April Fools: get ready for the worst jokes in the tech industry

Posted:
in General Discussion edited April 2018
Every year, several companies--most notoriously Google--float various unfunny, excessively long dad jokes on April Fools Day. But rather than waste your time detailing these latest flat attempts at humor in tech, why not take a moment on April 1 to take a look at the really foolish stuff the tech media serves up virtually every day?


Reporters of "fake news" and "cheap sensation" in an 1894 illustration by Frederick Burr Opper

Fake, phony and foolish

Sometimes journalists and bloggers print things they apparently know to be false just to generate sensational clicks. This is usually obvious because after the alarming headline that states something outrageous, upsetting or otherwise provocatively in conflict with reality in order to get a click, they then begin walking back the entire premise.

By the end of the piece, they generally just go ahead and admit that the entire story was nonsense. For example, note the recent rash of clickbait that claimed, then un-claimed, that an Apple executive had announced that it will stop selling music downloads.



That sort of fake news often only works with Apple. If anyone were to report that Samsung or Microsoft or some other company was about to stop selling music downloads, we'd just assume that it was because they'd failed in yet another attempt to copy Apple. Stories about Milk Music or Zune Marketplace don't drive clicks because there's no potential for driving fear or outrage. Nobody cares.

For Apple, it's different. In order to fully maximize the clickbait intensity of a false story about iTunes downloads, it was reported specifically as being a dick move by the company to take away something everyone loves, rather than just an inevitability of the trend toward streaming.

Sometimes it's hard to tell whether false reporting is intentionally a malicious hit piece or simply a lazy, ignorant effort to deliver a moment of content capable of attracting eyeballs toward a stream of advertising.

The end result is the same: yet another narrative on why the world's most successful company is secretly a bumbling bunch of idiots perched precariously on the brink of failure.

Such a fool premise requires really foolish logic to back it up. You might call it flawgic. Here are three examples of super foolish ideas that the worst tech media writers can't stop spreading.

April Fools: iPad is failing as Chromebooks take off in education


This narrative started a few years ago but recently found a sounding board in the coverage of Apple's recent education event. Bloomberg didn't know anything about what Apple would actually be announcing, so it instead wrote a scoop that detailed how badly iPad was performing in a market dominated by Chromebooks.


Apple's education event focused on just 5 percent of the global iPad market


There are a few factual problems here: despite claiming that hardware deployed in K-12 education changes the future of what kids will buy as adults and use in the workplace (an idea that has never been true, just ask Acorn in the U.K.), the reality is that education is not very big nor very valuable commercially.

At its most beleaguered point back in the 1990s, Apple controlled a huge proportion of the hardware sales in education, but it didn't help the company drive Mac sales in the enterprise. Absolutely nobody reported Apple's clear edge in education back then as an inevitable coup about to dethrone Microsoft globally in PC sales. That would have been stupid to suggest in 1998. Yet that's exactly what virtually every member of the media is foolishly repeating in 2018, just in reverse.

Last year, Apple sold nearly 44 million iPads globally, less than 2 million of which were sold to U.S. K-12 education. Google's partners shipped nearly 7.5 million Chromebooks into U.S. K-12, but that also accounted for virtually all of the Chromebooks produced globally. Apple has a huge, growing iPad business with its foot planted in education; Google has a small, stagnant Chromebook base entirely confined inside K-12.

Apple doesn't always invest in pure proportion to its potential Return On Investment. Apple focused its 2018 iPad launch event almost entirely upon K-12 education, with features and specialized software and services targeted specifically to that segment, despite the fact that U.S. K-12 represents less than 5 percent of Apple's iPad business. Apple can afford to invest in education because it earned over $19 billion from iPad sales in just the last year.

In stark contrast, Chromebook hardware sales earned nothing for Google. Even if we assume that every school paid for support contracts, Google's total revenue from Chromebook was in the low millions. Yet Google has to pay for the same type of software development, maintenance and support costs as Apple.Sales volumes don't matter unless they are driving sustainable profits

Sales volumes don't matter unless they are driving sustainable profits. The investments Apple makes in education are also being adapted to serve the enterprise, where Apple already makes billions and where there is a clear and significant demand for iPad as a product.

For Google, the reverse is true. It tried valiantly to sell Chromebooks to the enterprise and failed. There is no latent demand for low-end, cheap netbooks that can only run web apps. Yet if you ignore global reality and focus only on a tiny, insignificant part of the picture, you can create the illusion that Google is winning and Apple is at the corner of Existential Crisis and Doom.

Premium ChromeOS was a failue and there is no latent demand for low-end, cheap netbooks that can only run web apps


If you examine the facts, it's clear that the narrative that Chromebooks are doing really well is totally foolish. Yet members of the media are either crafting a story they know is false, or are so ignorant of the facts that they come away honestly believing the story that nickels are larger than dimes, and therefore must be worth more regardless of the number on the coin.

Google has settled upon education as a runner-up business model for Chromebooks because no other segment is really buying them: not enterprise and not consumer. That business is not only unsustainable for Google, it's also unprofitable for the Chromebook makers who also once built netbooks, Android tablets and Android Wear watches. That's a pretty obvious pattern: lots of shipments (or lots of announcements) are no substitute for sustainable profitability.

A good way to determine if a media narrative is true or just manufactured foolishness is to imagine if the same story would be told if things were different and the story flattered Apple. That's easy to do here because Apple once owned education while its primary competitor, Windows PCs, took over virtually everything else. Nobody hid facts to paint a glorious, flattering portrayal of Macs in education as evidence that PCs were doomed. That would be really foolish, just a foolish as the Chromebook narrative today.

April Fools: Siri is failing next to the breakout success of Alexa, Assistant and maybe Cortana

A similar media narrative regarding Siri has identically served as a way to denigrate Apple while creating a lush portrait of success for a competitor making nearly nothing on relatively small volumes of low-end hardware.

Just as with Google's Chromebooks in U.S. K-12 education, this foolish media narrative greatly exaggerates the market importance and value of Amazon's Alexa voice assistant as it also suggests Apple's ability to sell hardware is at risk because the company isn't pursuing the same voice-first strategy Amazon was forced into after its Fire Phone burned down.

There's even the side-suggestion that Google Assistant and Microsoft Cortana are also commercially outperforming Apple's Siri just because they can answer some questions better, again without regard to the numbers of people actually asking, or even the actual value of a voice-based answer. Numbers matter. Journalists should be asking for them, not just expressing their agreement that nickels are indeed impressively large.

Note that the issue here is not that Siri is beyond criticism. In many cases, Siri simply does not perform well. Many its competitors can do things Siri fails at. Both of those things are true. However, the truth doesn't make everything else it touches also true.

If consumers actually cared much about voice services, Google's Pixel phones that premiered with exclusive Assistant features should have at least made a dent. They didn't. Both generations have been huge commercial flops despite Google's massive attempts at advertising and all of the endorsement and publicity that The Verge and other media outlets could provide for them.

Siri once inarguably helped Apple to sell iPhone 4s, a model that (apart from Siri) wasn't radically different than its predecessor. But it isn't 2011 anymore, and the novelty of voice assistants aren't still moving billions in hardware sales.

Cortana did next to nothing to boost PC sales or Windows Mobile; Google's Assistant hasn't mattered and even Alexa (despite all of its glowing media coverage and a generally positive reception from consumers) doesn't really matter in terms of money--the currency of the ability to do things. At best, Alexa is an effort to get people to place more online orders from Amazon.



At the same time (and despite a detailed media catalog of all of its flaws) Siri is supporting real-world functionality to Apple's offerings ranging from Apple TV to AirPods to CarPlay to HomePod, and it helps support Apple's leadership in accessibility. Siri needs to be improved, but there's zero evidence that its flaws are fueling any significant shift in anything apart from some low-value announcements of support for Alexa for washing machines and other totally foolish nonsense.

Again, imagine how tech media would handle the same subject in reverse, if say Apple launched a competing service years after another company, yet instead of just using it to sell low volumes of profitless hardware (like Amazon), that service helped launched a series of highly successful, profitable businesses that the original company itself had never capitalized upon, even though the original service was generally thought of as being superior, despite not making any money.

Yet Apple's service subscriptions (I'm talking, of course, about Apple Music) are rapidly growing in scale toward the level of Spotify's paid subscriptions at a pace massively faster than Alexa's adoption compared to Siri. Nobody regularly reports that Apple Music is killing Spotify. Instead, they're reporting that perhaps Spotify will enter the hardware game and offer a challenge to Apple. That's pretty foolish. And it's the opposite treatment Alexa gets as a Siri competitor.

April Fools: MacBook Pros are hopelessly behind the genius engineering of Microsoft Surface

Have you heard? Microsoft has run circles around Apple in its ability to innovate, shipping (among other concepts) laptops that convert into a serviceable, if impractical, tablet screen; a big screen that you can draw on; a notebook with a GPU base; keyboards with a fabric top and so many other novel ideas.

The media narrative states that Microsoft is exciting and cool again, while Apple just makes basic rectangles that lack legacy ports and present an expensive OLED Touch Bar as a dynamic part of the keyboard just to make the thing look really cool.




Who's to say what the value of a specific innovation is? Well the dollar talks. It says that despite all of its creative ideas, Microsoft's Surface isn't racking up many votes from consumers or businesses (who were supposed to be a shoo-in for Microsoft).

Across all the years that Microsoft has been spending billions to develop and market Surface, it has been a marginal failure and has never grown past quarterly sales of a little more than a million units from just over a billion in revenues.

Across its last fiscal year, Apple sold 19.25 million Macs (worth $25.85 billion in revenues) and 43.75 million iPads ($19.22 billion). That means that outside of phones, Apple's vision for computing devices brought in $47 billion. Microsoft's tablet, laptop and other PC form factors combined were less than a tenth of that. And while Apple's sales are trending toward growth, Microsoft's Surface unit sales are actually slowing--in the last winter quarter, Microsoft defended its stagnant Surface unit sales by pointing out that it sold a slightly more expensive mix of products.

Journalists keep lapping this up and regurgitating it, but the reality is that despite all the puff pieces hailing its innovations, Surface is a stagnant failure of a business. And despite all the contemptuous dismissal of Apple's work by tech journalists who prefer nickels to dimes, its light, thin, legacy-free MacBooks with the distinctive novelty of the Touch Bar are selling in high volume and making lots of money--despite intense competition from iPad Pro--Apple's other highly innovative computing platform.

For nearly a decade, Apple has been developing and maintaining the two most desirable, commercially successful and flagrantly-copied visions for the future of computing. But yeah, tell us more about the incredible innovation at Microsoft driving the failed hardware business of the company that lost its monopoly over computing (and any presence at all in smartphones) by being boring and moving too slow.


When hardware fails to sell, Microsoft cancels it even if it says it won't


Imagine how Apple's "innovation" would be reported if it were coming up with lots of new ideas that were only perpetuating stagnant, immaterial sales that were far below the leaders of the market. Back in the 1990s, this was actually happening to the Beleaguered Apple, and nobody was inventing media narratives to explain why Apple was really performing well and that the low innovation PC makers were doomed.

We also don't need to imagine today: the media narrative invented for iPhone X is that its sales are disappointing because nobody cares about its fancy premium priced features.

That's a straight-up lie. We know iPhone X drove Apple's phone sales pace higher while also dramatically increasing the Average Selling Price of iPhones. And on top of that, Apple sells--by far--the most premium phones, not just overall but in markets ranging from China to India--places where supposedly nobody can afford Apple's prices.

What foolishness. These media narratives (and I could keep going, but April 1 is already here) in tech are more laughable than the dumb jokes tech companies are creating for the media.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 64
    sfolaxsfolax Posts: 49member
    "April Fools" then continues to post links to his own previous articles. DED, you need to relax a little and stop being so defensive on everything.
    cecil444avon b7GeorgeBMacsirlance99hammeroftruthgatorguychasmelijahg[Deleted User]muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 2 of 64
    2old4fun2old4fun Posts: 224member
    As always a very good article. I hav not agreed with all of your articles, but I have always enjoyed your writing. Thank you.
    andrewj5790racerhomie3magman1979watto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 3 of 64
    sfolax said:
    "April Fools" then continues to post links to his own previous articles. DED, you need to relax a little and stop being so defensive on everything.
    How many times does this have to be said? No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Media. The whole point of DED articles is to defend against what no one else (except the Macalope) will call out as the preposterousness that it is. The whole point of the article is to be defensive, because most normal tech media attacks Apple all the time and builds up these false narratives. 
    edited April 2018 racerhomie3baconstangminisu1980propodmacxpresscharlesgresmagman1979mejsricTuuborpscooter63
  • Reply 4 of 64
    racerhomie3racerhomie3 Posts: 1,148member
    Agreed with all the points.

    magman1979mejsricradarthekatStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 64
    DAalsethDAalseth Posts: 682member
    The thing about telling a lie, is to have enough truth to make it believable.

     1) Chromebooks are not succeeding generally and IMO will go the way of Netbooks. But they have gotten a foothold in education. This is more to do with the fact that they look like a bargain to school administrators

    2) Siri isn't as useful as is should be. But while others may do some things better, the truth is most people don't want to talk to their computer. Honestly whether the system is running Cortana, Google, Alexa, or Siri, I know of no one that uses voice as their first option. Siri may be falling behind, but none of them are really powerful enough to do what I want.

     3) The Surface isn't winning many friends. But the TouchBar won't really break out until it's on more than a small number of models. Until I can get a MagicKeyboard III with a TouchBar for my iMac, or as an add on for my iPadPro they remain a fantasy. Until they become a reality for the majority of Mac users I suspect most software companies won't include TouchBar functionality.
    edited April 2018 hammeroftruthradarthekatwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 6 of 64
    sfolaxsfolax Posts: 49member
    sfolax said:
    "April Fools" then continues to post links to his own previous articles. DED, you need to relax a little and stop being so defensive on everything.
    How many times does this have to be said? No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Media. The whole point of DED articles is to defend against what no one else (except the Macalope) will call out as the preposterousness that it is. The whole point of the article is to be defensive, because most normal tech media attacks Apple all the time and builds up these false narratives. 
    Give me one example where he was right? 

    Look at his first "Truth" 
    https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/03/24/editorial-bloomberg-spins-apples-event-as-a-desperate-blind-stab-for-cheap-ipads-in-education
    Second to last paragraph:

    "But of all the things Apple can outline in its education event, "new low-cost iPads" are the least likely to appear. Apple's historical move against cheap commodity has been to release a new leap in functional technology that makes its products more valuable at the same price point. The most obvious step is suggested by the calligraphy of the event's invite, which looks as if drawn by an Apple Pencil."

    So what did Apple do? Release a new low cost iPad.
    In fact even AI did an article about the lower price for students - 
    https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/03/27/apple-offers-new-ipad-to-schools-and-education-customers-at-discounted-299

    I can pull out many other examples where his arguments fell flat. Unfortunately No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Hypocrisy.

    Dracarysavon b7hammeroftruthchasmelijahgmuthuk_vanalingamrevenantzoetmbrogerramjet
  • Reply 7 of 64
    DracarysDracarys Posts: 72member
    sfolax said:
    "April Fools" then continues to post links to his own previous articles. DED, you need to relax a little and stop being so defensive on everything.
    How many times does this have to be said? No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Media. The whole point of DED articles is to defend against what no one else (except the Macalope) will call out as the preposterousness that it is. The whole point of the article is to be defensive, because most normal tech media attacks Apple all the time and builds up these false narratives. 
    Except that DED isn't using facts. He's building his own false narratives to fit his own needs. 

    The regular media is NOT attacking Apple, they just aren't always shining Apple as being flawless and that rubs DED the wrong way. It's a FACT that Siri is falling behind, it's a FACT that Chromebooks never went after the enterprise market (why would they? What enterprise is going to go for a web browser based OS? It makes no sense at all). 

    This article is so self serving that it's not even funny.
    avon b7cecil444hammeroftruthchasmelijahgmuthuk_vanalingamrevenantrogerramjet
  • Reply 8 of 64
    baconstangbaconstang Posts: 551member
    For a second there, I thought I was at Macworld reading the Macalope.
    GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 9 of 64
    Great article as usual.

    I think this is a typo, though: "by being boring and moving to slow" (discussing Microsoft). I think it should read moving TOO slow.

    Thanks and sorry if I am wrong.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 64
    DanielEranDanielEran Posts: 290editor
    sfolax said:
    sfolax said:
    "April Fools" then continues to post links to his own previous articles. DED, you need to relax a little and stop being so defensive on everything.
    How many times does this have to be said? No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Media. The whole point of DED articles is to defend against what no one else (except the Macalope) will call out as the preposterousness that it is. The whole point of the article is to be defensive, because most normal tech media attacks Apple all the time and builds up these false narratives. 
    Give me one example where he was right? 

    Look at his first "Truth" 
    https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/03/24/editorial-bloomberg-spins-apples-event-as-a-desperate-blind-stab-for-cheap-ipads-in-education
    Second to last paragraph:

    "But of all the things Apple can outline in its education event, "new low-cost iPads" are the least likely to appear. Apple's historical move against cheap commodity has been to release a new leap in functional technology that makes its products more valuable at the same price point. The most obvious step is suggested by the calligraphy of the event's invite, which looks as if drawn by an Apple Pencil."

    So what did Apple do? Release a new low cost iPad.
    In fact even AI did an article about the lower price for students - https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/03/27/apple-offers-new-ipad-to-schools-and-education-customers-at-discounted-299

    I can pull out many other examples where his arguments fell flat. Unfortunately No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Hypocrisy.


    First off, "defensive" is the wrong word. The article is an offensive attack on lies or just cliche narratives that aren't really accurate and create a false impression. Defensive would be making an excuse. You used the word defensive as part of your own cliche narrative that I write out of "fear" for a multibillion-dollar global company as if AppleInsider shifts international discourse. I write to be right. I've been pretty accurately covering the real trajectory of tech for almost 20 years. 

    The previous article you cited actually took Mark Gurman to task for his Bloomberg article "Apple Tries to Win Back Students and Teachers With Low-Cost iPad," carrying water for Google's Chromebook dumping. Three years in, Chromebooks haven't budged an inch in the enterprise. They're still a K-12 phenomenon and growth has stopped. Are you defending that as accurate, because that's a stupid position to try to support. It is, however, the same delusional thing that tech media wonks were saying about Android tablets as I pointed out for years that iPads were gaining in enterprise use and getting real app support while Google just pushed for cheaper and cheaper commodity tablets that were really just big phones. When it tried to raise the price of its Nexus/Pixel tablet and copy iPad, it fell on its face and crawled out of tablets entirely. 

    The 2018 iPad is not a low-cost iPad priced to compete with cheap Chromebooks. It is, as I wrote, inline with "Apple's historical move against cheap commodity," "to release a new leap in functional technology that makes its products more valuable at the same price point."

    There is a new edu discount, but Apple didn't release the new refresh as a "low cost" effort but as a premium value-add with support for the $99 Apple Pencil from the high-end iPad Pro line (as I predicted as "the most obvious step is suggested by the calligraphy of the event's invite, which looks as if drawn by an Apple Pencil.")

    So as presented, the 2018 iPad is actually significantly more expensive than the 2017 model. 

    Also, the word "Hypocrisy" has a meaning. It's not just a general insult. Look it up.


    propodMacProfotoformatmagman1979mejsricandrewj5790macxpresspscooter63osmartormenajrradarthekat
  • Reply 11 of 64
    sfolaxsfolax Posts: 49member
    sfolax said:
    sfolax said:
    "April Fools" then continues to post links to his own previous articles. DED, you need to relax a little and stop being so defensive on everything.
    How many times does this have to be said? No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Media. The whole point of DED articles is to defend against what no one else (except the Macalope) will call out as the preposterousness that it is. The whole point of the article is to be defensive, because most normal tech media attacks Apple all the time and builds up these false narratives. 
    Give me one example where he was right? 

    Look at his first "Truth" 
    https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/03/24/editorial-bloomberg-spins-apples-event-as-a-desperate-blind-stab-for-cheap-ipads-in-education
    Second to last paragraph:

    "But of all the things Apple can outline in its education event, "new low-cost iPads" are the least likely to appear. Apple's historical move against cheap commodity has been to release a new leap in functional technology that makes its products more valuable at the same price point. The most obvious step is suggested by the calligraphy of the event's invite, which looks as if drawn by an Apple Pencil."

    So what did Apple do? Release a new low cost iPad.
    In fact even AI did an article about the lower price for students - https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/03/27/apple-offers-new-ipad-to-schools-and-education-customers-at-discounted-299

    I can pull out many other examples where his arguments fell flat. Unfortunately No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Hypocrisy.


    First off, "defensive" is the wrong word. The article is an offensive attack on lies or just cliche narratives that aren't really accurate and create a false impression. Defensive would be making an excuse. You used the word defensive as part of your own cliche narrative that I write out of "fear" for a multibillion-dollar global company as if AppleInsider shifts international discourse. I write to be right. I've been pretty accurately covering the real trajectory of tech for almost 20 years. 

    The previous article you cited actually took Mark Gurman to task for his Bloomberg article "Apple Tries to Win Back Students and Teachers With Low-Cost iPad," carrying water for Google's Chromebook dumping. Three years in, Chromebooks haven't budged an inch in the enterprise. They're still a K-12 phenomenon and growth has stopped. Are you defending that as accurate, because that's a stupid position to try to support. It is, however, the same delusional thing that tech media wonks were saying about Android tablets as I pointed out for years that iPads were gaining in enterprise use and getting real app support while Google just pushed for cheaper and cheaper commodity tablets that were really just big phones. When it tried to raise the price of its Nexus/Pixel tablet and copy iPad, it fell on its face and crawled out of tablets entirely. 

    The 2018 iPad is not a low-cost iPad priced to compete with cheap Chromebooks. It is, as I wrote, inline with "Apple's historical move against cheap commodity," "to release a new leap in functional technology that makes its products more valuable at the same price point."

    There is a new edu discount, but Apple didn't release the new refresh as a "low cost" effort but as a premium value-add with support for the $99 Apple Pencil from the high-end iPad Pro line (as I predicted as "the most obvious step is suggested by the calligraphy of the event's invite, which looks as if drawn by an Apple Pencil.")

    So as presented, the 2018 iPad is actually significantly more expensive than the 2017 model. 

    Also, the word "Hypocrisy" has a meaning. It's not just a general insult. Look it up.


    Sorry man, that's a really cool story but even AI says the 2018 iPad is the Budget iPad.
    https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/03/31/this-week-on-ai-apples-budget-ipad-gets-the-pencil-apple-watch-rumors-ios-113-more

    There are many other articles that does the same, done by other writers that come to a similar conclusion. But you state it's more expensive.
    So who is right?

    edited April 2018 elijahgmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 12 of 64
    DanielEranDanielEran Posts: 290editor
    Dracarys said:
    sfolax said:
    "April Fools" then continues to post links to his own previous articles. DED, you need to relax a little and stop being so defensive on everything.
    How many times does this have to be said? No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Media. The whole point of DED articles is to defend against what no one else (except the Macalope) will call out as the preposterousness that it is. The whole point of the article is to be defensive, because most normal tech media attacks Apple all the time and builds up these false narratives. 
    Except that DED isn't using facts. He's building his own false narratives to fit his own needs. 

    The regular media is NOT attacking Apple, they just aren't always shining Apple as being flawless and that rubs DED the wrong way. It's a FACT that Siri is falling behind, it's a FACT that Chromebooks never went after the enterprise market (why would they? What enterprise is going to go for a web browser based OS? It makes no sense at all). 

    This article is so self serving that it's not even funny.

    1) What "false narrative" did you notice? 

    2) The article doesn't say Siri is "flawless," it says "In many cases, Siri simply does not perform well. Many its competitors can do things Siri fails at. Both of those things are true. However, the truth doesn't make everything else it touches also true."

    The point you missed what that if consumers actually cared much about voice services, and the difference between Siri and Alexa/Google/Cortana was an important factor, then Fire Phone, Pixel, Windows Mobile wouldn't have been massive flops.

    The fact that the two companies that make the worlds best-selling/most expensive premium phones have only "sort of adequate" voice services: Siri and Bixby. If voice services were commercially important to end users, that wouldn't be the case, would it? 

    Alternatively, the mobile device platforms that sell the most have a full catalog of apps: iPhone, Android phones and iPad. Windows Mobile, Tizen, ChromeOS & Android tablets all lack broad support for decent apps and so aren't selling at a premium (as you noted).

    3) "Chromebooks never went after the enterprise market" is a really foolish thing to say when Google is desperately trying to sell to the enterprise and has been since it came up with the concept of a web-based netbook alternative to Windows back in 2009. The fact that it failed for a decade isn't proof that it didn't happen. 

    Also, I think you are using a lot of words that don't mean what you think they mean.



    edited April 2018 propodmagman1979mejsricpscooter632old4funradarthekatcornchipStrangeDaysmacpluspluswatto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 64
    DanielEranDanielEran Posts: 290editor
    Great article as usual.

    I think this is a typo, though: "by being boring and moving to slow" (discussing Microsoft). I think it should read moving TOO slow.

    Thanks and sorry if I am wrong.
    Thanks for the correction
    magman1979watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 64
    sfolax said:
    sfolax said:
    sfolax said:
    "April Fools" then continues to post links to his own previous articles. DED, you need to relax a little and stop being so defensive on everything.
    How many times does this have to be said? No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Media. The whole point of DED articles is to defend against what no one else (except the Macalope) will call out as the preposterousness that it is. The whole point of the article is to be defensive, because most normal tech media attacks Apple all the time and builds up these false narratives. 
    Give me one example where he was right? 

    Look at his first "Truth" 
    https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/03/24/editorial-bloomberg-spins-apples-event-as-a-desperate-blind-stab-for-cheap-ipads-in-education
    Second to last paragraph:

    "But of all the things Apple can outline in its education event, "new low-cost iPads" are the least likely to appear. Apple's historical move against cheap commodity has been to release a new leap in functional technology that makes its products more valuable at the same price point. The most obvious step is suggested by the calligraphy of the event's invite, which looks as if drawn by an Apple Pencil."

    So what did Apple do? Release a new low cost iPad.
    In fact even AI did an article about the lower price for students - https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/03/27/apple-offers-new-ipad-to-schools-and-education-customers-at-discounted-299

    I can pull out many other examples where his arguments fell flat. Unfortunately No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Hypocrisy.


    First off, "defensive" is the wrong word. The article is an offensive attack on lies or just cliche narratives that aren't really accurate and create a false impression. Defensive would be making an excuse. You used the word defensive as part of your own cliche narrative that I write out of "fear" for a multibillion-dollar global company as if AppleInsider shifts international discourse. I write to be right. I've been pretty accurately covering the real trajectory of tech for almost 20 years. 

    The previous article you cited actually took Mark Gurman to task for his Bloomberg article "Apple Tries to Win Back Students and Teachers With Low-Cost iPad," carrying water for Google's Chromebook dumping. Three years in, Chromebooks haven't budged an inch in the enterprise. They're still a K-12 phenomenon and growth has stopped. Are you defending that as accurate, because that's a stupid position to try to support. It is, however, the same delusional thing that tech media wonks were saying about Android tablets as I pointed out for years that iPads were gaining in enterprise use and getting real app support while Google just pushed for cheaper and cheaper commodity tablets that were really just big phones. When it tried to raise the price of its Nexus/Pixel tablet and copy iPad, it fell on its face and crawled out of tablets entirely. 

    The 2018 iPad is not a low-cost iPad priced to compete with cheap Chromebooks. It is, as I wrote, inline with "Apple's historical move against cheap commodity," "to release a new leap in functional technology that makes its products more valuable at the same price point."

    There is a new edu discount, but Apple didn't release the new refresh as a "low cost" effort but as a premium value-add with support for the $99 Apple Pencil from the high-end iPad Pro line (as I predicted as "the most obvious step is suggested by the calligraphy of the event's invite, which looks as if drawn by an Apple Pencil.")

    So as presented, the 2018 iPad is actually significantly more expensive than the 2017 model. 

    Also, the word "Hypocrisy" has a meaning. It's not just a general insult. Look it up.


    Sorry man, that's a really cool story but even AI says the 2018 iPad is the Budget iPad.
    https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/03/31/this-week-on-ai-apples-budget-ipad-gets-the-pencil-apple-watch-rumors-ios-113-more

    There are many other articles that does the same, done by other writers that come to a similar conclusion. But you state it's more expensive.
    So who is right?

    The 2018 iPad at $329 is exactly the same price as the 2017 $329 iPad. It’s the “budget” iPad compared to the $649 iPad Pro. It’s not the $259 iPad Apple was supposed to rollout in desperation to fight Chromebooks in education.

    Apple already had educational pricing on the 2017 iPad, I don’t remember if it was $299 or $309. But by adding Apple Pencil capabilities to the 2018 iPad, it’s not only more valuable to users but also Apple—who can increase revenue by another $100. (That’s the more expensive part you weren’t able to understand.)
    propodroundaboutnowandrewj5790radarthekatcornchipwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 15 of 64
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,348member
    Spot on as always.  I was hoping you'd get to the ridiculous slagging off the HomePod got from the critics despite clearly being in another league it terms of audio innovation simply because a cheap speaker had Alexa that was sooo much better.  Who cares about an audio device with good audio (no phenomenal audio) if it can't play trivia?/s
    magman1979andrewj5790pscooter63radarthekatcornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 64
    minisu1980minisu1980 Posts: 127member
    Dracarys said:
    sfolax said:
    "April Fools" then continues to post links to his own previous articles. DED, you need to relax a little and stop being so defensive on everything.
    How many times does this have to be said? No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Media. The whole point of DED articles is to defend against what no one else (except the Macalope) will call out as the preposterousness that it is. The whole point of the article is to be defensive, because most normal tech media attacks Apple all the time and builds up these false narratives. 
    Except that DED isn't using facts. He's building his own false narratives to fit his own needs. 

    The regular media is NOT attacking Apple, they just aren't always shining Apple as being flawless and that rubs DED the wrong way. It's a FACT that Siri is falling behind, it's a FACT that Chromebooks never went after the enterprise market (why would they? What enterprise is going to go for a web browser based OS? It makes no sense at all). 

    This article is so self serving that it's not even funny.
    What reality do you live in? I follow the tech industry on on a daily basis. 99% of everything Apple does is crapped on out of the gate by the vast majority of the tech media, followed by a negative analyst opinion piece, that is then reposted by the other news outlets general and financial over and over until the click rates decline. I earn a lot of my income by waiting for Apple to release tech, evaluate what it means long term (basically in one or two days), then purchase LEAPS while the media piles on their doom and gloom predictions. On average it takes 6 months to a year for the media to be proven wrong and to have this reflected in the stock price. Can’t do this with Microsoft or Google because no one cares if their tech fails or succeeds (in fact failure is almost to be expected), so there is little to no coverage or market manipulation and there is no corresponding stock drop to take advantage of.

    Is it a FACT (not sure why all caps is needed here) that Siri is behind? Most used, Siri. Widest install base, Siri. On a profitable platform, Siri. A voice assistant is a secondary technology, always has been ... probably always will be. Apple understands this and as such realizes it is likely only to be used in specific scenarios: in the car, on home speaker to play music, on Apple TV to ease text entry. In these scenarios it functions extremely well. Siri has been surpassed by its competitors in use cases that don’t really exist in the real world. 

    Again is it a FACT (Facticous Apple Countering Tale? still not sure on the all caps) chromebooks never went after enterprise? Got anything to directly support this statement. Absolutely correct it makes no sense for an web browser based OS to go after enterprise, much like it make zero sense to continue a platform that actively loses money but here we are non the less.


    edited April 2018 magman1979andrewj5790radarthekatcornchippropodStrangeDaysmacpluspluswatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 17 of 64
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 4,056member
    Dracarys said:
    sfolax said:
    "April Fools" then continues to post links to his own previous articles. DED, you need to relax a little and stop being so defensive on everything.
    How many times does this have to be said? No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Media. The whole point of DED articles is to defend against what no one else (except the Macalope) will call out as the preposterousness that it is. The whole point of the article is to be defensive, because most normal tech media attacks Apple all the time and builds up these false narratives. 
    Except that DED isn't using facts. He's building his own false narratives to fit his own needs. 

    The regular media is NOT attacking Apple, they just aren't always shining Apple as being flawless and that rubs DED the wrong way. It's a FACT that Siri is falling behind, it's a FACT that Chromebooks never went after the enterprise market (why would they? What enterprise is going to go for a web browser based OS? It makes no sense at all). 

    This article is so self serving that it's not even funny.
    What reality do you live in? I follow the tech industry on on a daily basis. 99% of everything Apple does is crapped on out of the gate by the vast majority of the tech media, followed by a negative analyst opinion piece, that is then reposted by the other news outlets general and financial over and over until the click rates decline. I earn a lot of my income by waiting for Apple to release tech, evaluate what it means long term (basically in one or two days), then purchase LEAPS while the media piles on their doom and gloom predictions. On average it takes 6 months to a year for the media to be proven wrong and to have this reflected in the stock price. Can’t do this with Microsoft or Google because no one cares if their tech fails or succeeds (in fact failure is almost to be expected), so there is little to no coverage or market manipulation and there is no corresponding stock drop to take advantage of.

    Is it a FACT (not sure why all caps is needed here) that Siri is behind? Most used, Siri. Widest install base, Siri. On a profitable platform, Siri. A voice assistant is a secondary technology, always has been ... probably always will be. Apple understands this and as such realizes it is likely only to be used in specific scenarios: in the car, on home speaker to play music, on Apple TV to ease text entry. In these scenarios it functions extremely well. Siri has been surpassed by its competitors in use cases that don’t really exist in the real world. 

    Again is it a FACT (Facticous Apple Countering Tale? still not sure on the all caps) chromebooks never went after enterprise? Got anything to directly support this statement. Absolutely correct it makes no sense for an web browser based OS to go after enterprise, much like it make zero sense to continue a platform that actively loses money but here we are non the less.


    99%?

    Be realistic. That isn't the case. I think you are being over sensitive.

    Apple had over a decade of praise and was even the darling of the mainstream press.

    Things have changed and other companies have come to equal or better Apple in areas it was once praised. That doesn't mean 99% crap on Apple. Some do, of course but that is par for the course. If you look, you will find people crapping on everyone else too. Just be more selective in where you get your tech news from and you will see a different picture.
    gatorguycecil444elijahg
  • Reply 18 of 64
    DAalseth said:
    2) Siri isn't as useful as is should be. But while others may do some things better, the truth is most people don't want to talk to their computer. Honestly whether the system is running Cortana, Google, Alexa, or Siri, I know of no one that uses voice as their first option. Siri may be falling behind, but none of them are really powerful enough to do what I want.
    I use it often actually but then I need to use it. As a motorcycle based mail delivery agent (postie) I’m wrapped up in motorcycle gear including gloves so accessing anything with gloves on is pretty much impossible. Siri on the other hand allows me to call people, send text messages, or answer the phone without taking my gloves off... when I’m stopped at a mailbox that is, not while riding because that’s stupid.

    There are many cases where Siri makes a lot of sense so don’t write it off as no one uses it. It works really well for me to and fails less than it succeeds for me and I’m a Kiwi and we’re mocked for our accent.
    cornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 19 of 64
    Dracarys said:
    sfolax said:
    "April Fools" then continues to post links to his own previous articles. DED, you need to relax a little and stop being so defensive on everything.
    How many times does this have to be said? No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Media. The whole point of DED articles is to defend against what no one else (except the Macalope) will call out as the preposterousness that it is. The whole point of the article is to be defensive, because most normal tech media attacks Apple all the time and builds up these false narratives. 
    Except that DED isn't using facts. He's building his own false narratives to fit his own needs. 

    The regular media is NOT attacking Apple, they just aren't always shining Apple as being flawless and that rubs DED the wrong way. It's a FACT that Siri is falling behind, it's a FACT that Chromebooks never went after the enterprise market (why would they? What enterprise is going to go for a web browser based OS? It makes no sense at all). 

    This article is so self serving that it's not even funny.
    Wow, you clearly don’t read mainstream media then do you. Your comment is so self serving that it’s not even funny
    pscooter63radarthekatRonnnieOcornchipStrangeDayswatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 20 of 64
    crossladcrosslad Posts: 497member
    Dracarys said:
    sfolax said:
    "April Fools" then continues to post links to his own previous articles. DED, you need to relax a little and stop being so defensive on everything.
    How many times does this have to be said? No. One. Else. Is. Calling. Out. The. Media. The whole point of DED articles is to defend against what no one else (except the Macalope) will call out as the preposterousness that it is. The whole point of the article is to be defensive, because most normal tech media attacks Apple all the time and builds up these false narratives. 
    Except that DED isn't using facts. He's building his own false narratives to fit his own needs. 

    The regular media is NOT attacking Apple, they just aren't always shining Apple as being flawless and that rubs DED the wrong way. It's a FACT that Siri is falling behind, it's a FACT that Chromebooks never went after the enterprise market (why would they? What enterprise is going to go for a web browser based OS? It makes no sense at all). 

    This article is so self serving that it's not even funny.
    Google have been going after enterprise for a long while.  As a member of an IT user group for a local authority, Google have been trying to get us to let them bring their Google bus to demo their products for several years now. 
    cornchipwatto_cobrajony0
Sign In or Register to comment.