumor based anger. There is no way that facts/common sense/logic will change his mind. Facts are an annoyance to someone like Island Hermit.
I've wasted enough time reading comments on Apple Insider. I won't do that again. The articles though are first rate. To bad they don't attract more knowledgeable commenters.