New Apple Lust Objects for 2010 and onward

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (16745 of them)

caek do you think this has big ramifications for apple ~at large~ beyond being interesting to apple-watchers? I get that they have a very recognisably distinct way of dealing with press and pr but that's always struck me as more corporate culture than an autocratic head of pr. Does her leaving change much?

sktsh, Thursday, 8 May 2014 18:41 (twelve years ago)

Both Bens are awful post-MBA types who seem to miss why anybody would actually care (or get excited) about tech.

Fine if you're an FT reader but even then they're just Rob Enderles who say things the Grubes of the world agree with.

stet, Thursday, 8 May 2014 18:43 (twelve years ago)

http://time.com/91918/apple-hdtv/

socki (s1ocki), Thursday, 8 May 2014 19:08 (twelve years ago)

i think this is worth paying attention (the pr thing) just because people, esp apple detractors, are always going on and on about how apple's success is alllll about how good they are at marketing and PR and nothing else. so if you believe that, it holds that the departure of their pr chief is notable.

socki (s1ocki), Thursday, 8 May 2014 19:09 (twelve years ago)

totes

mainly i'm just reacting badly to gruber writing the "The times, they are a-changin’.", sitting back and thinking "nailed it", as though it had some explanatory power.

caek, Thursday, 8 May 2014 20:02 (twelve years ago)

http://valleywag.gawker.com/goodbye-to-katie-cotton-the-queen-of-evil-tech-pr-1573505515

D:

a strange man (mh), Thursday, 8 May 2014 20:32 (twelve years ago)

She was the very best at her job, as proved by all the journohacks who gladly sucked on her tit of lies and spin, from their elite imperial guard—Goldman, Gruber, Moss, Pogue, Swisher, etc.—to the countless clone stormtroopers populating the web. An army of hacks commanded by a ruthless pair.

a strange man (mh), Thursday, 8 May 2014 20:33 (twelve years ago)

Anyone else get the impression that the "tech journalists to pay attention to" re: Apple are basically their second-party PR department? Like their official in-house policy was to deny everything and then give "tips" to friendly writers who say nothing but good things or temper negative things with nuance that still paints Apple well?

hell, for all I know, they spread rumors of different products they might be working on through those channels and check public sentiment on those stories to decide what to actually bring to market

a strange man (mh), Thursday, 8 May 2014 20:38 (twelve years ago)

I think any "public sentiment" you could glean from the people who read those same friendly writers would be way off base compared to the market as a whole. Imagine what Apple would really be doing if they catered to the daring fireball t-shirt brigade.

fields of salmon, Thursday, 8 May 2014 20:40 (twelve years ago)

they don't need to! they have gruber.

a strange man (mh), Thursday, 8 May 2014 20:42 (twelve years ago)

in the c4news video embedded in that valleywag piece, the other apple pr is the most uncanny malcolm tucker clone

mainly i'm just reacting badly to gruber writing the "The times, they are a-changin’.", sitting back and thinking "nailed it", as though it had some explanatory power.

lol

sktsh, Thursday, 8 May 2014 21:34 (twelve years ago)

Apple's PR team does the least of any PR team in the world and could be replaced by a voicemail that says, "No comment" and "the suicides at the factory are down this month."

anonanon, Thursday, 8 May 2014 21:40 (twelve years ago)

why the fuck would Apple buy *Beats*?

stet, Thursday, 8 May 2014 22:24 (twelve years ago)

that actually makes sense, beats is wildly popular and successful for some reason

Nhex, Thursday, 8 May 2014 22:28 (twelve years ago)

Yeah but there's no technology there so they'd basically just be buying the brand. Which you'd think was the one area Apple wasn't lacking, no?

stet, Thursday, 8 May 2014 22:35 (twelve years ago)

Wow this is gonna be a shit acquisition

, Thursday, 8 May 2014 23:01 (twelve years ago)

thanks for calling me and telling me this was happening

markers, Thursday, 8 May 2014 23:15 (twelve years ago)

Yeah but there's no technology there so they'd basically just be buying the brand. Which you'd think was the one area Apple wasn't lacking, no?

― stet, Thursday, May 8, 2014 6:35 PM

they make headphones and streaming software. insert "apple" and "beats" for "they."

markers, Thursday, 8 May 2014 23:15 (twelve years ago)

which means:

why the fuck would Apple buy *Beats*?

― stet, Thursday, May 8, 2014 6:24 PM

basically

markers, Thursday, 8 May 2014 23:16 (twelve years ago)

like, do you need them in order to get streaming rights? i thought you already had streaming software working. and i thought you already sold a million headphones to people with iphones and ipods.

markers, Thursday, 8 May 2014 23:16 (twelve years ago)

https://twitter.com/PedroPithan/status/464532092035301376

markers, Thursday, 8 May 2014 23:17 (twelve years ago)

Wow this is gonna be a shit acquisition

― 龜, Thursday, May 8, 2014 7:01 PM

can you come on my podcast and say this?

markers, Thursday, 8 May 2014 23:19 (twelve years ago)

i don't have a podcast

markers, Thursday, 8 May 2014 23:19 (twelve years ago)

but if it did i'd invite dayo on just to say that

markers, Thursday, 8 May 2014 23:19 (twelve years ago)

brb tweeting 2 do

markers, Thursday, 8 May 2014 23:20 (twelve years ago)

that actually makes sense, beats is wildly popular and successful for some reason

the headphones are successful. I think the streaming has been a big flop, no?

dan selzer, Thursday, 8 May 2014 23:34 (twelve years ago)

it's a flop but it's not half bad and would be a good fit w/iTunes Store IMO. The curated stuff on their service is decent.

beats headphones just make me sad, though

a strange man (mh), Thursday, 8 May 2014 23:59 (twelve years ago)

Ah. Already forgot about the streaming service. But if Apple hasn't been working on their own streaming service, that's pretty alarming!

schwantz, Friday, 9 May 2014 00:17 (twelve years ago)

iTunes Radio already exists, it just is inconsequential

a strange man (mh), Friday, 9 May 2014 00:19 (twelve years ago)

no, i think i've read that they have

markers, Friday, 9 May 2014 00:21 (twelve years ago)

i got the impression somewhere

markers, Friday, 9 May 2014 00:21 (twelve years ago)

not just itunes radio

markers, Friday, 9 May 2014 00:21 (twelve years ago)

anyway, this doesn't make sense to me

markers, Friday, 9 May 2014 00:21 (twelve years ago)

I mean, it can't be for the HEADPHONES!

schwantz, Friday, 9 May 2014 00:24 (twelve years ago)

You can stream purchased music to your Apple TV

a strange man (mh), Friday, 9 May 2014 00:46 (twelve years ago)

i think this whole thing is just to troll markers

socki (s1ocki), Friday, 9 May 2014 03:32 (twelve years ago)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaxZ8XsN0xo

markers, Friday, 9 May 2014 15:43 (twelve years ago)

Their headphones must have a huge profit margin, because everything I've read on them says the audio is crap.

mohawk ororoducer (abanana), Saturday, 10 May 2014 11:46 (twelve years ago)

Maybe Apple just like crap headphones?

Chewshabadoo, Saturday, 10 May 2014 12:07 (twelve years ago)

Somewhere I read that beats cost $14 to make. What a business!

Jeff, Saturday, 10 May 2014 12:51 (twelve years ago)

I would wager most headphones around what Beats sell for cost $14 or less to make

, Saturday, 10 May 2014 12:54 (twelve years ago)

Beats sound like shit not because they're made from cheap materials (in fact all that injection molded polycarbonate w/e probably costs more than their competitors), it's because they're tuned to sound like shit

Not the first time Apple has fallen in love with bad audio

You can still find a BOSE directly across from every Apple store in existence

, Saturday, 10 May 2014 12:56 (twelve years ago)

their earbuds really should have been better.

markers, Saturday, 10 May 2014 13:23 (twelve years ago)

Pro tip: The $70 Apple In-Ear Buds with Dual Drivers are actually really good

, Saturday, 10 May 2014 13:28 (twelve years ago)

too much money for me to spend on that. although i did buy sennheiser's once and sold them on amazon a year or so later

markers, Saturday, 10 May 2014 13:34 (twelve years ago)

i don't care about headphones. i'm wearing $30 sony things right now that are good enough.

markers, Saturday, 10 May 2014 13:35 (twelve years ago)

No they're not

, Saturday, 10 May 2014 13:35 (twelve years ago)

still, if apple wants their products to be "the best," i don't think their headphones have to be, but they should at least be really good for what they are, and at least the old ones weren't. i haven't tried the "new" earpods fwiw

markers, Saturday, 10 May 2014 13:36 (twelve years ago)

No they're not

― 龜, Saturday, May 10, 2014 9:35 AM

this is stupid.

markers, Saturday, 10 May 2014 13:36 (twelve years ago)

i don't give a shit what you think about my headphones! they work for me!

markers, Saturday, 10 May 2014 13:36 (twelve years ago)


This thread has been locked by an administrator

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.