
Steve Jobs' reality distortion takes its toll on truth - ssclafani
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/03/03/steve-jobs-reality-distortion-takes-its-toll-on-truth/
======
corin_
Completely agree. I'm not exactly an apple fanboy, but I do love my iPad, and
there isn't yet a competitor's device I'd want to replace it with (although
I'm hoping BlackBerry's will change that).

If he had come out and given all the ways that the iPad 2 is better than the
iPad, I'd have been impressed. But spending half the time criticising
competitors just came across as the kind of tacky tactic that really shouldn't
be needed unless you're trying to catch up to them - not if you're trying to
prevent them from catching up to you.

Oh, and that's just for the attacking competitors. Going even further than
that, and attacking them with incorrect spin, way too far.

~~~
fluidcruft
Allow me to appropriate a quotation from a person who's legacy Apple has had
no shame appropriating for marketing: "First they ignore you, then they
ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win."

This was plainly an exercise in ridicule by Jobs.

~~~
gruseom
_Allow me to appropriate a quotation from a person who's legacy Apple has had
no shame appropriating for marketing: "First they ignore you, then they
ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win."_

While I agree with you that Apple's use of Gandhi in their ads is just about
the most shamelessly incongruent marketing ever, Gandhi never said "First they
ignore you etc." It comes from a speech made by someone called Nicholas Klein
to a garment workers' union circa 1915. Oddly enough, the original Google
Books citation I found for this no longer yields the phrase in search. But it
appears in this (garbled but recognizable) digitization of the primary source:

[http://www.archive.org/stream/generalexecuti1919amaluoft/gen...](http://www.archive.org/stream/generalexecuti1919amaluoft/generalexecuti1919amaluoft_djvu.txt)

(I'm experimenting with bringing this up every time I run across the misquote,
because I'm curious if the real information will ever catch on.)

~~~
fluidcruft
That's very interesting. It's listed in the disputed section of Gandhi's page
on wikiquotes:

<http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mohandas_Karamchand_Gandhi>

As a thank you, I offer this personal favorite that I like to bring up
whenever someone talks about stealing someone's thunder:

<http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/steal-ones-thunder.html>

------
Tycho
Somebody rebutted the points in one of the comments: none of the dual-core are
really shipping over 100 000 a month (threshold for volume considering iPad
ships 1,000,000 per month); Samsung admitted miscalculating their end-sales;
iPad 2 has some intense minitiarisation, which as with other
'features/improvements' doesn't come free; Apple bore the entire cost of
developing the OS themselves; Kindles, Nooks etc. aren't tablets. Not sure if
his/her points were sound, just reporting them.

~~~
dean
_none of the dual-core are really shipping over 100 000 a month (threshold for
volume considering iPad ships 1,000,000 per month)_

No one is shipping over 100,000 month. And Apple has shipped _zero_ dual-
cores. Jobs should wait til it happens before he says it happened.

------
Kylekramer
Lot of nitpicks and to be expected framing/number fudging by Steve, but
straight up misquoting the Samsung rep was very odd. That had been widely
corrected, so either Apple did not research their presentation (unlikely) or
just knowingly lied (yuck).

~~~
spooneybarger
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity

~~~
coderdude
How much stupidity do you think is involved when billions of dollars are on
the line?

~~~
kmfrk
I'm sure Microsoft has the answer to that question. Or at least the
experience.

~~~
coderdude
A cheap jab at Microsoft with no citations that doesn't even follow the
conversation, in an Apple thread no less. I'm shocked.

~~~
kmfrk
I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but I'm a Windows user.

If you can't recall any egregious Microsoft failures, you're the fanboy
trapped in a distortion field. Microsoft may have a lot of things going for
them, but they are ginormous klutzes.

Do you seriously think that there isn't stupidity involved in any billion-
dollar projects and companies?

~~~
kenjackson
Charlie Sheen is also a ginormous klutz! What does he have to do with this
discussion (besides the fact that he's a rockstar who should be a part of all
discussions)? Nothing. Neither does Microsoft.

------
Jun8
How much of an Jobs/Apple hater do you have to be before you include Nook and
Kindle in the tablet market to argue that the iPad share is actually close to
50?

~~~
wmeredith
Quite a large one, I'd imagine. The Nook and Kindle are a pretty far cry from
the iPad in terms of capability. To me it seems like it's a very close
parallel to a smart phone vs. a feature phone.

~~~
NickPollard
So you're saying the iPad has sold more than 90% of all devices that are like
iPads? Seems verging on tautological to me.

~~~
pmjordan
Do any of the Kindles, etc. have touch sensitive main screens? 'Tablet' isn't
exactly a new term and has implied a large touchscreen for a long time now.
Seems a reasonable distinction considering the difference in how you interact
with the devices.

~~~
orangecat
The Nook is literally a 7" Android tablet. (Capacitive multitouch screen, same
CPU and GPU as Droid X). And a pretty good one once you root it, which
consists of inserting an SD card and turning it on.

~~~
rkudeshi
That's the Nook Color, actually.

The Nook (the original one, which goes by simply 'Nook') is an e-reader with a
6" eInk screen (a Kindle clone, if you will).

------
nopal
Are we really debating whether a CEO over-hyped his product in a keynote? Next
we'll be taking apart a sales rep for saying his product is better than its
competitors.

~~~
lwhi
There's a difference between over-hyping and telling lies.

~~~
bonch
I saw nothing that constituted a "lie." This is an article from an obvious
Android fan (looking at Seth Weintraub's other articles, it's all Google, all
the time) who didn't like that Apple took some shots at competing tablets. I
have to agree with one of the comments to the article that says Android
fanboys are as bad as Apple fanboys, maybe even worse because they act like
the fact Android is open source is some great benevolent act of morality--
Google is simply an advertising company giving people free services in order
to index their data for contxt-sensitive advertising space.

I imagine that a lot of Apple competitors and their fans were upset at the
iPad 2 announcement, because it really seems as if will be another hit.

~~~
bane
_I saw nothing that constituted a "lie."_

Here's the list from the article since you must have skipped over them:

1) A mistranslation from Korean that puts a competitor in a bad light.

2) "First dual core tablet to ship in volume."

3) ">90% market share".

#1 could arguably just a rehash of old stuff, "sorry guys I'm a bit out of
date". #2 and #3 are complete fabrications.

The rest of the article was just nitpicking.

~~~
rbarooah
#2 depends on your definition of volume, and it's pretty clear that nobody is
close to Apple there, so it's hardly even an exaggeration let alone a lie.

#3 isn't a fabrication either. For it to be false, you either have to include
e-readers, or assume that Samsung sold over 1.6m Tabs, which seems extremely
unlikely given the evidence.

#1 is the most dishonest looking one, but none of it really justifies the "You
Lie!" outrage, given the general tone of industry commentary.

~~~
bane
#2 Since the iPad 2 wasn't shipping at all, its volume is 0 at the time this
was said. That much is inarguable, full stop. Ergo it is a lie.

#3 Provide documentation then, don't guess. Since you're obviously an Apple
fan (not saying there is anything wrong with that), guessing will only provide
numbers and situations that you want -- confirmation bias.

For it not to be a lie, Apple must own not 88% of the market, not 90% of the
market but some number _larger_ than 90%. And yes, include Nook colors since
they're Android tablets and sold out and back-ordered where I live. And
include Windows tablets. And include cheapo Walgreens Android tablets, and RIM
tablets and Nokia tablets, convertable notebooks/netbooks, netpads and
whatever other random tablet form factor is out there today. If you want to
constrain the form factor to "a big screen that you touch and carry around" so
that it excludes Kindles, I think that's fine and makes sense. Here's some
lists of tablets so you can start your research.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablet_personal_computer>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablet_computer>

Unfortunately, all indications are that Apple owns somewhere between 85-88% of
the tablet market today. Which is a fantastically impressive number
considering that Microsoft has been trying to build the tablet market for many
years and Apple's only been at it a fraction of the time. _That_ is the number
that should have been presented, it's an amazing number. There's no reason to
fabricate a number and lie.

~~~
rbarooah
"#2 Since the iPad 2 wasn't shipping at all, its volume is 0 at the time this
was said. That much is inarguable, full stop. Ergo it is a lie."

No, he said when it was going to ship. It's a prediction. It's only a lie if
he has good reason to believe that the won't ship in volume .

~~~
bane
Here's the link to the slide in question

[http://fortunebrainstormtech.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/scr...](http://fortunebrainstormtech.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/screen-
shot-2011-03-02-at-7-00-19-pm.png?w=600)

It says, "first dual core tablet to ship in volume". That's an exact quote.

It doesn't say, as you are positing,

"when it ships, we predict that at some unspecified point in the future, it
will be the dual core tablet that ships more than some arbitrary number for
'in volume' that we've defined, while our competitors will likely not meet or
exceed our completely arbitrary and self defined benchmark for 'in volume'."

If you don't think that's a lie, I have some property on the moon to sell you
(or at least I predict at some point in the future I will own property on the
moon that I will immediately turn over to you if you pay me for it now)

~~~
pjdavis
A slide will usually have a generalization of the point that the speaker is
making, not a word for word rehash of everything he says.

------
grav1tas
I'm curious if specs in mobile devices have become less important when the
device is only supposed to do more or less what it's advertised to doand what
the user bought it to do, and not much else. Apple advertises all the apps
that work on the iOS line of devices, but these apps are (should be) designed
to fit "inside the box" of functionality on the device. Android seems to take
a different philosophical approach where users are the big deciders in what is
good and appropriate for them on their devices. In the face of advertising
versatility, specs do become a bigger issue...especially when you compete with
multiple devices on the same platform...like PCs. Apple devices don't have the
spec issue, except where it's relevant to show difference between generations
of devices. At least that's my two cents. I think both platforms put forth
their design philosophies pretty well, and both are respectable options for
users. Why people fight over what's better so much is a source of both
hilarity and sadness for me.

~~~
bostonpete
I'm not sure I buy it, or at least that reasoning doesn't match Apple's
apparent position on this. For example, at the iPhone 4 launch, the retinal
display was the big topic. It would seem hard for them to then turn around and
say that the better resolution of the XOOM is irrelevant.

This is the first product version launch I can remember where Apple wasn't on
the leading edge in terms of specs. If they launched months after the XOOM and
are as far behind spec-wise as the article suggests, that seems like a big win
for the XOOM (even though specs obviously probably aren't the most important
factor for most potential customers).

~~~
rbarooah
Except that we know why the iPad resolution hasn't changed:

1\. There are 65,000 apps tuned to work with it, so a minor bump to 'compete'
on specs would make the user experience _worse_.

2\. We know they are going to double it to 'retina' levels when they can. If
motorola want to follow that approach, it's going to be longer before a double
size panel is available.

3\. The Xoom has an aspect ration that is better for playing a small subset of
HD videos, but is worse for using in portrait 'magazine' orientation. It's not
actually better for a lot of users.

I'm not even sure where the idea that they are behind the Xoom spec-wise is
coming from.

~~~
bostonpete
> I'm not even sure where the idea that they are behind the Xoom spec-wise is
> coming from.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's another side to this argument, but the
article explicitly lists where the XOOM exceeds to ipad2:

\- higher resolution

\- superior cameras (w/flash)

\- stereo speakers

\- upgradeable to 4G

\- micro-USB/SD Card reader

\- probably more RAM (author suggests it may be double)

------
scott_s
_You see, Apple loves to talk about specs when it is in its best interest
(speeds and feeds)._

Generalizing,

 _You see, [companies] love to talk about [what] is in its best interest._

~~~
jokermatt999
And thankfully, good journalists will call them out on it. I'd argue that's an
important function of journalism, even.

~~~
scott_s
That's fine, but the tone of this piece was surprise that Apple would use its
own marketing event to make Apple look good. Calling them out on facts is
good, but there's no need to tell me that Apple will selectively present
features based on how good it sells.

~~~
kmfrk
“In what seems like a ritual at this point, I watched Apple's iPad 2 keynote
in disbelief, noting the factual errors that kept coming up minute after
minute.”

The only surprise is that a journalist bothered to fact-check a Stevenote.

~~~
Semiapies
The only surprise is that a journalist bothered to _fact-check_.

Most just put ditto remarks on a press release or a presentation. In tech
journalism, there's been a meme that Jobs has a "reality distortion field", so
there's free attention when someone actually bothers to look at Apple claims.

------
ary
This is a whole load of conjecture, but the product announcements coming out
of Apple for the last few years seem to be converging on a pattern.

1) Update on success / market share / etc.

2) Possible update on retail.

3) Compare product that is about to be obsoleted with its competition while
putting said competition in an unfavorable light.

4) Make the magic happen and take the press to their happy place.

#3 intrigues me. I can't help but wonder if casting the competition in a
negative light is just an excuse for being able to talk about the competition
at all. Given the possibility of government interference in _any_ industry it
is in the best interest of most businesses to maintain the perception of
healthy competition. What has struck me about Apple's portrail of their
competitors is that they preset what appears to be a finely tuned mix of
recognition, disdain, and paranoia. It's almost as if they want you to
remember that _there are others out there_. Any company that mops the floor
with their competition is going to have to deal with the losers running off to
the FTC, Congress, etc and whining about anti-competitive practices. At times
Apple's presentations seem to be attempting to preempt that sort of thing.

Let _me_ preempt any emotional responses by pointing out that I'm _not saying_
Apple/iOS is better than Google/Andriod, etc, etc. I'm saying that in terms of
financial success and overall market/mind share they're doing some serious
winning (and not in the Charlie Sheen sense of the word).

------
phatbyte
I hate when people compare Apple products specs with the other competitors. I
mean, if a device runs smooth including apps, and no crashes. Why the hell do
I need to know if Xoom as 1GB and iPad2 has only 256mb ?

This will only shows that the iPad was better developed in terms of memory
optimization then any another other >= 1GB device that does the exact same
thing.

~~~
Tichy
I suppose the article talks specs because in the keynote the specs of the
competition were being dissed. Reap what you sow.

Actually, the one spec that REALLY matters to me is resolution of the front
facing camera. A smooth tablet is a nice gadget, but I really _NEED_ a skype
capable device for my mum, so that she can chat with her grandchildren.

It seems the iPad 2 is actually losing out in that spec comparison.

~~~
Someone
I do not know anything about the quality of either device's cameras, but I do
know resolution is not the way to measure camera quality.

That applies even more to measuring how Skype-capable a device is. For Skype
on an iPad, one could even argue that any resolution over 1024 by 768 is
overkill.

~~~
Tichy
Why should the resolution be overkill? Apple just put HD webcams into their
new line of MacBook Pros.

The other end of the chat might be on something else than an iPad. (Also I say
Skype, but Facetime might be an option in some cases, too).

------
gamble
I was surprised to see Jobs hit Samsung with the repudiated 'quite small'
quote, but at the same time Samsung hasn't exactly been eager to release their
sell-through numbers. They haven't been shy about _claiming_ their tablets are
big sellers, though. Where is the condemnation of their claims that the Tab
represented a third of tablet sales, when it's obvious from the near-total
absence of them in the real world that they're nowhere near those numbers?

If Samsung is bothered by Apple's claims, they're easy to refute - just
release the numbers.

------
Stormbringer
And lo, at the _slightest_ bit of Apple bashing in the media, suddenly the
floodgates open and the hatorade pours forth.

Do any of you Apple haters hold _any_ other company to the standards you claim
that Apple or Jobs has violated? No, you do not. You huff and you puff on
their vapourware, but if Apple puts a single foot wrong you pounce.

Why?

Why the double standard?

I'm not defending Apple†, and I think perhaps if _all_ companies were held to
the same high standard that you hold Apple to, the world would actually be a
better place.

Let's hold _all_ companies to the same standard.

†They're big enough to fight their own battles, and as I've said before they
are far from perfect and there are plenty of valid things to complain about,
just not the ones that people pick on (for some bizarre reason that escapes
me)

~~~
Dylanlacey
Part of it is pushing back on fanboyism. Neither are logical or sensible, but
I believe one begets the other.

If you don't overly care about Apple and the only news you hear is either
"Apple did this" and "I WANT APPLES BABIES", you will start to form an overly
critical view, because the news seems to always tend towards hype.

And then some people (with the same fanboyish mindset as the fanboys) will
start to take it too far, still as a backlash, but still just as ridiculous.
You only get raging haters by either spectacular failure of delivery OR by
having raging fans. People seek to balance by becoming unbalanced. I am guilty
of this. I suspect a great many people are.

People don't like being told that someone else is better then they are,
especially when it's something they hold dear. Geeks, therefore, do not like
being told that they are a poorer person for making different technology
choices. This is not news, see Vim VS Emacs. As fanboyism can be quite
judgmental, this gets on people's nerves, and they become defensive, lashing
out at the "Cause" (being Apple). The fanboys feel that their identity is
being attacked, and they fight back with equal fervor.

None of this is rational or even useful, but it's just a product of social
human nature.

(You're right, they big enough to fight their own battles, and they're big
enough to toot their own horn, but people will do it for them, so people will
do it against them.)

~~~
Stormbringer
Exactly zero of the 'raging Apple fanboys' that I know go around telling
people that they are bad people because they don't use Apple products.

A few Apple fanboys get a bit 'preachy' about how 'awesome' Apple is when they
first switch, but I've never seen an Apple fanboy call somebody a bad person
as part of that process. Additionally, this desire to 'win souls' quickly
wears off, and some never go through it at all.

\----

Now, if you were making a sporting analogy and said that the mere existence of
people who like Apple somehow causes the supporters of 'the other teams' to
get more energetic in support of their team, that would make sense to me.
Sports fans need the existence of other sports fans to hate and whip them into
a frenzy.

But (sadly) that isn't what you're doing here. You are painting the Apple fans
as the bad guys by making all these assertions about their behaviour and
character. Essentially, you are saying that they bring it on themselves
because of their bad behaviour, and I don't believe that. It doesn't match my
observations at all.

\-----

Let us examine your claims:

the only news you hear is either "Apple did this"

I dispute this as factually inaccurate. Right now, as I flick to the tab
holding the front page, I see the following tally:

msft 2 startup 7 rampant rails fanboyism 1 digital rights 5 linux 1.5 apple
0.5 pop psych 2 world news 1 us news 2 fitness 1 history of the world 1 intel
1

(there was a story title for android and iphone, so I gave them each partial
credit).

That's it. 2% of the news. 1/4 of what Microsoft is getting.

Now, when you say "Apple did this" I'm going to assume you mean people
bitching about how evil Apple is. E.g. the recent 30% debate. Because all I
remember recently about Apple is a bunch of bashing and sledging.

Essentially, you are saying that because you see people bashing Apple so often
in the news, that makes you sick of Apple and want to bash them. I cannot say
that I see that as a reasonable justification.

Then you say the other side of the news, the pro-Apple side

"I WANT APPLES BABIES"

Now look. I don't know if you've ever seen any Apple ads, but they never do
that. They are never garish and over the top. Oh wait, the iPod ads. Well,
okay, I'll give you that one.

Now I like understated ads. I liked the Microsoft ads with Jerry Seinfeld and
Bill Gates, I thought they should have continued them. I like the ad where the
guy is texting while peeing at the urinal, and then drops the phone and goes
to retrieve it and the guy turns to him and says "really?", and the kid throws
the ball at his Dad's head because he's texting instead of playing. But here
Microsoft is taking a leaf out of Apple's playbook (sic).

For every loud garish Apple ad, I'll see you _ten_ Microsoft party to install
Vista ads. You want annoying? There's your culprit right there.

Moreover, I think you got the emphasis wrong, it is more like the two sides of
the Apple news coin are like this:

"I WANT APPLE TO DIE IN A FIRE" and "Hey, Apple just put out new MacBook pros"

"you will start to form an overly critical view"

Not critical enough by a large margin. Like I said in the first post, Apple is
singled out for unequal treatment. If your view actually was properly critical
you'd view each company with equal suspicion.

"because the news seems to always tend towards hype"

But the hysteria end of the hype scale is filled with Apple haters. Where
Apple fits on the hype scale is in the 'large corporate announcing a new
product' part of the scale. But even there I give Apple better marks than most
IT companies, since Apple actually delivers the products they are hyping
(except the white iPhone). Most other IT companies make all sorts of
breathless announcements and then half the time the product that is going to
lead us into the promised land of milk and honey never arrives.

... but they never get called to task for it, or if they do, with only a
minuscule fraction of the rage and bile that is directed at Apple.

"And then some people (with the same fanboyish mindset as the fanboys) will
start to take it too far, still as a backlash"

Backlash against what though? You've failed to establish the existence of
raving Apple fanboys, and my experience completely disagrees with your
assertion that the Apple fanboys are just as bad as the Apple bashers.

"You only get raging haters by either spectacular failure of delivery"

If someone says they hate Apple because they had a $mac and one day after the
warranty expired it blew up and then Apple screwed them over, that would be
fair enough in my book. By all means, bring Apple to task for their _real_
sins, but unless Apple has injured you, do not bash them for _imaginary_ sins,
unless you also bash other companies equally. That is all I'm asking.

"OR by having raging fans. People seek to balance by becoming unbalanced."

I just don't see the raging fans. Apple is far too mainstream these days.
Maybe back in the 90s with Guy Kawasaki whipping the faithful into a frenzy of
religious ecstasy, but that was _TWO DECADES AGO_. For every Apple raging
fanboy you show me, I will give you 100 Apple bashers.

Let's have a look at the comments in the MSFT threads. In the first one, there
are only three overt mentions of Apple. One is apparently an IE 8 fanboy
bashing n IE 6 fanboy (the mind boggles), and the reference to Apple is an
extremely minor point by way of an argument by analogy.

The second is a response to someone who was bashing Apple, and suggesting that
because they are taking 30% of subscriptions, they are unfit to serve as a
replacement for Microsoft. (In response to someone saying that we should just
throw out Microsoft entirely (and not just IE 6)). The overt mention of Apple
is someone saying that leaving Microsoft is not the same as going to Apple,
because there are other choices.

The third reference is someone disputing that, saying that there are no Linux
devices for sale, and that for non-technical people it is just a choice of
Microsoft or Apple. (There is a response to that by a Linux fanboy, I know
he's a fanboy because he misses the obvious logical retort that most Netbooks
run Linux).

Anyway, by my tally in these mentions of Apple there are 3 Microsoft fanboys,
1 Linux fanboy and 0 Apple fanboys.

Hmmmm.... not looking so good for your theory. Perhaps the other thread will
prove more fruitful?

There are two overt mentions: I'll quote the first since I can't identify its
fanboy classification:

"Microsoft producing new software for Windows XP is like Apple doing the same
for OS9."

It is a little fanboyish, since it is kind of inaccurate (a better comparison
would be Windows ME vs OS 9 in my view, since Microsoft introduced XP in
August 2001 and (according to Wikipedia), Apple introduced OS 9 in 1999 and
discontinued development on it in 2002), but never mind that nitpick. So far
as I can tell, this is not Apple fanboyism, this is just someone arguing by
analogy, like the first example from the first article.

The second quote:

"Anyway, they supported it till IE8 and MS has one of the best track records
for backward compatibility(if not the best) in the industry. Just see Apple to
see how quickly things are deprecated."

Okay, so here Apple is being shown in a bad light. Microsoft is better than
just about everyone at maintaining backwards compatibility. And the person
could have said that, but no, they had to slide in a little negative dig at
Apple in the process.

Would you call that an example of rampant Apple fanboyism??

I hope not!

You see, this is how things are. Apple fanboys as a general rule stick to
their own 'turf' and don't engage in needless nerd-rages across the internet.
I'll admit there is probably a low level of baiting and trolling that is going
on, but not at a higher level than the last guys snide side remark about
Apple.

 _In fact, this quick survey shows enormously more Linux fanboy trolling than
Apple fanboyism._

If anything, it also shows that people are out there actively trying to bait
the Apple fanboys, but they aren't biting.

Of course, this is a limited sample, highly inaccurate, blah blah blah, but I
think it goes to cast suspicion on your claims of bad behaviour by Apple
fanboys.

"People don't like being told that someone else is better then they are"

Apple fanboys don't do this.

"Geeks, therefore, do not like being told that they are a poorer person for
making different technology choices."

Apple fanboys don't do this.

I'd happily accuse someone of making a poor technology choice if they go 'all
in' with Microsoft technologies, but I wouldn't tell them they are a "poorer
person"

"As fanboyism can be quite judgmental"

Apple fanboys don't do this.

"this gets on people's nerves, and they become defensive, lashing out at the
"Cause" (being Apple)"

So, despite a complete and total absence of Apple 'fanboys' attacking, it is
okay to go on the defensive, and the best defense is a good offense?

Even in trigger happy USA you're still supposed to wait until you're attacked
before retaliating with superior force.

"The fanboys feel that their identity is being attacked, and they fight back
with equal fervor."

But there aren't any attacks. Oh, I'm not saying that if you go into a thread
about Apple you won't see people arguing in Apple's favour, but there it is
entirely in appropriate and in context. The very thing you claim, the moral
high ground of not lashing out except in defense, is _exactly_ what the Apple
fanboys do. The very superiority you claim for Apple bashers is instead the
high ground that the Apple fanboys are firmly encamped upon.

It is the Apple bashers who are the clear aggressors, who attack without
provocation.

~~~
mreine
you say "Exactly zero of the 'raging Apple fanboys' that I know go around
telling people that they are bad people because they don't use Apple
products." Well then you obviously have never met a mac zealot. Every and I
mean EVERY person I have ever met that has a mac or iphone constantly berates
windows users and especially android users. I can only postulate that is due
to their insecurity and general lack of social grace or the fact that they are
complete idiots.

------
dr_
Disagree, although it was wrong for Job's to misquote Samsung. Regardless,
just because Samsung's tablet sales are "smooth" rather than "small" that
doesn't mean that it's selling particularly well. It's not. Nor is the Xoom. I
mean c'mon, honestly how many people do you know who own a Galaxy tab or a
Xoom? Or anyone who is even really looking forward to buying one? And now how
many people do you know who own an iPad or plan to purchase one? Exactly.

Jobs didn't even need to waste his time attacking his competitors. To be
honest I, like most people out there probably, never even heard of the Samsung
quote until he brought it up, so he may have even given them more credibility
now.

And the smart phone game isn't over. Nobody I know who live in other countries
wants an Android phone. They want an iPhone. But a lot of people can't afford
it. Trust me that will change too.

------
cwisecarver
The misquote was the straw that broke the camel's back. Everything else in
that presentation was exactly like every other presentation given by Apple or
any company touting a new product: Bring up the places you're better and leave
out the places you're falling down.

If it wasn't for the obvious misquote, in bold type, nobody would have batted
an eye.

------
Bud
Let's just take the bull by the horns here. Seth Weintraub's first sentence in
this article, and ostensibly his main point, is:

"Apple twisted facts (or worse) to try to convince crowds that all other
tablets had no shot at de-throning the iPad in 2011."

I'll put up $100 right now that says no competitor will sell more units than
the iPad this year. I'd be surprised if anyone cracked 50%.

Does anyone seriously doubt that the iPad will kill its competition this year?
I think it's pretty obvious. Weintraub is just dreaming if he thinks
otherwise.

So who's guilty of reality distortion, here?

~~~
rosser
The guy who outright lied?

~~~
rbarooah
You mean Weintraub? He knows for certain that Samsung didn't sell 2 million
tabs, because Samsung made a statement saying that, yet he pretends that they
did.

This kind of journalism is part of the problem - not the solution.

~~~
jongraehl
So they both lied.

~~~
rbarooah
Aside from the Samsung misquote, what did Jobs say that could be called a lie?

~~~
burgerbrain
You're a little slow, aren't you?

------
kill-9
How does a link like this make it to the top of HN? It's nothing more than
petty, spiteful Apple bashing by a Google guy.

~~~
jrockway
Isn't the whole keynote "petty, spiteful Google bashing" by an "Apple guy"?
Jobs intentionally misquoted someone to make himself look better at a talk
with his customers and investors. An article pointing that out is not
"bashing".

~~~
rimantas
Care to elaborate, how was Google bashed in the demo of Garage Band, iMovie,
Smart Cover? Was Google even mentioned?

~~~
jrockway
I chose that wording to parody the comment I was replying to. When you see
wording in a reply that is very similar to wording in the original comment,
you should switch your language processing unit from the "analyze exact
literal meaning" mode to the "read for entertainment value" mode.

From a strictly literal standpoint, Jobs made a lot of jabs at the competition
for iOS, which is phones and tablets running Android now. Android is developed
by Google.

A specific comment would be the misquote of Samsung's CEO. Samsung is not
Google, but you can see how Google is involved; they make the OS that the
Samsung tablets run.

~~~
rimantas
OK, point taken.

The misquote thing is interesting. It causes (rightfully, I guess) a lot of
noise, but to be fair: Jobs is not the author of misquote IIRC, and then we
don't know if that version of the quote _is_ a lie, Samsung does not give the
numbers. Choosing to quote incorrect version over the "smooth" version
knowingly is indeed fishy, no matter the factual accuracy.

------
wglb
First, I don't think this is really a reality distortion field. Yes, he does
do it, but I think this is simply marketing.

Let's clarify a little what might be going on, and I don't think that many of
the commentators here are thinking this way.

Have you noticed that a lot of the Apple advertising and marketing is directed
towards those that already have apple products? Obviously people who favor
android devices are going to be put off by this talk.

But if one is already invested in Apple products, then he might be addressing
that little doubt such owners might have.

All of this hoopla reminds me of how for the better part of 30 years
commentators were standing in line to underestimate Bill Gates.

And seriously, if this kind of talk, or john gruber's columns annoy you to the
extent indicated in the threads, I suggest the following alternatives:

1) Look the other way, perhaps at something pleasant. 2) Figure out why it is
working for Apple: can it work for you? (And that is what you are here for,
right?)

~~~
bane
_Have you noticed that a lot of the Apple advertising and marketing is
directed towards those that already have apple products?_

It's an interesting point. If various analysts are correct, most of the recent
purchases of Apple products have simply been existing customers moving up to
the newest device, not new customers coming into the fold.

I overheard a very telling conversation today where a colleague was lamenting
that his teenage daughter wanted to get rid of her new iPhone 4 and get a
"Droid" because all her friends were doing the same.

 _2) Figure out why it is working for Apple: can it work for you?_

Apple seems to have retention down to a Science. For the most part, people who
buy Apple stuff will continue to buy Apple stuff. If some of the typical pro-
Apple opinions in this thread are any indication, people will overlook almost
any amount of flaws in Apple so that they can continue buying Apple stuff.
That's a powerful bit of marketing, but it may not be instructive to try and
analyze and duplicate since most of that effect seems tied to Steve Jobs
himself (we'll see if his transition out of the company changes this, even in
the dark ages while he was gone there were still loyalists who clung to their
ugly, underspecced and out-of-date Performas...heck there are still people who
use their Amiga 500s daily).

It may be more instructive to see how:

1) Apple is losing non-computery people that they managed to bring into the
fold, what's going wrong (based on the conversation I heard)?

2) How can they reverse this?

3) Where are they still growing, what are they doing right?

------
brisance
The author must've missed the entire range of keynotes from the late 90s
through the mid 2000s when the highlight of each was to have a shootout
between a Power Mac and a Wintel PC at Photoshop.

My memory is poor but they seemed to stop this practice maybe 5 years ago.

So, this practice is really nothing new. It's marketing. Google did the same
thing when they trotted out specs about how Android browsing is much faster
than the iPhone during Google I/O. Horses for courses, etc.

------
stcredzero
_That's not including all of the Android-powered Nooks out there,_

I like the look of those.

 _those cheap $100 Androids you can buy at Walgreens or Amazon_

Those aren't doing Android any favors.

 _and even Windows-powered Tablet PCs (which are mentioned two bullet points
above!)._

Have one of those. While it is great that I can use any Windows software I
want on it, I only use the iPad nowadays. It's just more comfortable to use.
Not sure they're the same category as the iPad.

------
henrymazza
Case is it's a bad article by a frenetic journalist. Bad written and more
biased than Jobs. His 90% "math" is ridiculous.

------
kmfrk
It's a great piece, but I don't agree that Jobs focuses on specs. Apple is
great in that they do their utmost to explain what is good about their
products and simplifying the purchase and customization options for the user.

The iPhone 4 wasn't interesting because it had x more DPI clocking in at a
total of y; it was interesting, because they had achieved so many DPI that the
average person would not be able to discern the pixels.

The Android handset manufacturers are losing the marketing battle partly
because they get caught up in numbers and data: x megapixel cameras, y RAM, z
megahertz. To the average consumer, all these extra parameters to consider
before buying a product makes it all the less likely and rewarding to pick out
your next phone.

~~~
nooneelse
> "The iPhone 4 wasn't interesting because it had x more DPI clocking in at a
> total of y; it was interesting, because they had achieved so many DPI that
> the average person would not be able to discern the pixels."

That measure of achievement is entirely dependent on the distance between the
eyes and the screen. I went around measuring a couple of days, many people
with smart phones already had non-discernible pixels at the distance they held
them in late 2009, before the iPhone4 (by Apple's measure of non-discernible).
Why pick one arbitrary distance over another and call that the interesting
transition?

------
fredBuddemeyer
ill never understand why someone so far ahead lowers himself like this. in
american politics this is what a vice president is for.

------
js4all
Since when is it not okay for a company the emphasize the pluses over the
competition and leave out what's not so good. This is common practice.

If you want a full comparison, you have to do it yourself or use independent
tests. I always rely on my own tests, if possible.

Mr. Job's keynotes are rhetorically first class and most people can't wait to
get hands on the products after they have seen the show. This is no reality
distortion, this is perfect marketing.

~~~
egor83
Just emphasizing is not a big deal. Giving numbers that are outright wrong is
a problem.

 _This is common practice._

"Everyone does that" is no excuse.

~~~
rbarooah
Which numbers were outright wrong?

~~~
egor83
The claim about 90% market share.

Price comparison, while not outright wrong, is still stretching the truth a
bit. "Smooth/small" thing too.

~~~
rbarooah
I don't see how the 90% market share statement is wrong unless you include
boxes sitting in warehouses or returned products as 'sold'.

What's wrong with the price comparison?

I agree that the smooth/small thing was underhanded, although let's not forget
that that statement was made as Samsung admitted that they hadn't actually
sold 2m devices as they had previously claimed.

~~~
egor83
1) _I don't see how the 90% market share statement is wrong_

From the article: Apple sold 14.8 mln iPads. Samsung sold 2 mln Tabs. Do you
imply that these figures are not correct? If so, please provide better data.

But if we use these figures, Apple has 14.8 / (14.8 + 2) ~ 88% market share,
and a claim about "> 90%" is outright wrong.

Please note that no other competitors were included in this count.

2) _What's wrong with the price comparison?_

"Jobs compared the most expensive Android tablet -- the XOOM --against the
iPad. ... The XOOM's are simply better. It has (expandable) 32GB of storage
built in and 3G built in ... XOOM has a much better, bigger 720P+ screen ...
Then, add far superior cameras (w/flash), stereo speakers (iPad 2 has one), 4G
and a micro-USB/SD Card reader", plus (possibly) more RAM.

One pays more for XOOM, but one gets more (EDIT - in terms of components. I'm
not saying XOOMs have better design/software/etc) as well. Jobs compares
prices for devices with different specs.

~~~
tedunangst
2 million Tabs is the number shipped to stores, not sold to consumers.

[http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2011/01/31/samsung-galaxy-tab-
sa...](http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2011/01/31/samsung-galaxy-tab-sales-
actually-quite-small/)

No real number given, but anything under 1.6 million makes 90% feasible.

~~~
Kylekramer
Apple reports the same shipped to stores numbers. Why not compare them?

~~~
rbarooah
The Tabs weren't sold - Samsung said so.

The iPads were sold and are no longer available.

That's why.

(source:
[http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/02/28/backs.quick.se...](http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/02/28/backs.quick.second.gen.ipad.launch/)
)

------
Bud
It's a bit hard to take CNN seriously as a tech commentator, frankly. They
published this today:

[http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/gaming.gadgets/03/03/missing.fr...](http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/gaming.gadgets/03/03/missing.from.ipad2.taylor/index.html?hpt=C2)

I've rarely seen a tech article that was less useful or more silly.

~~~
corin_
Not sure why you chose to justify criticising CNN with a single article that
was written by a guest, who happens to actually work for Mashable.

I don't read CNN regularly so I won't argue for or against CNN's tech
coverage, but if you want to argue against it you should try a little harder.

~~~
Bud
I think the article referenced in the current thread makes for a pretty good
second data point.

The author tries to pretend that sales "into the channel" are real sales (they
aren't, of course). He pretends that all RAM is equal and directly comparable
(on-die RAM is clearly superior). He pretends that megapixels in cameras that
are a few mm in size is a hugely important measurement of camera quality (it's
not). He pretends that the Nook and Kindle are at all comparable to the iPad
or even in the same product category (they manifestly aren't). He pretends
that all dual-core CPUs are equivalent (which is laughable).

I can't remember the last CNN tech article that I found to be insightful or
informative. By contrast, I read a few dozen things via Hacker News daily that
pass muster.

------
michaelpinto
How come Fortune didn't predict the 2008 bubble? Isn't that a much worse
reality distortion field that hurt too many people...

------
casschin
At the end of the day, none of Jobs' points or of Weintraub's rebuttals have
any bearing on how the quality of the product. It's really just a bunch of
bickering. I just want to see the new gadgets and what they're capable of, not
how much one company can one-up each other.

------
aufreak3
Look at SJ's talk as "entertainment" .. which is what practically _all_ of
Apple's products are about :)

Rgd Samsung tabs, I believe the writer's choice of "last quarter" itself shows
bias, 'cos the debate on what "smooth" means seems to be about post-Christmas
sales. It is indeed a vague word which can be interpreted as "slow" in
comparison to "faster than expected". Bottom line is that we don't know what
the sales figures are with any degree of accuracy if Samsung can say "2
million sold" .. and later on add quietly "to retailers".

The real bottom line is, do you care about these numbers when making your
decision to get one of these things?

------
ryanisinallofus
Isn't this just called marketing?

------
AbyCodes
"To the author:

You have been warned. Take down this article based on lies or else we will sue
you. You have 24 hours to comply.

Sincerely, Apple Customer Relations Posted By Apple CR, Cupertino, CA: March
7, 2011 5:41 PM "

fanbois are always entertaining.

Those comments there are the bread and butter of this article. I am pretty
sure that, even lolcats won't hold a candle against those commenters.

------
pdaviesa
You actually expect any company representative to be truthful in what
essentially amounts to a sales presentation? The naivety in these comments is
astonishing - I mean, it's not like Jobs works for a non-profit doing
humanitarian work in third world countries. I'm not saying it's right but this
is the world we live in.

------
gaiusparx
I'm not sure why an article to rant about a common marketing practice?
Earnings call bashing Android, Google IO attacks Apple, so on and on. Is Steve
reaching the status of a saint and not allow to bash?

------
mreine
When will steve jobs just die already so apple can go out of business.

------
johnyqi
It's not important what is a fact, it's important whether masses will believe
him. An they will. Period. Steve Jobs is marketing expert and showman of the
century plus he produced few most revolutionary products in the world. Nobody
really cares whether he gets his facts right because they are completely
irrelevant for majority of people. He does what it takes to sell it and it
works. When it comes to stretching the truth I don't think any company out
there is clean but we only notice those things with top ones.

------
nachteilig
When did CNN start hiring Dvorak-style Apple trolls to generate traffic?

------
mreine
die steve, just die already.

------
shareme
SO when will the FTC catch Apple in the Truth IN Advertising
gaffle..[sarcasm]..

You see keynotes are not covered by FTC truth in advertising but if I was an
Apple stockholder right now I would be worried about all that fibbing by Steve
Jobs.

------
martythemaniak
Well, there wasn't too much to talk about other than these lies. "We got the
iPad2. Same hardware you saw at CES, same OS you saw last year. Have a good
day everybody"

~~~
rbarooah
The iPad 2 hardware was shown at CES?

------
runjake
Link bait.

I'm tempted to label the author a "socialist", keeping with recent trends.
Apple markets well. Other people market and make similar claims. Your soap,
your window cleaner, your vitamins, your TV set. It's the nature of our
culture, our marketing, and our capitalism.

Why is this a me vs. you thing? Corporations selling Android devices do it,
too.

Check out any Android-based "4G" device on AT&T: 1) virtually no one actually
has "4G" coverage, and upload speeds are HORRIBLE on 3G (allegedly because
AT&T or the OEMs decided to disable HSUPA on these devices for god knows what
reason).

Why must Apple always be called out like this? Because they do it so much
better than their competitors. If you don't like this, I urge you not to buy
their products.

~~~
burgerbrain
_"I'm tempted to label the author a "socialist""_

And you really tempt me to label _you_ something _actually_ derogatory. The
50s called, they want you back.

~~~
runjake
Uhm, are you serious? It's tongue-in-cheek, hence the "keep with trends" quip.

