Spork Boards
Hot Spork Chat : Join us in an AIM chat room!

Apple's relationship with the press, customers, and dealers

tliet's Avatar Picture tliet – March 20, 2008 05:34AM Reply Quote
Although we don't live in the Apple is beleaguered times anymore, there's still enough to be said about them...
Transplanted once again...

The Gay Blade - 05:54pm Mar 31, 2000 EST
The Blade will attempt to transplant yet another rhetorical sapling here
on the Spork boards by copping a page from the delightful Brian Miller,
writing eloquently on the superannuated boards of yesteryear:

Brian Miller - 03:07pm Sep 30, 1999 PT
The man with a plan

My recent PowerBook G3 fiasco notwithstanding, I am beginning to wonder if
Apple is planning on abandoning "small fry customers." Consider the
evidence:



1) Apple's war with the Macintosh press;
2) Apple's slashing and burning of small local dealers, who often provided
the best service "in a pinch";
3) Apple's continued horrendous customer service breaches (individual Apple
Store orders cancelled in favour of large educaction/business orders).

Pulling all this evidence together and analysing it makes me feel far more
"worried" about Apple's future than any time under Amelio. Consider, for
instance, what all of those resources spent on lawyers threatening tiny Mac
sites could do in customer service and relations.



Before we consider Apple's "invasion" into the Fortune 1000 enterprise to
be ready, we have to focus on Apple's status in its own current markets. In
my view, there's a lot of "retrenching" to do before they're ready. They
can start by ceasing their intimidation of Mac publishers, letting the damn
Mac rags publish OS 8.6 on their cover disks, and spending a bit more time,
effort, and energy on a "satisfy the customer at all costs throughout the
organisation" policy. These are all core competencies they'll need before
they can even THINK of invading the big-enterprise space.
[/quote]

John Willoughby – January 21, 2011 08:44PM Reply Quote
Homo Sapiens Sedentarius
I'm not real happy with Apple right now. Even though I've set my Ping account to not share anything, searching my name on iTMS reveals all of my sordid details. OK, so I bought "Lucky Leif and the Longships." Big deal. I'm really just steamed that anybody who knows my real name can find me, and who knows what info will show up their down the road? App purchases? iDevices owned? I didn't authorize this and it is typical of everybody in the social networking arena to do it. Rape the customer, spam the customer's info to provide the illusion of an active community, and sell whatever you can to marketers. Jerks.

John Willoughby – January 21, 2011 08:55PM Reply Quote
Homo Sapiens Sedentarius
OK, so at some point in the last few months my Ping account preferences apparently reset to default "massive exposure" mode. That just moves the focus of my anger from displaying my info to resetting my preferences in such a way as to display my info. I've turned Ping off now, and all that show up when searching my name are odd songs like "My Lord Willoughby's Welcome Home." (Sense and Sensibility reference, I'm guessing?)

Roger – January 21, 2011 09:01PM Reply Quote
Ping's privacy really sucks. I'm surprised this hasn't become a bigger story, since it's been terrible from the start -- unclear whether the policy even permits pseudo/anonymity, and it defaults to making the real name on your account's credit card public on all your reviews, even the old ones you may have written anonymously. I turned Ping off as soon as I saw that my real name was suddenly coming up with new Google hits for cranky App Store reviews I thought were anonymous. It's terribly handled.

John Willoughby – January 21, 2011 09:38PM Reply Quote
Homo Sapiens Sedentarius
I really, really hope that Apple backs off on the whole social network thing. That's a race that was lost before Apple began to run.

Tony Leggett (Moderator) – January 21, 2011 10:01PM Reply Quote
I like to call the whole social networking thing "Big Stranger."

It's going to end in tears...

Cloudscout – January 23, 2011 02:34PM Reply Quote
˙pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ʎɯ ɥʇıʍ ƃuoɹʍ ƃuıɥʇǝɯos sı ǝɹǝɥʇ ʞuıɥʇ ı ?ɹǝʇndɯoɔ ʎɯ ɥʇıʍ ǝɯ dlǝɥ ǝuoǝɯos uɐɔ
Apple really doesn't like all of us former iTools and .Mac users.

If you want to continue using your old mac.com email address for outbound mail on an iOS device, you have some serious hoops to jump through.

My account renewed again this month. This might be the last time. It just isn't worth anywhere near the $99/year they keep soaking from me.

John Willoughby – January 23, 2011 03:11PM Reply Quote
Homo Sapiens Sedentarius
Yeah, I did that all myself without the tech note. It must be semi-intuitive because I figured it out. I hate the forced march to me.com, though I suspect that this is a case of Apple not taking the time to test with mac.com accounts rather than intentional change. Steve told us mac.com would continue to work. It had better.

ddt – January 26, 2011 09:04AM Reply Quote
Hey, I know it's not officially attended and all, but wasn't Macworld Expo happening this week or something?

ddt

Tony Leggett (Moderator) – February 01, 2011 04:42PM Reply Quote
Very Ironic...

oh, not the whole 1984 thing - that's dated and lame. Motorola claiming it's "more powered" than, well, anyone really is deeply ironic given their semiconductor history...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/01/2011 04:43PM by Tony Leggett.

tliet – February 08, 2011 06:01PM Reply Quote
Belgium seems to have enough of the policies that US based companies apply to content and apps, which causes a lot of the content that's referring to the Belgian culture to be banned on the likes of the AppStore and Facebook.

'Imagine driving a Toyota which stalls when you're trying to go to Amsterdam because the boss of Toyota doesn't like what's going on in that city'.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/openinternet/blog/4784 (in Dutch)

Tony Leggett (Moderator) – February 08, 2011 06:11PM Reply Quote
Non parle hoogen-floogen bork bork bork?

bahamut – February 08, 2011 08:51PM Reply Quote
Er, I wanna spook de Internet?

Tony Leggett (Moderator) – February 10, 2011 02:31PM Reply Quote
Jobs has only been gone less than a month and Apple is going off the rails...

And I didn't realise in some cases, there's 30 per cent double-dipping... (30 per cent on the actual app - another 30% on every subscription/purchase...)

Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?

John Willoughby – February 10, 2011 02:48PM Reply Quote
Homo Sapiens Sedentarius
If Sony leaves the iTMS, then a lot of people will buy less Sony Music. For every 30% Apple loses, Sony loses 70%. It's no secret that the music companies don't like Apple as gatekeeper. They want multiple music providers, so that they can bargain for better deals (e.g. can make the customer buy "packages" of music rather than the single track they want). As for the "new technology" of streaming, I doubt the other music companies will use Sony's store. So customers will have to visit multiple sites, use multiple forms of DRM, and probably multiple player apps for their music. Once again, less sales.

I've seen Sony's attempts at online stores. Sony is their own worst enemy.

As for the double-dipping: I've seen a lot of articles that assume Apple is taking 30% of subscription revenue, but I haven't heard it officially stated. I think 30% is fair, if Apple is hosting the content on their servers, but not otherwise.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/10/2011 02:50PM by John Willoughby.

tliet – February 10, 2011 07:13PM Reply Quote
With more and more streaming options available, my guess is that digital sales will become less relevant anyway over the next few years. At least in my household we have moved completely from digital downloads to Spotify, which satisfies all of our requirements. 3 portable devices, offline syncing, it's all there. This is a model where I don't mind paying €10 per month for. Maybe the industry will punish Apple by not allowing them in on the streaming market.

I do believe Apple is on the wrong track with taking 30% of subscriptions and it will get them into hot water with (EU) authorities. There's no way a newspaper would need to pay Apple 30% for the privilege of providing their readership with the same paper on iOS devices.

John Willoughby – February 10, 2011 08:05PM Reply Quote
Homo Sapiens Sedentarius
Again, do we know Apple is getting 30% on subscriptions? I see many articles assuming that, but no statements from Apple or The Daily to that effect.


John Willoughby – February 11, 2011 07:23AM Reply Quote
Homo Sapiens Sedentarius
Were they saying that Apple's new subscription model would charge them 30%, or that previously they had to pay 30% for the each-issue-is-an-app model? It also seemed that they were hung up on letting paid subscribers to their hardcopy editions free access to the same content online. I think that they ought to be able to do that. I wish that Apple would release clear, unambiguous statements of their policy. I wonder if they avoid doing that so that they can cut special deals with big providers like The Daily.

tliet – February 11, 2011 10:02AM Reply Quote
According to the article Apple was talking about 30% of the subscription price... It seems Apple is 'powerless' without Steve on a day to day basis. On the other hand, Apple with Steve on board Wasn't too quick to respond to media reports.


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login