corebeliefs

I'm not a fan of Spotify either. The last straw was Spotify shoving political podcasts in my face every time I opened the app. I left for the simplicity of Apple Music, even if the recommendations are better on Spotify.

With that said, I'm skeptical that any company can make a profit with the record companies taking so much money from the artists. What value does a record company add anymore. They're a greedy middleman that gets to blame music streaming services as being the problem of artists working for pennies.

Apple can afford to run Spotify out of business, but until the music industry is completely reworked from the ground up, most artists will continue to scrape by with little to show for their record deals. That's not Spotify's fault.  

Mike Wuerthele said:

corebeliefs said:

It seems you're referencing MaxTech with your sideswipes about controversy. The problem with indirectly criticizing other channels, it makes you look weak and cowardly, not them. MaxTech gets a lot of heat because they set the tone with investigative reviews of Apple products. They're not afraid to have strong opinions. They make reviewing a long-term conversation. All of these things help clicks, as the trolls have pointed out. But they also reflect the reality that tech products take time to understand in real-world use.

Have a problem with what they're saying? Reference them directly. It will only improve your site. I've watched many channels and sites try to bury their influence with indirect innuendo. And yet, MaxTech still leads the way because they're talking directly to viewers and not playing the industry game like you are here. 

Your interpretation is incorrect. If we were calling anybody out, we'd do so by name. They jumped on that train well after the controversies and discussion started.

In regards to criticizing other channels, we've done so before, and will do so again, if necessary.

https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/04/02/editorial-cbc-again-attacks-apples-repair-policies-but-still-lacks-knowledge-of-how-repair-really-works
https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/10/09/cbc-video-claims-apples-repair-policies-are-abusive-but-proof-falls-far-short
https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/04/18/apple-refusing-to-fix-youtubers-imac-pro-claims-low-on-facts-light-on-details

There are more, if you're inclined to look.

FWIW, they started their career here at AppleInsider. I will be happy to discuss the facts of their exit in a DM if you are so inclined.

Thank you for your reply. AppleInsider is a daily stop for me, so I do feel part of the community here (although I post rarely). I understand it's hard to balance a review with greater context, to keep the review a manageable length. It's just one reader's takeaway, that referencing controversy without a source or sources raises more questions and distracts from the point being made. Overall, I see AppleInsider's editorial point of view as very valid, to be a voice of reason in a click-driven world.

I was aware that Max and crew were part of your team. Their editorial stance is able to be critiqued, in part because they are so open about their opinions. I apologize if my reading into your description of controversy was mistaken. MaxTech was at the heart of the Intel Macbook Air thermal throttling discussion. It seemed to me in that case, they were correct in that the Intel Air ran too hot, needlessly for upselling to the Pro. I'm not saying they are infallible, only that they speak plainly to their viewers, which is welcome.

It seems you're referencing MaxTech with your sideswipes about controversy. The problem with indirectly criticizing other channels, it makes you look weak and cowardly, not them. MaxTech gets a lot of heat because they set the tone with investigative reviews of Apple products. They're not afraid to have strong opinions. They make reviewing a long-term conversation. All of these things help clicks, as the trolls have pointed out. But they also reflect the reality that tech products take time to understand in real-world use.

Have a problem with what they're saying? Reference them directly. It will only improve your site. I've watched many channels and sites try to bury their influence with indirect innuendo. And yet, MaxTech still leads the way because they're talking directly to viewers and not playing the industry game like you are here. 

I believe Epic has a point, and don't believe Epic forfeited anything by agreeing to the original Apple contract. Contracts are re-negotiated often, even iron-clad ones. Business is often about exerting influence based on a company's popularity with consumers. Apple commands its price premium because of this.

Regardless of the proposed motives for it, Epic has a point in wanting consumers to have a choice that Apple doesn't want to give. The device isn't a rental, and without the App Store ecosystem the value of the device we are paying for is much less. They go together.

But here is where I believe Apple should get a pass. Desktop computers that Epic references are much more forgiving of any kind of program run on it. Epic is trying to get the same system applied to mobile devices which are finely-tuned for battery life, performance, and security. If Apple ever is made to allow other app stores on its devices, it should be able to indemnify itself from offering support for the device, unless the device is wiped to a factory refreshed state.