The sorry state of tech journalism when it comes to Apple

[TimelessOne]

And here's another one I found via Yahoo News:

Study: 80% Of iPhone Users Not Likely To Buy An Apple Watch Next Year

Of course flip that headline around and 20% of iPhone owners buying an Watch in the first year is quite bullish. But that wouldn't be very good click bait would it? All these Watch surveys are nothing more than click bait (and the tech media echo chamber wanting to push a specific meme) under the guise of 'research'. It's impossible for random firms/media sites to gage purchasing intent of a product most people have not seen in person and a product that we still don't know a lot about. Arguably Apple hasn't even begun trying to sell Watch to consumers.

Lets be blunt about it. The iWatch is not bring anything new to the table other than OMG it from Apple. Everything announced about it so far we already have on the market. There is nothing really new about it other than it is Apple. It will only work with Apple devices which makes it a no go for a lot of people. It does not work with open standards.

Android wear is going to branch out and work with everything but even that look at it people are not hugely jumping on board.
smart watch is a different beast. Apple is right fitness is a key part to help but honestly even there Apple missing the boat and really should partner with some of the fitness companies out there on what they need. Example would be look at what garmin and nike do there. Really look at garmin. Nike would be the company to partner with but I have seen lately Nike is even trying to distance itself from Apple and work with everyone.

 

[Rogifan]

Lets be blunt about it. The iWatch is not bring anything new to the table other than OMG it from Apple. Everything announced about it so far we already have on the market. There is nothing really new about it other than it is Apple. It will only work with Apple devices which makes it a no go for a lot of people. It does not work with open standards.

Android wear is going to branch out and work with everything but even that look at it people are not hugely jumping on board.
smart watch is a different beast. Apple is right fitness is a key part to help but honestly even there Apple missing the boat and really should partner with some of the fitness companies out there on what they need. Example would be look at what garmin and nike do there. Really look at garmin. Nike would be the company to partner with but I have seen lately Nike is even trying to distance itself from Apple and work with everyone.

The point is these surveys on an unreleased product that no one has actually used are stupid. How can anyone really give an opinion on something we know very little about. No doubt what Apple showed us in September was a teaser and there's another shoe to drop when the product actually launches. Plus Apple hasn't even begun to start marketing Watch. So people's impressions about it are probably colored by pessimistic press around it.

Considering Apple makes most of its money off hardware it shouldn't be surprising that it designs products to work with its hardware and to sell more if it's hardware. If people (outside of tech geeks) really cared about "open" Apple wouldn't be nearly as successful as it is.

 

[Solomani]

I'm sorry but this is just embarrassing and another reason I'm skeptical about anything the media reports on Apple. It's so obvious there's an anti-Apple agenda that the broader tech media is all to happy to advance, even if it includes recycling 7 month old data.

I had always believed than many (not all) tech blogger sites are biased because they have been paid off or bribed by corporate sponsors.

Trust me. IF I had been a Samsung CEO…. that's one of the first things I would do to bring down Apple and tarnish the Apple brand. Spend a few thousand dollars (very very very cheap) to bribe some influential bloggers and journalists to keep debasing Apple products.

Sending them some free Samsung phablets? No problem. Sending them other incentives? No problem.

Bribing these legions of tech bloggers would only cost some thousands of dollars. It is a LOT cheaper than spending many millions of dollars on cheesy TV advertising campaigns bashing Apple (or other rivals).

----------

Article about Apple = clicks
Article about Apple that's negative = even more clicks

Samsung's smartphone business is in a state of absolute free fall and they're panicking while Apple is at the most successful point they've ever been in their history, mostly thanks to the iPhone. Who do you think customers are more satisfied with? The company who's phones no one wants or the company who can barely keep theirs stocked on shelves because they sell so quickly?

According to the latest "survey", Samsung has passed Apple in Customer Satisfaction.

Samsung Beats Apple For The First Time Ever In New Customer Satisfaction Survey

Sorry, did I just debunk what you were trying to say?

 

[Liquorpuki]

Journalism in general got sorrier once anyone with access to a blog could create news and get paid off to create news

Instead of publications, it's better to follow specific writers you think are credible. Reason why Anand was so popular way back when

 

[TimelessOne]

The point is these surveys on an unreleased product that no one has actually used are stupid. How can anyone really give an opinion on something we know very little about. No doubt what Apple showed us in September was a teaser and there's another shoe to drop when the product actually launches. Plus Apple hasn't even begun to start marketing Watch. So people's impressions about it are probably colored by pessimistic press around it.

Considering Apple makes most of its money off hardware it shouldn't be surprising that it designs products to work with its hardware and to sell more if it's hardware. If people (outside of tech geeks) really cared about "open" Apple wouldn't be nearly as successful as it is.

Unrelease does not change you can look at it and see potential. iWatch potential is near zero at bring anything new to the table. Everything about it so far points to nothing new other than Apple.

I could say it looks behind things like Android wear but due to the fact it is unrelease not going to say that. But I can look at it and see nothing new other than it is designed to work with the iPhone. Apple is late to the game on that front. The only thing that have going for it is the iPhone lacks a good smart watch pairing and it need to use standard Apple cheats and closed API to really work.

 

[Rogifan]

Unrelease does not change you can look at it and see potential. iWatch potential is near zero at bring anything new to the table. Everything about it so far points to nothing new other than Apple.

I could say it looks behind things like Android wear but due to the fact it is unrelease not going to say that. But I can look at it and see nothing new other than it is designed to work with the iPhone. Apple is late to the game on that front. The only thing that have going for it is the iPhone lacks a good smart watch pairing and it need to use standard Apple cheats and closed API to really work.

That's your opinion.

 

[tdale]

Unrelease does not change you can look at it and see potential. iWatch potential is near zero at bring anything new to the table. Everything about it so far points to nothing new other than Apple.

I could say it looks behind things like Android wear but due to the fact it is unrelease not going to say that. But I can look at it and see nothing new other than it is designed to work with the iPhone. Apple is late to the game on that front. The only thing that have going for it is the iPhone lacks a good smart watch pairing and it need to use standard Apple cheats and closed API to really work.

Late to the game? Yes, Apple is late to the game, and so is everyone else. Smart watches are not new, but they are rare, they are not mainstream. Apple will probably make them mainstream. Exactly like Apple Pay, that will make smart payments mainstream which they are not now. Apple Pay has given that genre a leg up, iWatch will do the same.

As far as the other poster rabbiting on about Apples closed system, not an open system, re fitness. Look at Homekit. Home Automation is useless, everyone has a different protocol. Homekit takes that problem away from the user, and gives the user ONE system. Apple manages the many incompatible protocols for the many devices itself. I see Fitness stuff going the same way, and despite what he said about Nike etc moving away from Apple, as we have seen with Apple Pay, if Apple makes a move forward, they come running to jump on the boat. So much for the fantasy of needing open standards. What is needed is a focussed company to make the products work well for the public. That the standrad works is key, it matters little if the open standard doesnt work well, NFC payments over the lest three years is one example.

 

[Rogifan]

Late to the game? Yes, Apple is late to the game, and so is everyone else. Smart watches are not new, but they are rare, they are not mainstream. Apple will probably make them mainstream. Exactly like Apple Pay, that will make smart payments mainstream which they are not now. Apple Pay has given that genre a leg up, iWatch will do the same.

As far as the other poster rabbiting on about Apples closed system, not an open system, re fitness. Look at Homekit. Home Automation is useless, everyone has a different protocol. Homekit takes that problem away from the user, and gives the user ONE system. Apple manages the many incompatible protocols for the many devices itself. I see Fitness stuff going the same way, and despite what he said about Nike etc moving away from Apple, as we have seen with Apple Pay, if Apple makes a move forward, they come running to jump on the boat. So much for the fantasy of needing open standards. What is needed is a focussed company to make the products work well for the public. That the standrad works is key, it matters little if the open standard doesnt work well, NFC payments over the lest three years is one example.

My understanding is Pay does not use any proprietary standards. Yes it requires Apple hardware to work as Apple designed it, but the technology is not proprietary to Apple. Seems pretty open to me. And I'm sure just like with Touch ID, NFC will eventually be opened up to 3rd party developers.

 

[tdale]

My understanding is Pay does not use any proprietary standards. Yes it requires Apple hardware to work as Apple designed it, but the technology is not proprietary to Apple. Seems pretty open to me. And I'm sure just like with Touch ID, NFC will eventually be opened up to 3rd party developers.

My main point is that while new stuff comes on board (fitness, watches, health, payments) as a few examples, it gets to market and moves slowly. Very slowly. It doesnt really make it to mainstream, but when Apple gets involved, that perks the publics interest, and befiore you know it, everyone has heard of smart watches, fitness gear, home automation gear, mobile payments.

My mention of open standards was more raised at another poster criticising Apple for being closed. Say Apple is closed, say Apple Pay is in fact closed, for example. lets say Apple Pay takes off, so many many are using it. Does that make it closed? I see many here using the "ciosed" more to criticise Apple, the word closed in this context is trendy to describe Apple. Say Apple Pay was used by the majority of payers, is that closed?
It doesnt really matter that much if its closed or open, what matters is if the public adopts it.

Linux is open, its not mainstream. iOS is closed, it is mainstream

 

[LizKat]

My main point is that while new stuff comes on board (fitness, watches, health, payments) as a few examples, it gets to market and moves slowly. Very slowly. It doesnt really make it to mainstream, but when Apple gets involved, that perks the publics interest, and befiore you know it, everyone has heard of smart watches, fitness gear, home automation gear, mobile payments.

My mention of open standards was more raised at another poster criticising Apple for being closed. Say Apple is closed, say Apple Pay is in fact closed, for example. lets say Apple Pay takes off, so many many are using it. Does that make it closed? I see many here using the "ciosed" more to criticise Apple, the word closed in this context is trendy to describe Apple. Say Apple Pay was used by the majority of payers, is that closed?
It doesnt really matter that much if its closed or open, what matters is if the public adopts it.

Linux is open, its not mainstream. iOS is closed, it is mainstream

I'd agree with all of that... with the caveat that iOS is mainstream only as long as Apple maintain a watchful eye on what emerges from more open sources that customers (or developers) pick up on and are enthusiastic about. I mean Palm OS was mainstream once upon a time.

Curation is one thing, and it's important. However, Apple's way of sticking a chair under the doorknob of a room in which Christmas presents are (maybe?) being carefully wrapped does sometimes get old, since we're on the outside and haven't a clue if there are actually any presents in there. Apple seems to dither over whether to permit this or that in iOS, and sometimes reverses itself. In the meantime it often leaves us all in the dark by its refusal to comment in advance on issues or their resolution.

As a business model I guess Apple's way works, or at least hasn't produced enough red ink to generate a serious call for remedies. Customers are as bad as developers in wanting access to everything all the time starting yesterday. That way lies anarchy, which is as dangerous and undesirable in technology as it is in geopolitical affairs. And that's why I'm still hanging out in Apple's curated garden. It's also why I don't get too crazed about whatever the tech journalists or click-bait artists have to say (or regurgitate) about Apple on the average Tuesday.

 

[s15119]

Whats the point in quoting one comment amongst my entire post. "

The first sentence was incorrect. I quoted what I was responding to. That's how it works. Please save the insults for someone younger who wants to argue. Have a nice day.

 

[lowendlinux]

My main point is that while new stuff comes on board (fitness, watches, health, payments) as a few examples, it gets to market and moves slowly. Very slowly. It doesnt really make it to mainstream, but when Apple gets involved, that perks the publics interest, and befiore you know it, everyone has heard of smart watches, fitness gear, home automation gear, mobile payments.

My mention of open standards was more raised at another poster criticising Apple for being closed. Say Apple is closed, say Apple Pay is in fact closed, for example. lets say Apple Pay takes off, so many many are using it. Does that make it closed? I see many here using the "ciosed" more to criticise Apple, the word closed in this context is trendy to describe Apple. Say Apple Pay was used by the majority of payers, is that closed?
It doesnt really matter that much if its closed or open, what matters is if the public adopts it.

Linux is open, its not mainstream. iOS is closed, it is mainstream

Android is Linux and pretty mainstream.