Apple Censors Consumer Report iPhone4 Discussions

An anonymous reader writes "Apple has done it again. All threads about Consumer Report's iPhone4 non-recommendation are removed or deleted. If it happened once, maybe you'd say it was a glitch. But what if it happened twice? Three times? Four times, five, six?"

Comments

Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[eldavojohn]

If it happened once, maybe you'd say it was a glitch. But what if it happened twice? Three times? Four times, five, six?

Keep it up until your 32,768th post when they'll regret using a signed short int for the NUM_POSTS_CENSORED value in your forum profile.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Haffner]

Am I the only one who immediately thought of the Season 5 finale of The Office when Dwight asks "How many people need to get hurt before we learn a lesson?" (or something) "One? Two? Three?" "Dwight..." "No, let me finish. Four? Five? Six?"

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[biryokumaru]

If someone says something, and you remove it, that's censorship. I'm not saying Apple isn't within their rights to censor their own website, but there's no question that it is censorship.

Think different indeed.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[localman57]

I'm pretty sure there is a clause allowing them to "moderate" according to whatever values they want.

So it's like 4chan then?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[tomhudson]

I mean, it sounds reasonable to prevent my angry customers from displaying all their filth on the front of my shop doesn't it?

Try it some time. I picketed a computer store that took a $300 deposit on a $3,000 computer, with a promised delivery date, missed the date, then admitted they couldn't deliver it and wanted to make substitutions, and wouldn't refund the money. I handed out flyers to every customer who walked in the door. They called the cops. I told the cops I was exercising my constitutional right to free speech and wasn't impeding people from entering or exiting. They called their supervisor - who turned out to have had a similar bad experience with that store. Got the refund within the hour.

Moral of the story - don't treat your customers like filth and they won't have cause to display YOUR filth in front of your store.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[C_Kode]

So... I don't want to sound like an Apple fanboy, but nobody ever said that the Apple forums on Apple's website are a place of free speech, right? I haven't read the terms & conditions of course, but I'm pretty sure there is a clause allowing them to "moderate" according to whatever values they want. AFAIK, they don't censor all the forums on the web...

So how is this censorship?

I mean, it sounds reasonable to prevent my angry customers from displaying all their filth on the front of my shop doesn't it?

Also, I don't get the class actions lawsuits... You buy a product. It's crap. Now you sue the manufacturer? Where are we going with this? Can I sue the national lottery for not having won with the ticket they sold me?

In my world: You buy a product. It's crap. You get a refund and don't buy again from the company.

Maybe it's me....

You may not want to sound like a fanboy, but you are laying it on pretty thick.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Pieroxy]

So if someone draws "motherf*cker" on your car and you are getting it removed, it is censorship? Don't you think your definition is a bit broad?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[maxwell demon]

I mean, it sounds reasonable to prevent my angry customers from displaying all their filth on the front of my shop doesn't it?

Well, if you don't want that, just make sure that your customers are not angry at your products. Or don't offer a forum. Or write explicitly that the forum is for fanbois only.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Loadmaster]

Just because Apple is allowed to censor the forums doesn't mean when they do it it's not censorship. It just means you knew they could do it. I don't think the argument here is that they couldn't do it, but that they shouldn't do it.

Angry customers are free to picket and protest in front of your shop.

Class action lawsuits are more involved than just "my product is crap." Usually it's a situation where you cannot return the product. For example, the possible class action against Sony for removing 3rd party OS capability from the PS3. How many of them can return the unit? Few. So you get all of the users who cannot return their product but have lost value due to Sony's removal and sue for compensation.

Your lottery example is easily distinguishable, because you have no expectation to win with the lottery but you do have the expectation that your product will work.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[poetmatt]

its apple avoiding people from seeing facts.

It's not about apple's apt censorship of free speech, it's that taking such actions are entirely unethical and wholly inappropriate.

This would be like saying "hey, your car is prone to blowing up, but you don't need to know about that. come buy it!".

It'd actually do them better on their reputation to allow there to be a thread on it.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Pieroxy]

But I guess it would have been their right to remove a flyer you would have stuck in the inside of the shop door, doesn't it? Your example works backwards it seems.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Low Ranked Craig]

censorship != first amendment.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Pieroxy]

They are stupid from doing it, that is for sure. What I don't get is people complaining and shouting and whining, when the most sensible thing to do is to get the phone back and get a refund.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[urulokion]

You're right in that Apple is free to moderate their boards however they wish. But you are missing the point. Image is very important to Apple. They are trying to keep "the Image" intact. But ultimately Apple is tarnishing "the Image". They are trying to control information in a very Orwellian way (i.e. "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength."). And what makes it very damning and hugely ironic, is that Apple is turning into the very thing they fought against in their very first Macintosh Commercial.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Pieroxy]

Note that I think the most sensible thing to do here is to get the phone back and get a refund. If the phone is crap it's the appropriate thing to do. If it's not crap, you keep it and live happily... But why all the fuss?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[A. B3ttik]

Plenty of posts on the issue are still up. My guess is that they simply removed a bunch of redundant or obscene threads, which I see nothing wrong with.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[betterunixthanunix]

That depends on the circumstances. If you invite people to draw on your car, then restrict what they are allowed to draw, then yes, it is censorship. Apple runs a forum for its users, but removes critical threads from that forum -- how that is anything but censorship is a mystery to me.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[cgenman]

I've seen this happen with products that I've worked on too, and it's always a hard line to toe. The non-smarmy thing to do would be to make a single major thread that you start by posting a company position statement to. Then force all discussion about that topic into that thread. That way you keep the board from becoming all about this one non-flattering statement, and the company gets to frame the discussion for new readers, but you also don't Streisand the topic or anger your regular users.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[rotide]

It is most certainly broad if you can't distinguish between discussing a Consumer Report's report about a product on that products forums versus maliciously damaging someone's property.

Those two things are really quite different with the only correlation being writing down words on a medium. The distinction is the form, the intent, and the forum.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[jollyreaper]

So... I don't want to sound like an Apple fanboy, but nobody ever said that the Apple forums on Apple's website are a place of free speech, right? I haven't read the terms & conditions of course, but I'm pretty sure there is a clause allowing them to "moderate" according to whatever values they want. AFAIK, they don't censor all the forums on the web...

So how is this censorship?

It certainly fits one of the definitions of censorship. You end up in a tricky area. A restaurant can choose not to serve hard liquor or beer and wine. That's no problem, you can always go to another one that does. If the government prevents anyone from doing it, that's where you have a dry county. But it's not national prohibition, people just go to the next county over to get their beer. I think the whole dry county thing is silly but it is, strictly speaking to the letter of the law, legal.

Apple's actions are corporate censorship. Not illegal but simply awful PR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[C_Kode]

For some, it's too late. The iPhone 4 was released on June 7th. Apple didn't admit that a software patch wouldn't fix the iPhone until July 7th. You had 30 days to return the phone.

Lets face it, a lot of people love the iPhone enough to hold on and wait for this "software fix" that Jobs promised. Now, they are screwed.

What happens next? Yep, lawsuit.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Anonymous Coward]

No. Removing a curse is a form of censorship, but in this case, most likely acceptable. In the case of Apple purposely removing the Consumer Report references in order to 'Control the Message', this is a form of censorship intended to control the public perception of their company and products.

The stupidity of Apples recent activities while they are clearly under the spotlight is quite telling of a company that is not capable of controlling the message once real problems occur.

All good PR agencies would tell Apple to come clean with their issues, propose a solution and move one. But Apple somehow thinks they can control the message. They are simply creating more attention to their brand is hurting their company image.

This self-desctructive behavior of Apple (Steve Jobs?) is quite bizaar, but telling at the same time.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[osgeek]

Since the side of your car isn't a public forum, then I would term it "cleaning up vandalism".

Words are squishy things. PETA calls eating meat "murder". I had a very tasty pig murdered for my Cuban sandwich just yesterday. Strange, but I don't feel guilty about it.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[elrous0]

No, Apple users are way less mature.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[it0]

So if you remove grafitti you are censoring? I guess that's true, but I'm still in my right to repaint my walls.

We use censorship with our children is that bad?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[betterunixthanunix]

It's only censorship when the government does it.

Funny, my dictionary does not include the word "government" in its definition of "censorship."

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[causality]

So if someone draws "motherf*cker" on your car and you are getting it removed, it is censorship? Don't you think your definition is a bit broad?

That depends on whether his car was represented as a forum where one can post messages, complete with text boxes where one can type in a comment and click "Submit" or similar. I'm guessing his car doesn't fit that description, so no, that'd be the removal of vandalism, not the censorship of speech. It'd be easier to continue this discussion if you don't deliberately act obtuse.

Apple had something to hide and because it was their own site they were successfully able to remove it in an attempt to hide it. That's really all there is to this. If their Web site and/or customer service staff had attributes like grace, dignity, or self-respect then they would write a helpful and professionally-worded response to any customer complaints and criticisms instead of censoring them.

It's like that saying "if you want to see what sort of character a man has, look at how he treats his subordinates or other people he's not required to be nice to." Likewise, if you want to see how honest a company really is, look at how it handles dissent on a forum it controls. What a shame that Apple failed this one so badly. They could have used such discussion threads as an opportunity to show that they listen to their customers and use their feedback to improve their products. That would have been respectable. Instead we get this authoritarian "because we can" garbage in an attempt to cover something up.

It's disgraceful. I am not a customer of Apple but if I were considering doing business with them, this would have made me reconsider.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Pieroxy]

Mine does

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship

May not be the best dictionary though...

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[skelterjohn]

That's because the government had it taken out.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Missing.Matter]

The most sensible thing to do is both shout and return the product. If Apple doesn't know why people are returning their iPhones, iPhone 5 will have the same problems.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Pieroxy]

To be very honest, if they discovered the issue from the internet, it probably means it didn't harm them a lot, and they probably can live with the phone for another 11 month.

That said, I agree that there is a grey area where consumers can be inconvenienced.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[osgeek]

A bad car analogy strikes again! Seriously, poor reception when you touch part of the phone isn't in the same league as an exploding vehicle.

Apple will have to do something about it soon. They'll need to come clean, announce a fix/return policy, and get this behind them.

They'll want to take charge, though, and not let the support department's forum pages lead the way.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me put it another way.

Censorship is just a label. Fine, let's define it in such a way that it isn't censorship. You're right, it's their forum.

Now, if it isn't censorship, it's still a STUPID thing to do, given that the Consumer Reports results are well described in broader media reports, and the best way to handle it isn't to pretend or otherwise arrange things as if the report didn't exist. The best way to handle it is to address the report, period.

You'd think Apple would know enough about technology reporting and the Internet to know that invoking the Streisand effect would be a bad move. As the article linked in the summary points out, now they have two PR problems instead of one.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[DJRumpy]

I don't think the parents post is a Troll. It is a valid point. He owns his car, and can control what is 'posted' on it. Granted there is more public interest in the Apple issue, but the basics are the same. They own the site, and moderate the content. In the above example, no one would ever claim someone was censoring for removing an expletive from the side of their car. It's not like someone can't Google "iPhone 4 Antenna" and get thousands of differing opinions that match what they are looking for.

Apple is big, but not that big. They don't control every blog on the internet. They are refusing to leave such posts on their own forums, which is perfectly within their right. If I was a stockholder in that company, I would expect such action to be taken.

Personally, I find the whole antenna debacle a bit silly. Everyone I know buys cases for these things. They did it for the first gen, and have done so for every phone that's out. it's more rare to see one in it's bare form. I liken this to Windows and Virus Scanners. Although you could buy it and run it without it (and it's certainly not included in the OS), no one does. It's just not that big of a deal. Without the cover, I still can't get mine to drop more than two bars, and hasn't dropped a single call (I've had it since the 16th of last month, so almost a full calendar month).

Hell, even consumer reports, although they said they couldn't recommend it unless Apple provided a free workaround for the antenna issue, still rated it as the highest ranked and best smart phone available. The hysteria around this has gotten ridiculous.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/07/13/consumer_reports_ranks_apples_iphone_4_best_smartphone_available.html

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Mongoose Disciple]

I agree as long as that person has innocent intent. Consumer Reports clearly created this article to sell copies rather than push factual information. Also, the reality is that a good amount of this type of "information" that was on the newsgroups was being put there by marketing firms who are being paid to push a certain agenda. The article "Is the Iphone 4 Apple's Vista" comes to mind here...

Lets cut to the chase... If Apple is so concerned about negative information on the iPhone 4, do you honestly think that there would be a 3 week lead time on shipping the of the phone? No, they would not. Also, the antenna issue is completely overblown, and I am sure Consumer Reports knows this internally...

Wow that must be great Kool-Aid. Clearly, a review that essentially says "We love this phone, but we can't recommend it until Apple fixes it so it can actually make phone calls." can only be a slanted hack-job to drive up circulation. Other than that one important detail, they all but gush over the greatness of the iPhone4. At this point, can you even remember what it was like to have a relationship with reality?

Cue the obligatory Penny Arcade "I'm the guy who gives hand jobs to Steve Jobs" strip. Seriously.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[selven]

Just as freedom of speech protects the content on the speech but not the means of delivery (eg. throwing a brick with a message into a window is not protected speech), censorship is removing speech because of the content and not because of the means of delivery. For example:

-slashdot.org closing itself down would not be censorship, since the removal is done because hosting is getting too expensive, something which is inherent in the act of posting messages on the internet.
-You cleaning your car is not censorship - your intent is to remove the paint, not the message (you'd still do it if someone wrote something neutral, eg. the word "banana", on your car). This is more murky than the previous example, since having "motherf*cker" on your car is more unpleasant than "banana" but it's leaning more on the "not censorship" side.
-Apple removing all posts about a specific topic is censorship - it's about the content.

This is my definition, not the Webster dictionary one, so feel free to disagree.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Spazmania]

Not questioning your mad skillz but it would probably have been cheaper and easier to send a certified mail demanding the refund in 7 days with a copy of the filled out (but unsigned) small-claims warrant in debt form.

http://www.courts.state.va.us/forms/district/dc402.pdf

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Anonymous Coward]

In the Wiki article you cited:

Corporate censorship is the process by which editors in corporate media outlets intervene to disrupt the publishing of information that portrays their business or business partners in a negative light.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[hipp5]

But I guess it would have been their right to remove a flyer you would have stuck in the inside of the shop door, doesn't it? Your example works backwards it seems.

And therin lies the nub of the issue. Apple certainly has no right to stop the Consumer Report from being published, just as the computer store couldn't stop the other poster from handing out flyers. However, I imagine Apple is well within their bounds to remove posts about the topic on THEIR forums, just as they could remove posts about porn or hacking or racism, or just as they could remove unwated flyers from their physical store. Whether they should exercise this power is another matter entirely. Methinks the damage done by this move outweighs the damage of allowing the posts to contine.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[ckaminski]

I don't think they're in the wrong here. I'd be willing to bet 50% of more of the posters there were on the forums simply to troll Apple - they're not offering anything constructive, and we all know better than to feed trolls. Look at this article as an example of the bashing I bet Apple was taking. Of course you try to control the message - not every phone is defective - they're offering to take them back no charge - why continue to bash them? Publicly? On their own forums?

Microsoft controls the message, IBM controls the message, hell, even Slashdot controls the message to a degree. How many people ever browse at -1, even the moderators?

But Apple gets called out on it. Good grief.

Hey, maybe I am turning into a fanboi...

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Runaway1956]

Censorship is censorship. It hardly matters WHY they are censoring. After all, redundancy and obscenity both help to get a point across, when the recipient of the point is being intentionally obtuse.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[djrobxx]

It's a support forum. How does Consumer Reports' article contribute to supporting existing customers? Do you guys really think CR's duct tape solution is so ingenious that poor helpless Apple victims are missing out on a vital solution? There's already plenty of discussion about iPhone 4's antenna problems. And there are plenty of other places to discuss Consumer Reports' thoughts on AntennaGate. Whining about censorship is weak on when it comes to privately owned internet forums. It's almost as bad as invoking Godwin's law.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[pgmrdlm]

In my world: You buy a product. It's crap. You get a refund and don't buy again from the company.

Here you go, you really should have provided a link to prove that apple will do a return on the iCrap. Ug, I mean iPhone http://www.intomobile.com/2010/07/05/apple-waiving-10-restocking-fee-for-returned-iphones/

One tiny detail we overlooked in Apple’s last statement confirming the iPhone 4/iOS 4 reception problem was “if you are not fully satisfied, you can return your undamaged iPhone to any Apple Retail Store or the online Apple Store within 30 days of purchase for a full refund.” Apparently this includes a change where Apple Stores won’t charge the usual 10% restocking fee, in this case $19.90 for the 16 GB iPhone 4 and $29.90 for the 32 GB version.

I hate apple, but that just answered a question for me about apple consumers along with the company itself.

The company is honoring its return policy.

Only an apple zombie would keep a defective product when they could return it for a full refund. Are people really this stupid? Seriously, are they?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[dunkelfalke]

If you want to get anything done in this country you've got to complain 'til you're blue in the mouth.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[phonewebcam]

Everyone is now waiting for the iPhone 5 but they should be happy the iPhone4 still runs its most popular apps just as well as before.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[commodore64_love]

>>>So if someone draws "motherf*cker" on your car and you are getting it removed, it is censorship?

Of course it is.

I'm pretty tyrannical when it comes to my own property.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[langelgjm]

It's only censorship when the government does it.

No, it's only government censorship when the government does it.

There are plenty of other kinds of censorship, but whether they are appropriate and our reaction to them varies with who or what is involved. Ever heard of self-censorship? Or the Index Librorum Prohibitorum?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[binkzz]

It's only censorship when the government does it.

Funny, my dictionary does not include the word "government" in its definition of "censorship."

That's because your copy was "censored" by the "government. Think about it.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[commodore64_love]

>>>I had a very tasty pig murdered for my Cuban sandwich just yesterday. Strange, but I don't feel guilty about it.

I executed some wheat, sugar cane, and coconuts, and baked their carcasses into a donut. I don't feel guilty about murdering these things either. It's either eat or die.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[dirtyhippie]

I RTFBingCache of the removed posts, and there was nothing useful there. Yes, it pointed to the consumer reports article, but after that there was nothing but trolling.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[localman57]

I don't know about where you live, but here our small claims courts are not that useful. You file a case, the respondant doesn't show up, and you get a default judgement. Now what? They have a long time to pay up, and after they don't, you have to start a collection action. Getting the judgement is easy. Getting the money is hard.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[j_rhoden]

"It's only censorship when the government does it."

No, it's only illegal censorship when the government does it. Everyone else can do it as well. However, just because it isn't illegal when a private company does it doesn't make it the right thing to do.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Pieroxy]

Are people really this stupid? Seriously, are they?

It sure looks like it. Now we have class actions, because apparently you can sue a company because their product is bad. Even if the company will give a free return options to its customers. The world is more dangerous every day...

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[commodore64_love]

>>>Consumer Reports clearly created this article to sell copies rather than push factual information.

Alex Jones is that you?

Put down the weed, we don't need any more conspiracy theories. Given CR's almost 100 year history, I don't think they deliberately slam or promote products just to sell magazines. They examine products and give them a fair review, both pros and cons. Only a Fanboi in love with an inanimate object would be so stupid as to malign a respected magazine like Consumer Reports
.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[kg8484]

Apple has no right to censor people for speaking their minds under these circumstances.

Actually, it is well within it's rights to censor people posting on its bulletin board. Now, if Apple tries to get a restraining order against Consumer Reports or against people posting on Slashdot, then no, it is not within its rights. Again, I repeat, Apple is 100% within its rights to censor people posting on its forum. Doesn't mean it isn't unfair in some way, but still within it's rights.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[MaskedSlacker]

Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Wiktionary is.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[LordPhantom]

That's obviously because they censored it.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[commodore64_love]

An even easier approach (and cheaper) is to file a credit card complaint. Item was charged but never delivered. That's a violation of the store's contract with the credit company, and the funds will be sucked out of their account, and put back into yours.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[BrokenHalo]

Yes, it pointed to the consumer reports article, but after that there was nothing but trolling.

I guess the Consumer Reports article said all that needed to be said. There's no useful response to be made, and that includes the outraged howls of all the fanboys.

If Apple really can't stand people poking fun at them when they screw up, perhaps they should stop being so fucking secretive and start doing some proper testing in the real world.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[commodore64_love]

>>>Apple didn't admit that a software patch wouldn't fix the iPhone until July 7th

When did this happen? I thought Apple was saying the software fix would change the signal meter and make everything perfect?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[sjonke]

Ok, but how about this one: what if there are lots of CR article threads in the Apple Discussion forums, some quite lengthy and utterly unmissable by allegedly censoring forum mods? Is that not censorship? No... wait... I mean is that not the blog effect going wild again?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[BrokenHalo]

Is a Cuban pig as good as a Cuban cigar?

It might be, but it's too hard to light...

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Loopy]

Regardless of your other op-ed, you obviously have no first-hand experience with the nature of the iP4's antenna problem. Until you do and actually understand the root cause, you really should refrain from making yourself look like a partisan hack (and an ignorant one at that).

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Score Whore]

How about slashdot removing NGAA posts? Is that censorship? If not, why not, and why don't those same criteria apply to Apple.

The fact is Apple doesn't maintain a free and open public forum. They have forums where people can discuss Apple products, ask for help, etc. They have policies to keep things civil and relatively organized. In order to facilitate the discussion, it's beneficial for them to trim threads that get out of hand. There are currently threads there discussing the CR article. Just because some putz' rant is deleted because he opened a new thread on the same topic -- instead of posting in the existing thread -- that's not censorship.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[sexconker]

I browse at -1, with all the settings set to show as much shit as possible, and there's still 9 posts hidden on this page that I need to manually click on.

The "trolls" are the most entertaining part of slashdot.
They're usually the most informative, insightful, etc. too.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[hahn]

You're right in that Apple is free to moderate their boards however they wish. But you are missing the point. Image is very important to Apple. They are trying to keep "the Image" intact. But ultimately Apple is tarnishing "the Image". They are trying to control information in a very Orwellian way (i.e. "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength."). And what makes it very damning and hugely ironic, is that Apple is turning into the very thing they fought against in their very first Macintosh Commercial.

Well, if you also read the other Orwell story, Animal Farm, it's not really all that ironic. In fact, with their huge increase in wealth and power, it was probably inevitable.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Me! Me! 42]

It is after all a "support site," not a "chat site."
It looks like there are lots of thoughtful discussions about the antenna issue, just no whining, which Apple has always deleted. Whining does not advance the support/trouble shooting goal of thew site.
Also CU does not let you see their full results unless you pay them (since they do not take advertising to remove any direct conflict of interest.)
Does this control of access to their site mean CU is "censoring" their site? I don't think so. Neither is Apple.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Mongoose Disciple]

Only an apple zombie would keep a defective product when they could return it for a full refund. Are people really this stupid? Seriously, are they?

Not to defend the Apple Zombie mindset, but I figure for many people who bought an iPhone 4 and aren't happy with it, the situation is:

- They previously owned an earlier generation iPhone.

- They got rid of that phone for their iPhone 4.

- They are unwilling to consider a phone that is not an iPhone. (Hey, it's got the WiFis. And probably they're already invested in iPhone apps.)

If you take all of these things to be true for a given person, is it more rational to keep their iPhone 4 and pray that Apple makes it all right some day, or enter a new 2 year contract on a 'new' older model iPhone?

So... yeah. In a sense, yes, you can just return the phone, but you can't necessarily undo what amounts to the full transaction that involved dumping your previous phone.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

We already determined that. NOBODY here has said that what Apple did wasn't within its rights. We didn't say they have broken any law, or stepped into anyones rights.

We said they censored, and other people cam saying "That's not censorship because it is their own website" and providing ridiculous examples like "If someone draws on your car and you remove it, is it censorship too?".

Censorship is any selective restriction of what you can say on a certain medium. Selective is the key there. If I invite everyone to write on my car, that's not censorship. If I don't want anyone writing on my car, and I forbid car-writing on cars I won, that's not censorship either. If I invite people to write on my car, then I delete all of those things and paint it over, it is not censorship. If I invite people to write on my car freely, and then selectively erase some of the stuff written to leave only the stuff I agree with, that's censorship.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Compaqt]

The reason people seem to be arguing in circles is that we've been told again and again that censorship is bad. Since a large number of Slashdotters don't want to call Apple bad, they don't want to call deleting posts censorship.

The thing is, it's plain as day that Apple is censoring posts. The real question is: Is this instance of censorship good or bad?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[pizzach]

People tend to only use the word censorship on the Internet when they are pissed off at a moderator. I sometimes feel sorry for them when they have to do the work that everybody hates.

This thread is closed as it was turning into a flamewar.. Censorship.

This post was deleted for inappropriate language. Censorship.

This post is off topic and has been moved to a board that is not searchable. Censorship.

People break the forum EULA not to talk about copying DVDs, ROM hacking, and other illegals. Censorship.

Slashdot has -1 disagree that people use to hide comments that they can't rate as wrong,flamebait, troll or be bothered to reply to. Censorship.

I could very well see people writing unhelpful complaints about the iPhone who are not actually seeking help at all.

I could see people trolling because they are so happy with their Blackberry that lets them to X, Y and Z while the iPhone locks them into the evil Apple empire where everybody are only drones. They don't want an over priced bumper or any of the other hippy shit. It's more fun just talking shit and getting the fanboiz riled.

Honestly, I could see that as being the case for a number of the posts. As in real life, you can complain about things (and you have the right to), but at a certain point a store will kick you out for disturbing everybody else. Censorship.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Demonantis]

The image in the post from 1984 should definitely be the new apple picture for /.. They have every right to do what they are doing. I just can't comprehend how it doesn't hurt their image.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[dcollins]

"It's only censorship when the government does it."

Common mistake. Here's the argument that you're trying to have:

Party A: "Apple is violating my 1st Amendment rights by censoring me!" Party B: "The 1st Amendment only protects you from government censorship, not censorship by Apple."

Anyone can engage in censorship, not just the government. For example, all television networks have staff positions referred to as "network censors".

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

How about slashdot removing GNAA posts? Is that censorship?

Yes, that would be censorship too.

Except that /. doesn't remove GNAA posts, or any other post. Posts can be modded up or down. They are still there, and you can still see them.

Also, it is the /. population that collectively and democratically mods down GNAA posts, and not some censor with an agenda to push.

Slashdot sucks sometimes, and we have a lot to say about the editors, but there is certainly no censorship in here. All submitted stories are right there in the firehose, you can comment on all of them, and no comments, GNAA or otherwise, ever get deleted.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[pgmrdlm]

ok, I hate to say it. But there is logic to what your saying.

Myself, I refuse to tie my self to any product that closely that I no longer have a choice. I find it interesting that I can think of no other product, other then windows, where a person is tied so tightly to the product they find it difficult to go to another product.

And probably they're already invested in iPhone apps.)

I do not have the numbers to back up this statement, so it is only an assumption. But based on the postings I have seen here and on other forums, I believe most iPhone owners also own other iProducts. Is it possible to transfer these apps to the other products.

I know when I owned(won it) an iPod Touch, all the apps would work on the iPhone. Then I gave the iPod to my daughter because I hate iTunes.

Good point though.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[causality]

To be very honest, if they discovered the issue from the internet, it probably means it didn't harm them a lot, and they probably can live with the phone for another 11 month.

You really missed the point on that one. The purpose of talking about it on the Internet is so that potential buyers can learn all about what they might be buying before a purchasing decision is made. That's why you have organizations like Consumer Reports. The reference to CU on Apple's own forums was for those who like to rush into things (i.e. making an 11-12 month commitment without really knowing the pros and cons of what they are buying) and have already been inconvenienced. For those people, it served both to validate the existence of the problem and to propose a temporary workaround.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[vk2]

UBG - http://www.davecarrollmusic.com/ubg/story/

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Jurily]

Apple is 100% within its rights to censor people posting on its forum. Doesn't mean it isn't unfair in some way, but still within it's rights.

That's not censorship, that's deciding what content you want to have on your website. Did they promise to leave every post as is, like Slashdot does?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[kg8484]

NOBODY here has said that what Apple did wasn't within its rights.

Actually, I replied to and quoted someone who did say that. And I understand the censorship issue; I agree, Apple is censoring people, but I didn't reply to you, I replied to another jackhole.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[selven]

I'd put it in the "bad, but should not be illegal" category.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Fusen]

But every example you pointed out is a form of censorship. However broad the definition is, fundamentally it's censorship. I think the issue here is that everyone seems to assume 'censorship' is a bad thing. I have no problem with moderators removing spammy posts that go against the forum rules. Just because you bring in the C word doesn't mean it wasn't called for. I suppose the counter argument is 'it's a slippery slope' .

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[causality]

Apple has no right to censor people for speaking their minds under these circumstances.

Actually, it is well within it's rights to censor people posting on its bulletin board. Now, if Apple tries to get a restraining order against Consumer Reports or against people posting on Slashdot, then no, it is not within its rights. Again, I repeat, Apple is 100% within its rights to censor people posting on its forum. Doesn't mean it isn't unfair in some way, but still within it's rights.

It would be well within my rights to call you all sorts of names and insult you for no reason. It would still reflect poorly on my character if I chose to exercise my rights in that fashion. That's what this is really about: knowing the character of a company -- i.e. its willingness to use censorship when convenient -- before you decide whether or not to reward them with your money.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[scot4875]

I could see people trolling because they are so happy with their Blackberry that lets them to X, Y and Z while the iPhone locks them into the evil Apple empire where everybody are only drones.

I think you're mistaking normal people for Apple customers or console fanboys. *Most* individuals have better things to do than post on Product-X's board about how great their Product-Y is.

--Jeremy

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[e4g4]

If I invite people to write on my car freely

That right there is the difference. Apple did not invite people to write on their board freely. The board in question is a support board, intended for users and admins help other users solve problems. Talking about what Consumer Reports says or doesn't say about the iPhone 4 has absolutely _nothing_ to do with support; it's just whining, and doesn't belong on a support board. If it were a bulletin board that I used to provide support services to my customers, I'd remove stuff like that too.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[osgeek]

Crap, now that our posts were subsequently modded up I have to clarify that originally we had both been modded down as "flamebait". Doesn't change my opinion, though. The negative moderation on anything not expressing the right groupthink on Slashdot these days is depressing.

Inspired me to journal about it

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[bonch]

Give me a break. By your definition, moderation of Slashdot posts is censorship.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[rinoid]

+1 @Pieroxy is not a troll here. He's right.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[stewbacca]

What assholes modded you troll? Your post was organized very well and thoughtful. I think slashdot has jumped the "I don't agree with you so I'll mod you troll" shark.

And yes, Apple can moderate their forums however they want. It isn't censorship, it's good business. If Apple is bringing down bad reviews about its product from other sites it doesn't control, then yes, that's a problem.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[PeanutButterBreath]

They are trying to control information in a very Orwellian way (i.e. "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength."). . .

Make that "Attenuation is Strength".

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[socz]

I beg to differ pal, it's not 'censorship' as you claim, but rather it's a "free market that regulates itself." You see, if it was censorship, you wouldn't even have known that a 'situation' existed, as all national coverage would converge to throw you off any trail or whiff of a problem.

This on the other hand is a company simply protecting its assets and IP. The question is: Wouldn't you do the same for a product your company produces?

All sarcasm aside, no one can reasonably claim that this is correct nor best for the consumer, but it is what has been allowed be as it has happened over and over and over again (search google for relevant links!). Sprint, interestingly enough, has done the same exact thing regarding problems with certain phones and ways to circumvent features that have been excluded though present/available. But now that could come down to legal issues as well as moral issues.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[stewbacca]

Well, CR could have said, "we can't recommend this phone unless you don't mind spending $25 or so on a case that you are most likely already going to buy anyway", if they love it so much. I guess CR has never heard of the term "work around", like using 1/4" of tape over the gap that fixes the problem.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[stewbacca]

Uh, CR isn't so respected in automotive circles. They are ridiculed for their undying affection for boring, often inferior Japanese econoboxes. Sometimes products are more than just a bunch of test numbers.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[data64]

If I invite people to write on my car freely, and then selectively erase some of the stuff written to leave only the stuff I agree with, that's censorship.

It should be pointed out that according to that definition, deleting spam and obscene posts would also be considered censorship.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[stewbacca]

The problem with your analogy is that you stayed out of the store. These negative posts are inside the store.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[RedSteve]

If Apple really can't stand people poking fun at them when they screw up, perhaps they should stop being so fucking secretive and start doing some proper testing in the real world.

They were gonna do that, but unfortunately the guy who was supposed to carry out those tests lost his iPhone in a bar...

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[dgatwood]

Censorship is censorship. It hardly matters WHY they are censoring.

Sure it matters. It's hardly wrong to censor posts that violate the terms of use for a message board. In this case, term #2(3) says that posts should be either technical questions, solutions, or constructive feedback about a product. I suspect many of the threads were nothing but whining, which is neither constructive feedback nor a technical question or answer....

The front page of a message board is a finite resource. People trying to help tend to read the first page, maybe the second, and that's about it. If people clog the boards with dozens of active threads that just complain without providing solutions or information that might help the manufacturer track down a problem, those noise threads end up burying real questions from people who are actually trying to get help with specific, solvable issues, at which point the entire board becomes useless.

Bottom line: if you really feel the need to complain on the forums, post in one of the existing threads. Don't waste the limited front page space with more threads about the same subject. Creating tons of new threads on the subject is abusing the board, and I'm fine with Apple thinning the herd when that happens....

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Spazmania]

90% of such cases are resolved by the receipt of a proper demand letter. It's easy to say "no" to someone in person. Even easier on the phone or over email. But when saying no means you have to ask a lawyer what your risks are and maybe go to court, unreasonable answers have a tendency to become less unreasonable.

And if you get a default judgment, there's lots of much more fun stuff you can do than just picket them. Did you know if they don't promptly pay you can go ask the judge to place a lien on their assets? That's when the sheriff goes in and places a bright tag on some piece of equipment in the store which says it's a criminal offense to move or tamper with the equipment pending resolution of the claim. And then you show up with the sheriff asking to see the item to confirm it's still there. :)

Another good avenue is filing a complaint with the better business bureau. Same deal: saying "no" to you is easy but leaving an unresolved complaint open with the BBB is harder.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Score Whore]

Slashdot goes beyond moderation and actively removes posts, perhaps not GNAA, but it does happen.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Spazmania]

That works great if you paid by credit card and too many months haven't passed.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[clone53421]

The , and . (comma and period) keybindings lower/raise the hidden/abbreviated threshold if you have hotkeys enabled. (To adjust the abbreviated/full threshold you can use the [ and ] keys.)

Handy to remember because the slider doesn’t go all the way down to -1 for some reason.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[tomhudson]

Two points:

1. On the way out of the store, I handed every customer a flyer explaining that they were refusing to refund the money even though they couldn't deliver as promised.
2. If it's an apple customer forum, and these are apple customers with a beef, isn't that the the place to address it, rather than censor it and invoke Barbara Streisand?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[crossword.bob]

CR did suggest duct tape. Only problem is that duct tape doesn't do anything. Antenna + thin insulation + hand = large capacitor. Radio frequencies laugh at capacitors.

Blog posts on antennasys.com are well worth reading. I'm not saying the phone isn't flawed, but anyone who claims to have fixed their phone with tape clearly weren't all that impacted by it in the first place.

FWIW I tried this on my iPhone 4, and there was no discernable difference with or without tape.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Mongoose Disciple]

Generally, yeah, stuff that runs on an iPhone could equally run on an iPod Touch, but because an iPhone can always have internet without needing to tether and is likely to always be with its owners (probably unlike a less portable/pocketable iPad), something you loved on the phone may not be something you really want on another iThing.

For example, maybe you've got a navigation or calendaring app you really like for the iPhone.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[The Hatchet]

Totally agreed, and in response to the responses to this, removing posts that state your product is inadequate purely to boost revenue, that is not the "removing mother-fucker from the side of your car" cencorship, it is the "lets hide the truth to boost profits, regardless of the damage it does to society" censorship. Bastards.

Apple had a commercial in 1984 superbowl, I am sure everyone remembers it. I bet they didn't predict that they where the big screen controlling minds by controlling allowed content. Think different, think open source, think freedom, not groupthinkapplecontrolledapprovedcontentbullshitfuckers.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[bennomatic]

Were you going to name that dictionary, or is it a virtual dictionary, i.e. one in your head?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Mongoose Disciple]

CR did mention work-arounds, but there's a lot of phones on the market (i.e., basically all of them including earlier iPhones) that don't need one to perform their most basic function.

I think it's fair to call that a sticking point -- if they thought the new Lexus was the greatest car ever but sometimes the brakes didn't work unless you slapped some duct tape on it, I'd expect them to withhold recommending that, too.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[SoundGuyNoise]

It's galled "gatekeeping." While it often feels and reeks of censorship, it's done by a private entity who controls their own output, just like a newspaper that decides not to run a certain story.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

And that would be censorship too.

I am not saying it would be a bad thing. The support system in my company isn't public, therefore deleting things from there is no different than deleting things from my own email account. Now, if it is public, and you are selectively deleting people's opinions, IT IS CENSORSHIP. That is a matter of definition. I am not even saying it is wrong or anything. I am saying that BY DEFINITION, IT IS CENSORSHIP.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[bennomatic]

Shhh! If you present "facts" that indicate that Jobs *might not* be a Nazi, you're going to be labeled as a fanboi!

That being said, if they're removing threads, they've gotta know it's going to make more of this noise, so they should at least put a replacement page in for the removed threads so that any visitor can (a) see why it was removed and (b) if it's due to redundancy, they can find a link to the thread that Apple's moderators have deemed appropriate.

Anything less than that is just asking for outrage, even from happy fanbois.

And that being said, I'm not sure that any of this really hurts them. People who are going to buy are going to buy. The people who are loudest about the problem were never going to buy an iPhone anyway.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

Yes, of course. That is indeed censorship.

What is so hard to understand? Freedom is for everyone, or it is not freedom.

Freedom of speech means that. NO ONE gets to say what is ok and what is not. If you say "Everything goes, except for SPAM" it is not free speech anymore.

You can go the slashdot way, and don't delete anything, just mod it down, or you can prevent most SPAM bots through captchas, etc.
That is not censorship.

If you effectively delete things from a public forum, you are censoring. I am not saying it is inherently a bad thing, it will all depend on your rules.

If you say "We will only delete SPAM" and abide by those rules, it is still censorship, but nobody will consider that such a bad thing. That's different from unilaterally censoring things.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Thinboy00]

[...] BY DEFINITION, IT IS CENSORSHIP.

If you take that position, then how do you differentiate between removal of spammy posts and what China does?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[yyxx]

So... I don't want to sound like an Apple fanboy, but nobody ever said that the Apple forums on Apple's website are a place of free speech, right?

No. But this isn't about "rights" it's about what Apple pretends to be in their marketing info and what they are in reality.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[sjames]

It is by definition censorship. They are specifically disallowing a particular message. That's not illegal, but it does kinda put the lie to the famous 1984 commercial doesn't it?

In my world: You buy a product. It's crap. You get a refund and don't buy again from the company.

And if they won't return your money, and to add insult to injury they expect you to pay more for the privilege of not buying any more of their crappy product or service, , you do what?

Possible responses include: just keep forking over like a sheep, go pee on their tires then keep forking over like a sheep, take them to court, or go shoot up their headquarters in a fit of homicidal rage.

Only one of the above is a reasonable solution.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[DarkVader]

It's still censorship. If they have a forum that allows people to post items (and they do) and they remove items that people have posted (and they do) because they don't like the content of those posts it is, by definition censorship. They ARE censoring their forum.

It's not unconstitutional censorship, as if say, the government were forcing the removal of those posts. But it is censorship.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[stewbacca]

1. Wow, that's pretty dickish.
2. No, the place to address it is on a non-apple site so it doesn't get taken down.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[stewbacca]

The tape trick seems to work for several tech sites. It was even on CNN this morning, so there must be a bit of merit to it, no? I don't have an iPhone 4 to test for myself, but I'll take several anecdotes for now.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[stewbacca]

A better analogy would be that the Lexus didn't come with a cup-holder, but you can purchase an after-market one for $30. It's not a show stopper because there is a workaround. If the iPhone antenna did not improve reception by adding a case, then it would be a show stopper.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[skila]

No, like slashdot moderation, but shinier because of the teflon coating.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Mongoose Disciple]

A better analogy would be that the Lexus didn't come with a cup-holder, but you can purchase an after-market one for $30. It's not a show stopper because there is a workaround. If the iPhone antenna did not improve reception by adding a case, then it would be a show stopper.

With all due respect, no, that is not a better analogy.

The primary function of a phone is to make phone calls.

The primary function of a car is not to hold my Mountain Dew.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[DJRumpy]

I disagree, and I'm an Apple product fan. It is censorship, but not all censorship is 'bad' simply because it's censorship. Slashdot has censorship in it's modding rules, effectively hiding comments below a certain threshold (although you could still see them if you change your prefs in a few places). If you don't log in, you don't even see comments below a certain threshold, and if you are logged in, you must change your threshold to see them by default.

I just don't have an issue with it, just as I don't have an issue with moderation done here to hide the typical anon trolling posts. Those posts add no value to the conversation and I'm frankly glad to be rid of them. I suspect the same Applies to these threads on the official Apple forums.

I dont go to the Apple forums to read news on products. I come to slashdot. Those forums are for tech support to my mind, and not general discussion. Apple is well within it's rights to moderate comments in any fashion they please. Frankly it doesn't bother me because I dont' go there for information. I know that they moderate heavily so the value there isn't that great for product opinion and frank discussion.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[e4g4]

BY DEFINITION, IT IS CENSORSHIP.

No argument there. The problem, however, is that censorship by a private company of something that doesn't belong isn't necessarily evil. A large portion of comments here seem to have such a black and white view of this situation that Apple is somehow trying to actually hide information published by Consumer Reports from the general population. That is simply a load of male bovine excrement. It's their support board, and Apple is removing the fucking flame wars that have been started about the report. They're not even that effective in their censorship (if you take a quick gander at the discussion boards, there are plenty of mentions and links to the Consumer Reports' findings, and a handful of flame wars that have no place on a support board and *should* be removed). Apple is not Big Brother - they can't be, they simply do not have the power. Folks need to stop crying wolf and keep their eyes peeled on those who *do* have the power (the federal government).

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Mongoose Disciple]

I think your post is seriously mismodded; I disagree with some of it, but it's definitely not a troll post.

That being said...

In my world: You buy a product. It's crap. You get a refund and don't buy again from the company.

App lock-in to a small degree and phone contracts (at least, in the American market -- I've heard some countries are different) put some snags in this philosophy in this particular situation.

If I've got an iPhone 3 and have bought a bunch of apps for it, and I get rid of / sell it to get an iPhone 4 (along with a new 2 year contract), it's non-trivial for me to get a refund and switch to a different phone without either:

A) Buying an earlier model iPhone, again, getting another 2 year contract or

B) Buying a different brand entirely and giving up on my phone apps.

I think B is the lesser of two evils if I feel really burned by the new iPhone, but I can understand why some people wouldn't want to go that route, either.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[lymond01]

Okay that was funny. :-)

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[crossword.bob]

It would make a small difference if the tape was thick enough; particularly if combined with a modified grasp, limiting the area in contact with the antenna-covered tape. But not enough to be called a workaround

This is one reason that the problem has been overblown—people who don't understand electrodynamics see an external antenna and assume that "shorting out" the gap is basically the same as they learned about DC circuits at school.

Now before I get flamed into next week, I am once again not claiming that the problem is not there—it is, and it's a real let-down on an otherwise nice piece of kit—but it not as catastrophic as has been portrayed. The "tape workaround" seems to be pure placebo.

I can't resist making reference to a great quote here, though: "The plural of anecdote is not data".

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[crossword.bob]

D'oh! I did, of course, mean tape-covered antenna.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[poetmatt]

who said a car analogy has to be in the same league? It's only meant to be comparative. It was an accurate analogy for that specific reason.

The analogy was appropriate due to what it inferred: that an important situation is being hiddden, analogous to a known car problem not being reported. Yet, is that "in the same league" either? no. Is it a bad analogy for that reason? no.

grammar whore elsewhere. I want my 30 seconds of worktime back.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Prophet of Nixon]

Apple has been Orwellian for the last 10 years. Is there any other explanation for devices in 2010 that can only connect over proprietary data cables, through proprietary software, that have no removable storage, no mass storage class driver support, and have to use a company mandated store to install any applications? Not to mention a smartphone that can't be used as a tethered modem? Their complete ban on all uncontrolled input and output is completely Orwellian, and it's no surprise that they treat their forums that way too.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Magic5Ball]

The population you rage for has close to zero members.

People who "rush into things" conduct a minimum of research. Apple's support forums do not show up in the first five pages of Bing or Google searches for "[apple] iphone 4".

People already aware of issues with the phone through Consumer Reports or another source would not need their information validated by Apple, especially since Apple offers no such validation.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Phantom of the Opera]

Sky blue and Royal blue are both blue, right?
Don't be held captive by a mere definition.

(see Wittgenstein's language game : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_Investigations

One general characteristic of games that Wittgenstein considers in detail is the way in which they consist in following rules. Rules constitute a family, rather than a class that can be explicitly defined.[14] As a consequence, it is not possible to provide a definitive account of what it is to follow a rule. Indeed, he argues that any course of action can be made out to accord with some particular rule, and that therefore a rule cannot be used to explain an action.[15] Rather, that one is following a rule or not is to be decided by looking to see if the actions conform to the expectations in the particular form of life in which one is involved. Following a rule is a social activity.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[allanc]

I would debate that. Of the basic functions of my iPhone, making phone calls is the one I use by far the least.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[laird]

"The primary function of a phone is to make phone calls."

Which the iPhone 4 does quite well, unless you hold the bottom left corner.

The issue is a real one, but it doesn't render the phone useless. You just can't hold it on one corner, unless you put your phone into a phone case (which is what most people do with expensive phones).

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[david_thornley]

Similarly, censorship is not necessarily bad. There are internet forums that are still usable because people are not allowed to put whatever content they want on them. That these forums are still useful is a good thing, hence censorship (in your definition) is not all bad. (You may call it a potentially necessary evil, and I might agree.)

However, there's a difference between an organization saying "You can't say what you like on our turf" and one (normally a government or SLAPP-happy company) saying "You can't say what you like". One is mostly harmless, and one is extremely dangerous. You pick which is which.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[thrawn_aj]

Not this shit again.

Slashdot moderation is like censorship in the same way that earplug manufacturers are responsible for limiting free speech.

In other words, you have free speech but I have an equal right to protect myself from all the crap speech out there any way I can (I don't expect anyone else to do so but leave the earplug manufacturers alone =p). Now, if Slashdot was deleting posts, that would be censorship. Anyone who wants to read any post ever written on slashdot is free to do so - THAT is freedom of speech. There are extraordinarily disgusting posts (obvious trolls who take advantage of this) that are still not deleted.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[thrawn_aj]

Can I sue the national lottery for not having won with the ticket they sold me?

If they promised (in an ad) that the ticket would definitely win (with 100% probability), then yeah. I guess I never realized that buying an Apple product was like buying a lottery ticket - your choice of analogy says it all =)

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[thrawn_aj]

If you take that position, then how do you differentiate between removal of spammy posts and what China does?

In the former case, the post is removed. In communist China, the poster is removed =). In both cases, it is still censorship. The means of censoring are wildly different.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[hkmwbz]

They are censoring because people who can't be bothered to just post in the existing threads keep flooding the forum with new threads.

Censorship is not inherently a bad thing. If someone posted child pornography in the forum, would you not want them to censor it?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[hkmwbz]

Why? They aren't censoring all threads on the issue, just the ones that are being posted separately from the existing discussions.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[thrawn_aj]

Slashdot has -1 disagree that people use to hide comments that they can't rate as wrong,flamebait, troll or be bothered to reply to. Censorship.

Good job sneaking the cuckoo in with the pigeons =p

Slashdot does not hide any comments. YOU do. BY choice. Browse at -1 and voila! No more hiding. Any form of moderation that leaves the power to hide/show any post SOLELY in the hands of the individual user is NOT censorship (if it is, it's self-censorship - otherwise known as "I choose what I read"). WHY is this so difficult to understand? More importantly, why is the fundamental distinction between it and the other examples in your list elude so many (otherwise intelligent) /. users?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[MikeBabcock]

If they want their image untarnished, they should fix the antenna problem and quit denying there is one.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[thrawn_aj]

You do realize that any moderation is pretty irrelevant unless YOU (the reader) want it to be, right? Browse at -1.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[wealthychef]

To the extent that Apple is removing posts, they are censoring by definition. Censorship is not always bad! Safeway censors the violent obscenity or even just fairly innocuous scrawls of bathroom graffiti as they consider it to be tasteless. Apple has the right to do that as well. If you don't like it, then use another forum, there are others out there.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[denzacar]

1. Wow, that's pretty dickish.
2. No, the place to address it is on a non-apple site so it doesn't get taken down.

1. So, in your universe "Informative" reads as "Flamebait Troll"? That must be one interesting and funny place. Not very insightful though.
2. Or why not just dig a hole in the ground and whisper his grievances into it?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[thrawn_aj]

You must have replied to the wrong post. I (and the person I was correcting) was referring solely to the Slashdot moderation system (about which parent was laboring under a serious misunderstanding). I made no comment about Apple or any other thing.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[stewbacca]

Who says the primary function of an iPhone is to make calls? I know people who have the phone with no voice plan. I would guess my iPhone gets about 5% use as a phone.

I use the cup holder analogy because its a long running joke with supporters of Consumer Reports. They have actually lambasted cars in the past for their lack of cup holders (sports cars specifically). It's the same thing at work here...Consumer Reports is telling YOU what is important, not letting you decide what you need out of the iPhone.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Wovel]

Your post should be given a score of 10 and pasted to the bottom of the story.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[exomondo]

People tend to only use the word censorship on the Internet when they are pissed off at a moderator. I sometimes feel sorry for them when they have to do the work that everybody hates.

This thread is closed as it was turning into a flamewar.. Censorship.

This post was deleted for inappropriate language. Censorship.

This post is off topic and has been moved to a board that is not searchable. Censorship.

People break the forum EULA not to talk about copying DVDs, ROM hacking, and other illegals. Censorship.

But those are forum rules, clearly defined rules. I can't find anything in apple's forum rules that relates to negative press or negative comments about their products. Sure if it was obvious falsehoods or conjecture then they should absolutely censor it, but not when it's a proven fault or a user's opinion.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[mjwx]

They are trying to control information in a very Orwellian way (i.e. "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength."). And what makes it very damning and hugely ironic, is that Apple is turning into the very thing they fought against in their very first Macintosh Commercial.

What Macintosh Commercial?

the past was erased, the erasure forgotten, the lie became truth.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Laser Dan]

A better analogy would be that the Lexus didn't come with a cup-holder, but you can purchase an after-market one for $30. It's not a show stopper because there is a workaround. If the iPhone antenna did not improve reception by adding a case, then it would be a show stopper.

No, a better analogy would be that the Lexus engine cuts out if you have too much pressure on the left half of the seat. Sure there is a work around, you just have to lean to the right while you drive. You would be fine with that I assume?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[grouchomarxist]

Cue the obligatory Penny Arcade "I'm the guy who gives hand jobs to Steve Jobs" strip. Seriously.

Wha? Did Penny Arcade censor that strip? I can't find it.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[glavenoid]

AFAIR slashdot has only removed a couple of posts, and only at the behest of their lawyers. One was the famous Scientology post and another was, I think, some leaked Microsoft code.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Pyrus.mg]

All opinions are welcome, but those opinions less welcome than others should be contained or eradicated.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[ToasterMonkey]

We said they censored, and other people cam saying "That's not censorship because it is their own website" and providing ridiculous examples like "If someone draws on your car and you remove it, is it censorship too?".

Well, it is their website. If they don't let people post AT ALL on their website, are they repressing freedom of speech? What pisses me off are the posts here debating wether what they are doing is censorship or not, then at the same time, "censorship is teh evilz!" Look at the moderation going on here. It's not possible to argue that what they are doing is OK, because a drone you like comes pointing out that it IS censorship, and drone 2 comes along with... ugh.

BTW everyone, the /. moderation system is not different because you can technically read -5 posts. It's still censorship, just like blacking out text with a magic marker is. Chew on that.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[powerspike]

But why delete them instead of closing them, and possibly adding a post back to one of the main threads.

Deletion of threads just indicates they have something to hide.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[exomondo]

Consumer Reports clearly created this article to sell copies rather than push factual information.

'Clearly'? I think not, the information contained in it is factual. Proving that Apple's claims of the issue being wholly related to a software glitch regarding the displaying of signal bars is false.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[exomondo]

surely a network connection of some kind is a requirement for most of those functions though, i know it is for most people.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Pieroxy]

But they will return your money without you having to pay more !

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[forkazoo]

Try it some time. I picketed a computer store that took a $300 deposit on a $3,000 computer, with a promised delivery date, missed the date, then admitted they couldn't deliver it and wanted to make substitutions, and wouldn't refund the money. I handed out flyers to every customer who walked in the door. They called the cops. I told the cops I was exercising my constitutional right to free speech and wasn't impeding people from entering or exiting. They called their supervisor - who turned out to have had a similar bad experience with that store. Got the refund within the hour.

Sounds kind of like a place I used to work. I even heard about a guy picketing in front of one of our locations during the period I worked there. Good for you, they probably deserved it.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[delinear]

Because, regardless of why they closed the threads, it leads to speculation and stories like this. And then you get cyclical speculation, people saying if they were willing to risk this kind of bad publicity by closing the threads, there must have been something really bad in them. A lot of companies are only just beginning to come to terms with the power the internet gives to users, but I would expect any company in the IT sector to realise why this self-defeating practice is potentially a bad idea (as opposed to, as others have suggested, just closing the threads with a valid reason, and if that's duplication then link the threads to the main thread to make it clear you're not hiding anything).

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[delinear]

Of course it's censorship. That's not to say all censorship is bad, there are many cases where society accepts it is necessary (movie ratings, the watershed on TV, ratings on adult magazines are all censorship deemed to be largely for the good of society). When it's a privately owned site, the owners can censor whatever they like, or instigate a moderation system to allow users to do the same. Again, if that's the will of the owners or the community, that's fine (there are plenty of un-moderated sites out there, or you can start your own, etc). What companies have to realise is that the internet exposes shenanigans such as deleting critical threads or trying to censor discussions, and while that's perfectly acceptable if they own the forum, they shouldn't be surprised when they suffer backlash from their users. Being legally right isn't always the same as just being right.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[delinear]

If they similarly delete duplicate threads about how great the iPhone is (and for all I know they do), then that's a valid argument. If not, you can understand why people would interprate this as censorship for the benefit of the company (even if it's actually nothing of the kind and they're closing threads full of unproductive, abusive language, this is all about managing people's perceptions) and not to make the forum easier to use.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[delinear]

Censoring just means removing comment. It doesn't matter whether you do that for good reasons or bad reaons, or whether the comment was worthy or worthless, it's still censorship. Apple are absolutely, 100% entitled to censor comments made on their forum. I don't see why these two parts are even up for debate, the first is a standard definition of an English word which has been formed over hundreds of years of application, the latter is a clear statement of fact. The only debatable thing here is whether it was an intelligent thing to do in light of the fact that people tend to react badly to their negative comments about a company being buried by said company.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[delinear]

Well, actually you interpreted the term "no right to do X" to mean "no legal right to do X", when its actually an ambiguous turn of phrase which is as often used to mean "you are doing X without justification", as in if I say "You have no right to call that guy a jackhole", my intention would not be to suggest that you don't have the legal right as clearly you do, but that what you are saying is unfounded. We don't know what his actual meaning was, strictly legal or moral.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[delinear]

One is a private entity, the other is the government of a country. Most notably, when people talk about bad censorship, it's almost invariably being carried out by governments, and this is probably why people seem to think that private entities carrying out censorship can't be censorship because it's not bad.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[delinear]

Surely the difference is that the user gets to choose what they read. The site gives the user the tools to self-censor, or not, it doesn't take that decision on our behalf.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[delinear]

It always astonishes me that, even in the midst of a discussion like this one which is proving massively divisive with people falling into at least three broad groups and several sub groups within those, people still allude to some kind of "groupthink".

Groupthink is a type of thought within a deeply cohesive in-group whose members try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas [Wikipedia]

Most days any two /. users won't even agree on the weather outside, let alone have some kind of hive mind consensus on any meaningful subject.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[delinear]

Why don't Apple bundle the case with the phone and charge $25 more, or even better, build the phone into the case? Because it would spoil the aesthetics of the phone. Like it or not a lot of people buy the iPhone for its stylish looks, if you're saying it's reasonable to suggest masking those looks with a case just to get it to function as a phone, you're not reflecting what the majority of customers want from the device, and I would guess this is exactly why CR didn't suggest it, it's a ridiculous workaround for an issue that should have been eliminated in QA testing.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[delinear]

The amount of usage it gets time wise doesn't accurately reflect the importance of that function. I spend most of my time with my phone browsing the internet and hardly ever use it for calls, if I had to choose between one or the other, I'd drop the internet in a heart beat. To me the phone absolutely must function as a phone when I need it, because the point I need it might be an emergency and I don't want to have to rely on emailing the emergency services for help. Similarly if I buy a burglar alarm, I don't care that it detects nothing for 99.99% of its entire life, that 0.01% is enough to justify its primary purpose being to detect burglars.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[TheFaithfulStone]

Just because you're within your rights doesn't mean you're not an asshole.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[sjames]

For an iPhone? You'll just get out of that contract if you're unhappy for any reason?

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[urulokion]

What Macintosh Commercial?

Apple's 1984 Macintosh Commercial

That commercal is so ripe with parody material. 'Shop Steve Jobs' head as Big Brother. Oh even better, Google could do a riff of that 1984 Commercial today for Andriod.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[mjwx]

Apple's 1984 Macintosh Commercial

Whooosh, Go back and read the quote in my GP, ironically from Nineteen Eight Four. Apple doesn't acknowledge the 1984 commercial any more, that was done by Apple Computers which doesn't exist any more. The new company is Apple Inc which is comprised of the same masters as Apple Computers.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[Pieroxy]

Well, that's the way it is, yes.

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[biryokumaru]

Removing a curse is a form of censorship

Damn those clerics, always trying to censor my new armor...

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[stewbacca]

How about their consistent ratings of anything Honda/Toyota over superior engineered German offerings? How about the fact the consistently rate Honda/Toyota with superior long-term reliability on new models that have no long-term history? How about how they fall in love with shitty Honda products because they say Honda and at the same time rip the Isuzu model that is a mechanical clone, just because it says Isuzu?

How about the fact that some people buy a car for things other than mpg, sticker price, stereo quality, cargo space and number of cup holders--all things that CR over-values compared to things that matter to some of us, like acceleration, braking, and handling. It's because of CR's total devaluation for the engineering aspect of vehicle design that America in general loves such shitty cars. Ooh, look 58.7 cu. ft. of trunk storage! So what if it only has 58 hp and take 310 feet to stop from 60-0!

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[stewbacca]

Your guess is wrong. I drive a Mazdaspeed 3. Made in Japan (not some Ford clone).

Re:Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

[stewbacca]

If the dealer gave me an inexpensive seat cushion that fixed the pressure on the left half of the seat, I wouldn't have a problem with it...as long as the car was as kick ass as promised (like CR says about the phone).

Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[ciaran_o_riordan]

Yeh, when Jobs said his control over every Apple-user's computing was about "freedom from porn", we could have guessed that "porn" was just being dragged up as a convenient excuse.

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[Chrisq]

Yeh, when Jobs said his control over every Apple-user's computing was about "freedom from porn", we could have guessed that "porn" was just being dragged up as a convenient excuse.

I don't know, when you see how excited some slashotters get about anti-Apple or anti-Microsoft news it looks like they are about to cream themselves.

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[Reilaos]

Well, now this is freedom from having complications in your decision to by the revolutionary new iPhone!

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[sznupi]

Somebody ought to laugh at Jobs with the spoof of that 1984 commercial, featuring him on the screen.

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[AnonymousClown]

I don't know, when you see how excited some slashotters get about anti-Apple or anti-Microsoft news it looks like they are about to cream themselves.

A lot of the Anti-Apple hatred is more of resentment for the years where any sort of Apple criticism, regardless of how valid it was, an automatic "-1 Troll" or "Flamebait".

The Anit-MS hatred is mostly the F/oSS fanbois who think MS is the man that's keeping them down.

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[betterunixthanunix]

http://www.defectivebydesign.org/new-sticker-results

One step ahead of you.

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[causality]

A lot of the Anti-Apple hatred is more of resentment for the years where any sort of Apple criticism, regardless of how valid it was, an automatic "-1 Troll" or "Flamebait".

I think there's a lot of truth in this. It's interesting that as Apple has become more and more visible in the mainstream this has diminished. Maybe it's about "the underdog" and not Apple specifically.

The Anit-MS hatred is mostly the F/oSS fanbois who think MS is the man that's keeping them down.

I'd wager their extreme dominance of the desktop, vendor lock-in practices, and status as convicted in court for abusing a monopoly in multiple countries may have a little something to do with that. The rest that doesn't get talked about so much is the culture that tends to surround Windows, which can be summed up as "the computer is far too complex for you to try to understand, so let us worry about that for you (for a fee, of course)."

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[unity100]

didnt microsoft itself declare that it was intending to keep foss down, in leaked memos, and sometimes in open statements from hapless high level managers, in the last decade ?

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[elrous0]

Just avoid jacking it in that way

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[geminidomino]

The Anit-MS hatred is mostly the F/oSS fanbois who think MS is the man that's keeping them down.

Let's be fair. Yes, that's a subset of the MS-Haters. But there's another subset made up of people who've had to administrate, maintain, and/or repair MS software installations.

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[MemoryDragon]

Consumer Reports is Geek Porn...

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[IflyRC]

I've had to administer, repair/maintain some Oracle products in java - and I hate them even more.

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[doodlebumm]

Jobs is just a big baby. He doesn't play well with others. He gets upset when he doesn't get his way. The only way he lets you play with his toys is if you pay him. I bet he even wears diapers.

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[geminidomino]

I am so, so sorry...

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[mcgrew]

"It's OBSCENE the way they trash talk our precious products!"

Re:Freedom from pron, criticism, open debate

[sznupi]

How do you quantify "more visible" though? Were iPods or iTunes not far enough? Apple commercials (some of those should readily touch a nerve) together with general hoopla about OSX in times when it wasn't that great?

Isn't Google quite visible and still rather liked, almost as if being an "underdog"?

Apple perhaps got a bit too bullish lately...

It's logical

[Errol backfiring]

Well, that is what you do with bad apples, isn't it?

Re:It's logical

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, that is what you do with bad apples, isn't it?

Bad apples, broken windows or dead penguins, ... I don't care which it is, I chuck them all into the bin.

Re:It's logical

[master0ne]

really? i just sent them to /dev/null

It is their site.

[Shivetya]

I do not see why they are required to allow discussions of that subject considering the number of sites where you are free to discuss it.

Apple knows about the review, why should they let you rub their noses into it? Let alone on their forums there are more than enough rabid supporters that keeping these messages off the site means for more peaceful forums. It would simply be a flame war

Re:It is their site.

[Pojut]

Wait wait wait...a company is quelling discussion about how their product has an easily demonstrated hardware issue, and you see nothing wrong with that?

That's...that's a bit unsettling, Shivetya. I recognize that it's their site and that it's up to them, based on their forum guidelines, to control certain messages...but come on. You can't possibly think this is a defensible act.

Re:It is their site.

[Austerity Empowers]

Because apple spends so much time trying to convince us they're our friends, that the inflated price tag is because they do much better engineering, and generally snobbing anything else. For them to censor unbiased analysis of their product is inexcusable. They should be on their board either explaining why the consumer reports article is incorrect, or apologizing profusely (replacing the overpriced and broken hardware people have).

Re:It is their site.

[the_Bionic_lemming]

Why should they? Perhaps to prove thet are a reputable company that listens to its customer base and learns from their mistakes?

FTA

Cached article on bing

All it seems to be is people trying to let others know about the article.

Re:It is their site.

[v1]

Amazing this surprises anyone. It's like protesters protesting against a store WHILE IN THE STORE. Of course they're going to kick you out. You're free to protest on the street or anywhere else for that matter.

If I paint up a sign that says "WalMart - Buy More, Pay Less, Eat Lead Paint" and walk around wal mart waving it I'll last about 10 seconds. But somehow when Apple does it, it's absurd?

It took them what, a couple days to react to the issue and start working on a fix, (the hiring of the antenna engineers we saw recently) so they're obviously trying to fix the problem. There's nothing to be gained by harassing them while they work on a fix for you, that will almost certainly be free.

Owell I suppose this comes with the territory. Apple wants to be chic and hip and trendy and on everyone's mind, this is just the dark side of that position. Do a good job and people will run around saying it's fabulous, do a poor job and people will run around saying its horrible. It's just a game of extremes.

Re:It is their site.

[Pieroxy]

Why would it not be defensible? It's their forum on their website. They moderate it however they want. Aren't we in a free world or is the "free" only refers to customers, not to vendors?

I mean, if the product is crap, get it back, get a refund and be done with it! Why all the fuss?

Re:It is their site.

[Enderandrew]

I say this as a guy who purchased an iPhone 4, but Apple is never your friend.

They are right up there with Microsoft on the evil scale.

Re:It is their site.

[geekoid]

Withholding information is the opposite of free.

A free market will not function properly unless the consumer is given all the data available.

No, it's not defensible; however it's there website and they can practice deplorable acts should they chose to. However they should clearly disclose to people visiting their site they censor negative information.

It may already clearly disclose that info, I don't know

"I mean, if the product is crap, get it back, get a refund and be done with it! Why all the fuss?"
seriously? How easy is it to go to AT&T get out of your deal get your old phone back and activated again with the previous cell company and not acquire any additional costs?

This isn't a shirt you got home and realized it was missing a button.

Plus the idea that people should discuss problems they have with a device is stupid.

Re:It is their site.

[yotto]

They have the right to quell the discussion on their own website. That is their right as they own the site.

We have the right to point out that it's dumb on this (or any other public) website, to make sure as many people as possible know what they're rightfully doing on their own website, so those people can make informed decisions next time they buy an expensive cell phone.

Re:It is their site.

[metamatic]

It took them what, a couple days to react to the issue and start working on a fix, (the hiring of the antenna engineers we saw recently) so they're obviously trying to fix the problem. There's nothing to be gained by harassing them while they work on a fix for you, that will almost certainly be free.

Hahahaha.

Yeahright.

The antenna engineers are just to make sure that the iPhone 4GS doesn't have the same problem. They're not going to fix the iPhone 4. They'll just tell you to use a rubber case. I'd put money on it.

Re:It is their site.

[Anonymous Coward]

They are right up there with Microsoft on the evil scale.

Compared to Apple, I'd let Microsoft watch my children.

Re:It is their site.

[L4t3r4lu5]

Censorship is cheaper.

In the short term.

Re:It is their site.

[steelfood]

It's defensible in the same sense that the RIAA suing 83-year old dead grandmas that have never touched a computer in their lives is defensible.

It's perfectly legal. The RIAA can bring whomever they want to court, even deceased people (they can sue the estate). It's their lawyers, and they can have their lawyers do whatever they want their lawyers to do.

But if you do try to defend them, then you have no defense against our collective opinion that you're a douche.

Re:It is their site.

[MightyMartian]

Discussing a serious hardware issue of a product brought up by a consumer products review magazine on a tech site dedicated to solving technical issues of the product is off-topic?

This is why Apple fanbois are considered the retards of the computing world.

Re:It is their site.

[L4t3r4lu5]

Compared to Apple, I'd let Microsoft watch my children.

So would I. I wouldn't use their operating systems on something important though, like a warship.

Oh.

Re:It is their site.

[technomancerX]

Exactly. Could someone point me to a company forum that DOESN'T do this (that is actually run by the company)? I spend more time on guitar forums than computer forums, but the two guitar manufacturer forums I visit occasionally, Ibanez and Ernie Ball/Music Man, do the exact same thing.... and those are general discussion forums, the Apple forum in question is a technical support forum. So why exactly would you consider a Consumer Reports review something that should be discussed on a tech support forum?

Re:It is their site.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, Apple is in a (mostly) free country. They are free to moderate their forum however they want - notice the absence of laws preventing them from doing so?

By the same token, others are free to criticize their moderation policies. That's "free" as well. (And, of course, you are free to criticize the criticism, and I'm free to criticize your criticism of the criticism, and so on and so forth.)

I really don't understand people who think their "freedom" is infringed when their actions or speech provoke criticism or disagreement. Sorry, freedom means freedom for everybody, not just you and the people you like.

Re:It is their site.

[jareth-0205]

There's nothing to be gained by harassing them while they work on a fix for you, that will almost certainly be free.

Wait, you mean Apple sell a premium-priced product with a large and obvious defect, and they're going to fix it for free? Oh thankyou sweet Apple! You are so philanthropic!

Re:It is their site.

[dzfoo]

It's a support forum, not an open come and bitch about our stuff forum. It is intended for users to get support on particular questions.

If you read the (few) complaints regarding deleted posts, you'll notice a pattern: Someone either gratuitously posted a link to the CR report, or someone posted the link as a purported answer to someone's question.

In either case a link to the review is not a constructive response to any legitimate support question, or at least that is how Apple is taking it. This violates the Terms and Conditions of use of the forum according to the moderators.

          -dZ.

Re:It is their site.

[master0ne]

So, if a free market doesn't function unless people have access to all information available then you think "insider trading" is legal? And if you think its wrong for them to censor their site then you wouldn't have a problem with me coming by your house and spray painting your slashdot id on the side of it? or slapping a bumper sticker on your car proclaiming how much it pollutes the atmosphere. I don't like Apple, of their products, i don't even own a IPod, but it IS their server, they are not going to other discussion boards and trying to bury or erase any defamatory remarks. And since the threads in questions i cant verify it, but im willing to say that the most likely reason the threads were removed is because of vulgar speech and/or it had become nothing more than a flame war. Yes this is censorship, its the same kind of censorship that keeps playboys out of elementary school libraries. Censorship in and of it self is not a bad thing, in fact its necessary to a cretin degree. The problem occurs when one controlling force is able to censor everything (total censorship), like the government banning a book, or a company like a ISP filtering out all negative press its getting to its users. Apple in this case is only modifying their own site, and there not using their devices to censor what reviews about their products people can access. It is your responsibility as a customer to independently review and evaluate a product before you buy it. There are many resources out there to assist with this, and the manufactures website should NEVER be considered the exclusive or conclusive source for this information. Free in this case means they are free to do as they wish to their site, not that you are free to post whatever you like to it. If you have an issue with this, start your own site/blog/form and post whatever you like to it. Just to reiterate, i am not an apple fanboi, i run ubuntu linux, and do not own nor would i consider purchasing any apple products.

Re:It is their site.

[pablo_max]

So, where are you kids exactly?

Cheers,
MS employee

Re:It is their site.

[master0ne]

just so you know TFA doesn't say they deleted ALL the threads, just lists several threads that they have deleted. This could well be a case of exactly what you say "If you're worried about too many threads have one main one. If you're worried about flames eliminate those posts." consolidating threads and eliminating mostly flame wars.

Re:It is their site.

[Skuld-Chan]

So serious question - how does hiring antenna engineers solve a hardware design issue in an existing shipping product you've already delivered a million of?

If they were serious about solving this - they would have given away a free case to insulate the antenna from the user instead of charging 30 dollars for something that cost 10 cents to make in china.

Re:It is their site.

[GrumblyStuff]

I dunno. Ballmer might whip out his Zune and try to squirt the tykes.

Re:It is their site.

[men0s]

Although, I would make sure all the chairs are properly secured before-hand..

Re:It is their site.

[laird]

"a company is quelling discussion about how their product has an easily demonstrated hardware issue, and you see nothing wrong with that?"

If that were what was going on, I would have a problem with that. But Apple is not deleting all posts that are critical of their antenna design/reception issues - it's easy to find such discussions in their forums, and in fact there are many more such discussions that the few that were deleted. Apple deleted some specific discussions that veered into trolling/flaming, including some highly negative discussions of Consumer Reports, which are off topic for a technical support forum.

So the initial claim was overblown and unsupported by the evidence. Still, it's posted by an anonymous reader, so shouldn't be taken too seriously without independent verification. Unfortunately, Slashdot's posting without any research has triggered a flood of posting by people eager to vent their personal opinion of Apple, without any particular relationship to what Apple actually did or didn't do.

Re:It is their site.

[mcgrew]

Possibly, but nowhere as evil as Sony

Re:It is their site.

[Your.Master]

I didn't read your whole post because there were no paragraphs. Sorry. So I'm going to do like all good slashdotters do and respond to only the first sentence:

Insider Trading is illegal specifically because non-insiders do not have access to all information available. It's an application of the idea that any good aspects of the free market system are eroded by imperfect information.

If you make a bunch of assumptions, including perfect information, then much of the economic claims we've all heard are provable in the same sense that mathematical theorems are provable. The more you tear down these assumptions, the less certain we can be about the efficacy of capitalism.

I am inclined to say Apple's site, Apple's rules; but to add that this means that Apple's forums have limited utility given that the most important problems are exactly those where discussion is stifled. I don't think Apple is being unethical so much as putting out a bad product (meaning the forum, not the phone).

Re:It is their site.

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't like your kids much, do you?

Re:It is their site.

[master0ne]

i 100% agree, sorry about the lack of paragraphs, im forgot my post method was html formatted instead of Plain Old Text. If i could edit it i would, but all in all, i thought it was a well thought out argument although its hard to find a 100% relevant or valid analogy which refers to this sort of situation.

Re:It is their site.

[Wovel]

Because they want Apple to be an evil censor engaged in a cover-up. It is consistent with their world view and makes them feel better about their other inadequacies.

Apple fanbois will love it

[Chrisq]

It will be an "advantage" over Android, that the forums are not cluttered with unnecessary information.

Re:Apple fanbois will love it

[AndrewNeo]

s/unnecessary/obvious/

Re:Apple fanbois will love it

[Xebikr]

I'm just waiting for the "Android: Hold it any way you want!" ad campaign.

Re:Apple fanbois will love it

[MemoryDragon]

Jepp Google also does not censor they simply ignore threads with more than 100 posts :-)

Re:Apple fanbois will love it

[smellsofbikes]

I'm just waiting for the "Android: Hold it any way you want!" ad campaign.

You know, if you combined that with a visual of a scantily clad woman, you could hit two pro-Android bullet points with one ad campaign. That'd probably be effective.

Re:Apple fanbois will love it

[jbezorg]

Or. "There's an app..... lication of duct tape for that."

Re:Apple fanbois will love it

[Stevecrox]

Nokia has already done one.

Re:Apple fanbois will love it

[tftp]

I'm just waiting for the "Android: Hold it any way you want!" ad campaign.

The wait is over.

We don't have to take criticism...

[Pojut]

...we're Apple! Now shut up and buy this overpriced device that is marginally better than the more expensive one you bought last year!

Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[LWATCDR]

Really you just paid $299 for your phone. You pay goodness knows how much a month for your 2 GB capped data plan. Just suck it up and buy the $30 bumper! what is the big deal!
(This message was sent from my Android phone on the Sprint network).

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[kidgenius]

! what is the big deal! (This message was sent from my Android phone on the Sprint network).

The big deal is that a person should have a reasonable expectation that a $300 device would work as it should, without having to spend another $30 to fix what shouldn't need fixing.

//I have an android phone on vz, so it doesn't really apply to me

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[biryokumaru]

"You just paid 40 grand for a new car that was supposed to run great. So what if the engine fell out? Stop whining already and drop that measly 5k to put a new one in it."

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[Rogerborg]

Tell me about it. It's like when one of the fuel injectors failed on my car and I found out that it was a design flaw. Big deal! It was only a problem if I actually drove the car, plus, instead of going to all the trouble of whining to the manufacturer or pulling some dick move like trying to warn other owners about the problem, I all I had to do to get it fixed was to spend money on it. Pfft, whiners.

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[D Ninja]

Methinks your /sarcasm sensor needs recalibrated.

Or, in Slashdot terms...

WOOSH!

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[helix2301]

I agree like I said in my last post if you had the money for the phone whats the big deal about buying a case. Apple probably never realized the problems because they had the phone in a case. It should be in a case it's an expensive phone.

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[LWATCDR]

wow....
Well then maybe Apple should give you the bumper to fix the problem rather than charging $30 for a gloried rubber band?
Just maybe?

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[LWATCDR]

I really thought that part about being sent from my Android phone on the Sprint network would have prevented the whoosh part but I was wrong.

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[BlackCreek]

The deal is that the phone is defective in the way it is sold.

What I find the most amazing thing in this whole story is how so many blogs/"news" sites didn't dare to call apple on it wrt the iphone4 antenna. Engadget, cnet all of them just gave the defective phone a stupidly high rating. Now that the cat is out of the bag they will all back-pedal on it.

Then there are the folks like you under the reasoning: "you bought a luxury phone that is defective by design, you were already ripped off, what are 30 bucks against that? Get over it". For a customer that values the design of a phone, adding a rubber band around it pretty much nullifies the value of it.

The whole idea that the product needs to be good for what it advertises, and that customers are entitled to get what they paid for apparently doesn't apply to this particular brand.

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[BlackCreek]

(This message was sent from my Android phone on the Sprint network).

Oh, shit I did miss the last line of your post....

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[dzfoo]

Bad analogy. We can agree that the "engine falling out" of a car is a critical problem. Touching the iPhone 4 antenna in a very specific way so as to cause reception to drop temporarily would be more akin to a "40 grand new car that was supposed to run great" but the engine drops a few thousand RPMs temporarily if you operate the door locks and the powered-windows control simultaneously while cruising.

In that case I would, you know, not do that and enjoy my brand new car.

        -dZ.

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[jpmorgan]

I see you're an Alfa Romeo fan too!

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[cynyr]

you are a bit high, it should have only been $4000 to fix that, the OP uses 10%. As for that, you can fix it with $0.03 worth of masking tape...

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[LWATCDR]

But man do you get points in my book for going back and owning up :)
Heck that should be modded up to a 5 funny :)

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[nahdude812]

Honestly if you're going to make a car analogy while accusing someone else of making a bad analogy, at least try to make it fit the actual scenario.

You just bought a new luxury car, it works fine until it suddenly drops 1,500 RPM, possibly completely stalling but at best losing a chunk of fuel efficiency and power while you're in the act of driving it, just because you touched the steering wheel at a certain spot.

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[ArsonSmith]

rewrite your post with it being "...touch the steering wheel and gas petal at the same time without a special steering wheel cover..." then you're analogy would be a bit closer. the holding method is the standard holding method for a cell phone while talking on it.

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[LWATCDR]

I usually get a day of use out of my phone but yes I would love a longer battery life.
But that is universal on all smart phones. Every time I read a review of any phone and they talk about how "thin" it is and then give the runtime I just want to hit people!
make the phone 3mm bigger and double the runtime folks. Really I would take that trade any day!

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[DriedClexler]

Maybe you missed the sarcasm, but you made a good point: CR seems to be the only one with any rigor in their reviews, the others just perpetuate information cascades. I hope you get modded up for that, since no one else has said that.

Then again, didn't CR only mention this *after* it became a big issue? Don't they still rate it higher than the others, even as they "don't recommend" it?

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[Missing.Matter]

Touching the iPhone 4 antenna in a very specific way so as to cause reception to drop temporarily

Except the antenna is on the perimeter of the device. Touching it is almost unavoidable, and the reception drop may be temporary, but it has been shown to be enough to drop calls reproducibly depending on ambient signal strength.

I think it's more like saying when my hands are at 10 and 2 on my steering wheel, my car won't go as fast as it will when they're at 7 and 4. Depending on where I am, the car might even completely stop.

If the manufacturer came out and said "Just don't hold the wheel at 10 and 2", is that acceptable?

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[Bryansix]

No! If I buy the $300 phone they should throw in the $30 bumper for free! You know why? Because that "$30 bumper" actually costs them $2 and most of that is shipping! If they did that then this issue would go away! Their refusal to do ANYTHING is complete bullshit! It violates the implied warranty of fitness for use as a PHONE (which it is still, gadgets and all).

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[Bryansix]

Thanks for that reply STEVE JOBS! Alert, I found ANOTHER one of his Slashdot accounts! Terminate it immediatly!

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[Wovel]

The problem is that half the whiners do not own an iPhone 4. Of the half that do have it, they only experience the problem if they hold it that way intentionally. Of the remaining 25% only 5 people have actually bothered to call Applecare. Of those 5 people, they have allmhad their phones exchanged for iPhone 4s that work flawlessly.

Re:Get over it and by a bumper you cry babies!

[LWATCDR]

Bazinga!

why?

[butterflysrage]

Streisand effect.. I never heard of the review until they made such a stink trying to keep me from hearing about the review.

Re:why?

[paiute]

Streisand effect.. I never heard of the review until they made such a stink trying to keep me from hearing about the review.

Really? It was on the front page of Google News and a lead story on at least two radio stations here the other day.

Re:why?

[butterflysrage]

I only listen to Radio-KOL and rarely look at google news....

Re:why?

[Dialecticus]

The question is, do you read Slashdot? http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/10/07/12/225227/Consumer-Reports-Cant-Recommend-iPhone-4

To think that this is the company.....

[8127972]

... That once claimed that 1984 wouldn't be like 1984.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[khendron]

They never said that 2010 wouldn't be like 1984.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[sznupi]

That's unfair, give them credit for great forward thinking; on the timescale of around 3 decades, it would seem. You don't see that too often from corps nowadays.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[HerculesMO]

Touche.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[lennier1]

It's always kinda funny to see how they've become what that classic TV spot wanted to rebel against.

And after years of using that Microsoft Borg logo we really need an Apple Borg logo as well.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[Pieroxy]

... That once claimed that 1984 wouldn't be like 1984.

Was it?

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[Nadaka]

There is truth in that, they were off by nearly two decades!

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[TheRaven64]

People seem to be misinterpreting that commercial quite often. They weren't saying that 1984 was a bad thing, they were just apologising for delays in their product line. It took them another 21 years to ship a working telescreen.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[zlogic]

That's a perfect example of doublethink. Remember how Apple said there would be no multitasking, no native apps because they're stupid and iPhone is perfect without them?
The reality distortion field is weak in comparison because it says "Apple is right, if you disagree, you don't understand our awesomeness" while doublethink allows Apple to contradict themselves and get away with it.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[alvinrod]

Funny thing about power. When you don't have any you deplore the use of it and decry those who abuse it. Once you accumulate a little and get a taste for wielding it, you just make room for the the next batch of squabblers without any power of their own yet.

Funny what $50 billion in revenue will do to a company.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[mizhi]

And after years of using that Microsoft Borg logo we really need an Apple Borg logo as well.

I think an Apple Lemming logo would be more appropriate. The Borg assimilated people by force - people didn't really want to become borg. Many people don't really want to use microsoft products, but must due to various factors, such as work.

On the other hand, people who use Apple products generally do so because they want to use Apple products, even if they're slowly assimilating into a computing culture that they would have abhorred had it come from Microsoft.

There's some broad brushing going on here, but I think my point is relatively clear.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[metamatic]

Extracts from George Orwell's "iPhone Four".

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[betterunixthanunix]

Woz still worked for Apple in 1984.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[cc1984_]

You spelt touchy wrong

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[v1k]

It's touché. Use the accent. (http://www.youfml.com/picture/3/touche.-use-the-accent.-17)

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[DriedClexler]

You spelled douche wrong.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[Bryansix]

No, only corrupt assholes do that. Point in case: One time in Band Camp there used to be a lot of hazing by the Seniors on the Freshman. They would not just play pranks but be complete jerks to the incoming class doing things like making them march in place for hours while covering them in food and silly string and then making them clean up THEIR mess afterwards. They also made them stand at attention for hours on end with no water (Abu Grahib Style) and hurl insults at them. The worst is when they would march them directly into solid objects like tree limbs and the sides of buildings.

When that Freshman class became Seniors, NONE of that stuff came over. The new Seniors kept ONE tradition which was making the Freshman carry a block of wood around and punishing them if they lost it. Otherwise there was no hazing whatsoever. So in one Generation the corruption ended. Apple just proves that instead of abhoring the corruption and abuse of power, they were simply jealous that they did not "think of that first".

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[izomiac]

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

1984 is not 1984

See? It fits.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[Tanman]

No, for apple we need a ziggurat with a Jobs head statue at the top.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[bm_luethke]

Become? No - they have *always* been this way. It is just that for the most part they were not in a position that most knew much about it or cared.

Most of their fan base has always been like the posts here defending Apple and calling them the Good Guys and that is what most of us have had contact with. It wasn't until the iPod that they truly had a market leader that people could interact with on a large scale. With it the restrictions weren't things you would want to do anyway - it played music and did so well and still does so, it isn't a general purpose computing platform. The iPhone has always had this attitude behind behind it, but again it was not really a general purpose computing platform for quite a while. It wasn't until we truly started looking at it as one that the flaws became so major. It wasn't until you had people outside of that core loyal customer base that you started seeing the Apple not shielded by them.

Nor have they been all that stellar in design too - lots of ergonomic and usage problems over the years. Know why we still make fun of the one button mouse? Because it sucked royally and Apple refused to change telling you to suck it up. Several of their macbooks over the years have had hard edges where many people rest their wrists and would quickly cause pain in use - they were told to just not let their wrists tough the edge and Apple happily continued the practice (it looked better than the rounded edges). They generally felt that the people who let their wrists rest on the edge of the laptop were in the minority so who cares? Same thing with both the antenna and prox sensor on the phones - they are a minority and they figure most will suck it up and still purchase/use the product. There are MANY more examples that have been done over the years. Nor are they the "inventors" of many of the things thier fan base says they are - they copied just as much as anyone else (see their failed attempt to sue Microsoft over the windows interface when they both ultimately stole from the same source - Xerox).

To be fair they are happy that way - if you do not see success as market dominance and are happy with 10% yet still make a decent profit who am I to tell you that you are doing it wrong? Long term Apple users are happy, Apple the company is happy, their investors are happy, and the people that are unhappy with that are not "loyal" customers anyway. If you d not really care what they think then it makes sense.

There is a reason the phrase "Jobs Reality Distortion Field" has been in use for so long, it is just that many people who thought it was a simple joke (or believed the Apple fanatics that it was jealousy of their clearly superior product) are learning why the term was coined to begin with.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[hitmark]

how about a pyramid where the floating top is Jobs head?

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[ejasons]

I think that's supposed to be douché...

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[squiggleslash]

There was a brief period in the early part of this decade where Apple was:

1. Contributing new things to open source (Darwin's kernel, a radically refactored KHTML, etc)
2. Moving away from proprietary standards and towards open standards (from Sorensen to H.264, for example)
3. Designing genuinely better UIs for a variety of objects from MP3 players to desktops
4. Contributing to functionality and the "just works" mindset

They've slowly moved away from all of that, while speaking in doublespeak, "We don't want people using proprietary Flash! We want people using open standards like HTML5 (but as HTML5 will never actually do the things you use Flash for, what we actually are saying is we want you to use Quicktime, but we'll never say the "Q" word in public)"; "We believe in a phone that just works! Which is why we've invented a phone that's lousy at being a phone, and whose first iteration requires plugging into a computer and installing software to activate, rather than just inserting your SIM card like all other GSM phones", "We're coming out with a Smartphone! Note that it doesn't let you program it. No. You can run apps on it, but only if they're published by us.", etc, etc.

Moved back to GNU/Linux four years ago. I don't regret it for a second. Thank you Mark Shuttleworth. And thank you Google for doing what you can to fix the touchscreen phone concept, so we might actually get a chance to see if it's a viable concept or not.

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[CoolGopher]

I think a better word to describe Apple's behavior would be "Douche"...

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[bm_luethke]

True, but they were never doing it out of any good will - they were doing it because it would save them money in the long term.

In the early 2000's IBM was adding a great deal of knowledge and code to numerous Open Source projects - I happened to be fairly heavily involved in a few of them (work, not play though). It was both obvious to us and, while not really something discussed, behind dealings with them that the same was believed there also. They were making a business decision that it was cheaper to help in the ways they were good at and let the Open Source communities do what they were good at.

Difference being that IBM wasn't looking to then close everything else up as much as Apple has done. Further it was an actual shift in corporate thought at IBM, it wasn't simply a case of taking advantage of something (though if they couldn't have taken advantage they wouldn't have done it), but a real move towards open standards in the HPC world.

Apple *never* changed on iota, they simply took advantage of their image in pure unadulterated corporate greed. They only contributed in places that they had to have work for them (and through the license was forced to release) and locked everything else down whilst saying how great they were.

Indeed your point 3 is arguable (many, including myself, think their desktop UI is worse) and four was only a marketing idea. One and two, while it could have been a first step towards openness was nothing more than taking advantage of the Open Source communities.

IBM gave up some *real* proprietary information that they didn't ahve too, especially in the Kernel arena. They paid people to do so and fully embraced the the OS/applications. Apple mainly fixed things and contributed as little new information as possible to have the core work for their OS.

I still wouldn't trust IBM very far - I wouldn't any entity that has its own bottom line as a higher priority than mine (and note that I hold my own priority higher than most others so I'm not saying that is bad - just do not be shocked when they do something to protect their bottom line and lets your fall) - yet they have been about as good as one can truly expect out of a company. Of course I haven't been involved in about 4 years now so things could very well have changed, but for at least a good 6 years they were consistent.

Apple didn't move away from it as they were not ever there. People wanted to believe they were good enough that they figured out how to rationalize it. People *still* want to believe it strongly enough that they can even rationalize what is currently happening as "good".

Re:To think that this is the company.....

[MoeDumb]

It's Souse. Egbert Souse, accent grave over the e.

Apple Has Become a Joke

[Slash.Poop]

This just proves it again. Don't you dare question our Dear Leader.

Usenet

[Pascal Sartoretti]

All threads about Consumer Report's iPhone4 non-recommendation are removed or deleted

Just use Usenet

Re:Usenet

[betterunixthanunix]

Sadly, the days of distributed discussion systems like Usenet are almost completely over.

Apple is About Freedom!

[CritterNYC]

Apple is about freedom. Freedom from porn. Freedom from criticism. Freedom from competition. Freedom from objective discussions. Freedom from the truth.

Apple little world is looking more like 1984 every day.

Re:Apple is About Freedom!

[Shadow Wrought]

Apple is about freedom. Freedom from porn. Freedom from criticism. Freedom from competition. Freedom from objective discussions. Freedom from the truth.

True. It doesn't matter what flavor the Kool-Aid is, as long as it's in a shiny, black pitcher.

Re:Apple is About Freedom!

[rivaldufus]

My suggestion for a slogan for Apple is:

Freedom from the tyranny of choice

Their marketing department can use that for free.

Re:Apple is About Freedom!

[VGPowerlord]

True. It doesn't matter what flavor the Kool-Aid is, as long as it's in a shiny, white pitcher.

FTFY

Re:Apple is About Freedom!

[fermion]

There is no app porn on the iphone. When the iphone came out, there little web porn that would work on it. That is no longer the case.

I am not sure how Apple users are free from criticism or competition. Even if Apple is censoring their web site, that is only a small portion of the web. I think we would agree that the vast majority of information the average user receives is through google or bing searches, not by going to the Apple web site. I think we can all agree that these searches bring up all sorts of criticism and information on other phones, such as RIM and Android and Kin. And whatever one may want to believe I have seen many more Android and Kin commercials than iPhone. As an aside, I have seen more Chrome commercials than Safari of Firefox.

Hyperbole is fun, but hardly part of an objective discussion. Part of the reason many political pundits, and politicians, cannot be taken seriously is because, like you, they make radical metaphors that have no basis in fact.

Re:Apple is About Freedom!

[rwv]

Apple is about freedom. Freedom from porn. Freedom from criticism. Freedom from competition. Freedom from objective discussions. Freedom from the truth.

Apple little world is looking more like 1984 every day.

WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Re:Apple is About Freedom!

[dzarn]

Freedom from phone calls!

Re:Apple is About Freedom!

[mister_playboy]

Perhaps he spent the extra $100 for the black pitcher? :)

Re:Apple is About Freedom!

[squiggleslash]

Hyperbole is fun, but hardly part of an objective discussion.

I don't think you understood the reference. Steven Jobs, in one of his recent infamous emails, made the comment "Folks who want porn can buy and [sic] Android phone." (http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/04/steve-jobs-porn/) The GP was almost certainly referring to that.

Nobody (except, apparently, Steve Jobs) is unaware of the porn-capable web browser installed on every iPhone.

Hey Apple fanboys...

[bogaboga]

...How do you explain this? Sadly, these fanboys will be outside Apple stores a few years down the road to buy the 'latest' and 'greatest' Apple product of the time...even when it's riddled with obvious defects like the iPhone 4.

After all no one in the industry cares more about the customer experience better than Apple. Right?

Re:Hey Apple fanboys...

[cowscows]

This has been standard operating procedure for Apple for a long time. That doesn't make it right, but it also shouldn't be surprising. Although it's interesting how even with actions like this, Apple still generally rates higher in customer service than everyone else.

The bar has been set very low in the industry.

Re:Hey Apple fanboys...

[HopefulIntern]

So? Who cares? If they wanna spend tons of hard earned cash on crappy products that are shiny, why not let them? I dunno about you, but part of the sweetness of having an Android phone is the smug satisfaction I get knowing I'm not a fucking moron.

Re:Hey Apple fanboys...

[psbrogna]

I bet not all of them will be back in line. They lost customers the minute they shipped a product that shouldn't have made it through QA. Superior engineering & QA is how many people justify the Apple Tax & if Apple has decided to do less QA then they will lose customers. That they are suppressing the voice of their customers will cost them more customers- perhaps even more than due to the former cause. I'd be willing to bet that the lost "brand equity" over this issue will cost them more in the long run then doing proper QA in the first place (call it justice, karma, etc.). Your point is well taken though- it won't cost them as much as would other companies because of the blind loyalty of many of their customers.

Re:Hey Apple fanboys...

[Nightwraith]

After all no one in the industry cares more about the customer experience better than Apple. Right?

Of course not! No customer should want to watch movies on Blu-ray(tm) discs.
That kind of behavior is just a bit too extreme.

Re:Hey Apple fanboys...

[jewswithbacon]

Glad to see you care so much. You should slit your wrists over this tragedy - it'd be the right thing to do.

And remember - when cutting - down the street works better than across the road.

Re:Hey Apple fanboys...

[david_thornley]

I'll be out to buy a product that's "riddled" with one easily avoidable defect, particularly as I was already planning to get a case for it. Yes, Apple screwed up on this one. No, it's not unique, and Apple really doesn't come out with an unusual number of screwups. No, there's no point in having people swarming their forums with links to the Consumer Reports article, since the problem is already known. Yes, Apple should give out some sort of insulation, and they aren't. No, this sort of behavior isn't unique (look at the history of automotive recalls if you like, and remember that a crashed car is a far more important problem than a dropped call).

Yes, this whole thing is being jumped on excessively by the Apple haters here, such as the parent poster. The iPhone 4 has a problem, and Apple isn't handling it all that well. Then again, maybe when the production catches up with the sales they will handle it better.

Re:Hey Apple fanboys...

[socceroos]

This has been standard operating procedure for Apple for a long time...Apple still generally rates higher in customer service than everyone else.

I don't think you're connecting the dots...

Re:Hey Apple fanboys...

[UnanimousCoward]

I know I'll get labeled a fanboy and flamed by Apple haters but...

Wake me up when Apple's bottom line starts hurting. Then it's a BFD. I'm not saying the it isn't newsworthy that Apple is deleting forum posts, but I'm sick of all the ranting and raving that accompanies Apple's stumbles and demands that "I" or "someone" needs to explain anything. AFAIK, there are still people climbing over fence to buy the so-called defective iPhone 4. Apple acts the way it acts because the drug addicts keep buying their product. When we stop buying the crack, Apple will change its tactics. Otherwise, Apple will think they're justified (and by all accounts, they have been so far) in acting the way they've been acting.

Hard to know if the posts violated the ToS

[Omega]

It's hard to know if this is censorship or if they just violated the terms of service and hatebois are flying off the handle. There are still lots of posts about the consumer reports unrecommendation on discussions.apple.com:

http://discussions.apple.com/search.jspa?search=Go&q=consumer+reports

Still, if it's true it wouldn't be the first time Apple flew off the handle with the censorship (remember the Ulysses app flap?).

Re:Hard to know if the posts violated the ToS

[Itninja]

I took a walk thru several of those cited links. They all had a post or two similar to this among the complaints:

BUY IT!

i have nvever owned an iphone before saturday but decided to get one even though i thought like you,should i/shouldn't i? best
thing i did! i have had no problems at all. the screen is amazing, so easy to register and sync, i can easily take of
photos and movies i have made though the auto play when you first use the usb to charge/sync the phone when plugs into
your pc. the movies and photos are perfect quality. no reception issues here and my case has not arrived so its nothing to do
with that!

get one, otherwise you don't know what you are missing!!

I am guessing marketing dept intern....

Re:Hard to know if the posts violated the ToS

[jewswithbacon]

But ... but .... all the haters said there were no posts on Apple! I can't get a hard-on without massive amounts of viagra and my hater fantasy! My sex life is completely dependent on whether or not my views on important things like consumer electronics and brands are validated on nerd-boards.

This is clearly Apple's fault. Fuck Steve Jobs! And those zombie buyers - grrrrrrrrrrrr!

(rub rub rub rub rub rub rub rub)

Re:Hard to know if the posts violated the ToS

[ukyoCE]

It's sad that I had to come this far down to find an upmodded post talking about the actual issue at hand, and pointing out there's very little merit to it.

Every other upmodded post is blindly lashing out at Apple as being de facto wrong and evil.

I must be new here, why would I expect objectivity regarding Apple from Slashdot users...

Re:Hard to know if the posts violated the ToS

[DocSavage64109]

To be fair, I just got an iPhone 4 last Thursday after using a Blackberry Curve for the last 2 years, and I'm amazed at how nice this phone is. I haven't really had any of the described reception problems either and I refuse to put a case on this beautiful piece of art. I'm just curious as to how this will all play out.

Its Baaaack

[dmunz]

Well it appears to be un-censored. I can see three or four active threads in thier support forum. Of course most are fanboys v. the worl calling each other asholes... FWIW DLM

Re:Its Baaaack

[Sulphur]

You would think that they would be used to it by now.

--

Is that a right handed or a left handed antenna?

Implosion

[Andy Smith]

Even though I'm a Windows user, it always gives me a wry smile when Linux users say what fun it is to observe all the Windows problems (virii, exploits, etc) from a safe distance.

Now, as an ex-Apple customer, now happily using an HTC Desire, I can say that it's great fun watching Apple implode, from a safe distance.

I don't wish them any ill-will. My preference would be for them to take an honesty pill, start treating their customers with some respect, and turn the whole sorry situation around. But they aren't doing that, so I'll toast marshmallows on the bonfire of Apple's reputation.

Re:Implosion

[progr]

Implode? Maybe you should take a look at AAPL stocks. 547.19% in the last 5 years (73.9% since 2009.)

Re:Implosion

[Krau Ming]

ah, but -2.5% since this morning... oh crap, i have AAPL stocks...

Re:Implosion

[MtViewGuy]

Of course, I think Apple better do something FAST before the Federal Trade Commission (or its equivalent at the European Commission) starts asking questions on why Apple sold a deliberately defective product and tried to hide the fact of this known defect. If Apple can't fix this problem with an update to iOS 4.0 then the potential for huge financial losses from recalling all iPhone 4's and the stock price hit could be quite real.

mod parent down

[ais523]

Wow, this spam is disguised as a legitimate post so well I actually read the whole thing before realising it was spam. Clearly Slashdot spambots (or human spammers?) are getting better these days. I don't know whether to be appalled or impressed.

Re:mod parent down

[chichilalescu]

human spammers. when spambots are ineffective, you start paying people to spam for you (the chinese government does it for instance; also, I assume all parties do it before elections).

and yes, someone please mod "studyabroaduniversit" down, and delete their account too.

and you should be appalled.

Re:It's a support forum...

[easterberry]

"well as the article I'm talking points out, my fucking antennae isn't working and last time I called you said it was a software problem so I linked this article showing an independent test proving it's a hardware one. So if you could fucking do something about it that would be awesome."

Antennas and Cradles

[HiveMind118]

We all know how Apple likes to make sure all peripherals are Apple licensed. Couldn't a cradle be made (for cars for example) that used the antenna contact point to extend the antenna (thereby bypassing the need to license a Apple proprietary plug)?

Re:Antennas and Cradles

[master0ne]

it seems like the issue is its shorting the antenna out (causing attenuation) rather than passing the signal through the case, most likely, even if a longer antenna was rigged up to the phone via this method, it would not improve reception at all... you would need to actually access the part of the PCB where the antenna solders on (or access part of the antenna directly (without grounding it out against the case or other components. Nice thought though... :D

Re:Antennas and Cradles

[wervr]

GP's idea would make the reception worse, and yours would make it even worse than GP's idea. The whole point of antennae is that they are the right length to do their job. You don't want them shorter (giving an iphone the finger) or longer (connecting metal crap to other parts of the phone). Basically this phone needs to have the antenna disconnected and replaced with a regular one inside if there is any space.

Re:Antennas and Cradles

[master0ne]

i agree that the original GP's would make it worse, however if designed right, (ie the right length for the spectrum etc) it would not be hard to design an antenna which replaces the included one. The catch is to have the right length for the spectrum being used.

Re:The Real Surprise...

[LynnwoodRooster]

With this latest fiasco with the iPhone 4, are we sure it's been the AT&T network all along instead of poor phone design?

But this is what people want

[Colin Smith]

They want a cool, sharp, designed world where everything is taken care of, by the caring giant that is Steve Jobs. He cares. He makes the world a better place. You don't have to worry about it.

Didn't someone write a book about that?

 

Re:But this is what people want

[Culture20]

They want a cool, sharp, designed world where everything is taken care of, by the caring giant that is Steve Jobs. He cares. He makes the world a better place. You don't have to worry about it.

Didn't someone write a book about that?

Indeed. They wrote a series of books.

Oh the irony!...

[kwolf22]

"Today we celebrate the first glorious anniversary of the Information Purification Directives.

We have created for the first time in all history a garden of pure ideology, where each worker may bloom, secure from the pests of any contradictory true thoughts.

Our Unification of Thoughts is more powerful a weapon than any fleet or army on earth.

We are one people, with one will, one resolve, one cause.

Our enemies shall talk themselves to death and we will bury them with their own confusion.

We shall prevail!

On January 24th Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh. And you'll see why 1984 won't be like '1984.'"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8

Who knew that 26 years later, Apple would be "Big Brother"...

Nice plagarism, anon

[sootman]

From http://www.tuaw.com/2010/07/12/apple-drops-consumer-reports-discussion-threads-down-memory-hole/

If you were looking for a message thread on Apple's support forums pointing to Consumer Reports' article 'not recommending' the iPhone 4, it's not there any more. Apple's support forum moderators deleted the thread. Bing cached it.

If it happened once, maybe you'd say it was a glitch. But what if it happened twice? Three times? Four times, five, six?

No...

[SmurfButcher Bob]

No... they're posting it wrong.

Re:No...

[thrawn_aj]

You're right as far as matters of principle go. Of course, if someone really wants an objectively run message board, it is impractical to expect that from the manufacturer of the product. Morality in the business world is a wonderful thing to aspire to but it's naive to assume that it exists. You don't go to church to hear a critical analysis of religion. You shouldn't be visiting an Apple message board for a critical review of an Apple product. Having said that, I'm a recent B&N Nook purchaser and their message boards are absolutely rife with whiners and objective tons of objective criticism (no censorship beyond language since it's meant for all ages) - shows that it's quite possible.

The part about Slashdot moderation being censorship is ridiculous in the extreme. This crummy argument keeps coming back like a bad penny. The data is all still there. Anyone who wants to read everything is free to do so. It's a rating system. Using that rating for displaying or hiding posts is the prerogative of the user. Why is this so hard to understand? If Slashdot was deleting the posts, that would be censorship. By your logic, the simple act of rating a post (something that is available in numerous message boards with even rudimentary features) amounts to censorship. WTF? Note also that it's not the powers-that-be that do the rating. It's the farking users! Even disregarding all of this, the simple fact of the matter is that if you browse the thread without filtering, the ratings don't matter at all and you can see everything.

Does Google censor when it simply provides a way to do a safe-search? Obviously, there's some sort of metadata that classifies certain search results as 'safe' and others as 'not-safe'. Does the mere existence of such metadata count as censorship? *snort*

Re:No...

[hkmwbz]

Censorship is wrong. Period.

So, as I asked the other guy, are you saying that if someone posted child porn on Apple's forum, they should not censor it?

the problem is that, just as we see every day here on slashdot, once the power is in place, what actually gets censored is what the censor disagrees with

Considering that there are several active threads in the forum on this specific issue, it seems that you are wrong.

And yes, I'm an Apple customer - Macs, iPods, iPads, software. I have absolutely no personal respect for Steve Jobs remaining. He's an utter loony, condemned by his own repeated bizarre practices.

That's interesting because I don't really like Apple as a company. I avoid their products like the plague. And yet I fully understand why they would want to clean up their forum when lazy bums are flooding it with new threads on something there are already several existing open threads on.

Re:No...

[dgatwood]

You're confusing the idea that you have the power to control something, with the rightness of doing so. Censorship is wrong. Period.

So you're okay with me posting the ASCII art version of goatse on your blog, right? A thousand times? On every page? Just making sure.

Re:No...

[delinear]

Duplicate threads are always going to exist (hello, /.), and while I share broadly the same opinion as you (of Apple as a company, but also of their right to clean up their forum) I certainly recognise that, in sensitive areas, it's wise to emply some tact or face potential backlash from users. There are many better ways to handle this, hell, if they're getting so many duplicate threads that it's becoming an issue, start a new forum specifically for that topic and just move all related threads to it. No need to close anything, people get to air their grievances without feeling they're being "censored". From a PR perspective there are many better ways to handle this than just deleting threads.

Re:No...

[dwightk]

Censorship is wrong. Period.

That is ludicrous and you know it. Are you telling me that if you ran a website with comments, you'd leave up all the crappy spam link comments?

If you do, have you noticed that people hate your website?

Yeah, it sucks

[osgeek]

You've got to wonder, though... what would you do if you were Apple?

Allow your support forums to be littered with direct recommendations not to buy the product? That kind of gets into the sales side of things. Do you allow Android phone makers to post ads for their products that compete with the iPhone?

It's a tough situation to be in. They should probably just come clean about the problem and offer customers the workaround cover thing... or refunds.

I'm glad I don't have any Apple stock these days. Might be a good time to buy some after the panic sets in and the price drops like a fire sale.

Re:Yeah, it sucks

[betterunixthanunix]

what would you do if you were Apple?

Remind myself that at one time, Apple was viewed as liberators from companies who were trying to subvert their users? Remind myself that hackers used to view Apple as a friend who was ending the age of begging for computer time? Remind myself of the days when customers were not viewed as sheep whose wallets need fleecing, and when Apple employees were not tasked with finding ever more effective ways to extract money from the customers?

Maybe I would take notice that the Free Software Foundation mentions "Apple" before "Microsoft" when describing threats to user freedom. Perhaps I would take a moment to notice that Apple's own attempt at building a hacker community failed miserably because of the level of control that Apple insisted on. If Apple has to censor its forums to maintain its image, they are in a very precarious position.

New Logo Please

[Tihstae]

We need a new logo on /. for Apple. No more with the company logo. We need Steve Borg or something similar.

Re:New Logo Please

[L4t3r4lu5]

Found it

Re:New Logo Please

[dmgxmichael]

Covered in rust with a worm crawling out that has Steve Job's head on it perhaps? (Just a thought. Be a great visual done right).

Re:New Logo Please

[shutdown -p now]

Why would Steve be a Borg? Who does Apple forcibly assimilate?

**YAWN**

[alanshot]

Really?

How about you come back when they are censoring OTHER sites and pulling down bad reviews from 3rd party websites with such nonsense as DMCA takedowns.

Until then, dont waste your bandwidth as its a non-issue, and status quo with MANY sites.

Next thing you are going to tell me is that there is astroturfing going on in places like Amazon, etc.
. /snark

Mr. Burns anyone?

[poly_pusher]

http://public.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pUmePicNqIFp8RaGrID5DwhtJFsZAqWCa2OO_8Wa3YcDkJGl-nAXr0ib321V3NFdF3yzGOLvz8xRLpBrTEG4y6g/Mr.Jobs.jpg?psid=1

Look it up

[ThrowAwaySociety]

If someone says something, and you remove it, that's censorship.

No, it's not.

Censorship is:

: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable ; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable

There are plenty of discussions about this issue on the Apple support boards which are not being removed.

The multiple posts about an external magazine review have been removed because discussing magazine articles is offtopic for a tech support board, just as discussing the latest Huffington Post article on Angelina Jolie is offtopic.

Re:Look it up

[betterunixthanunix]

There are plenty of discussions about this issue on the Apple support boards which are not being removed.

So it is only censorship if they remove all discussions about the topic, rather than some of them? Note the second part of that definition of "censorship" which you posted.

The multiple posts about an external magazine review have been removed because discussing magazine articles is offtopic for a tech support board, just as discussing the latest Huffington Post article on Angelina Jolie is offtopic.

An article about a technical issue that users are experiencing is off topic in a technical forum? I am looking there right now, and half the topics are not specifically "tech support."

Re:Look it up

[blind biker]

The multiple posts about an external magazine review have been removed because discussing magazine articles is offtopic for a tech support board, just as discussing the latest Huffington Post article on Angelina Jolie is offtopic.

So, a magazine article about the iPhone is off-topic in a tech support board dedicated to the iPhone?

Are you saying this with a straight face?

Re:Look it up

[schon]

If someone says something, and you remove it, that's censorship.

No, it's not.

Censorship is:

: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable ; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable

So, you're saying that this is not being deleted? Or that it's not objectionable? If it's not objectionable why is it being deleted? Oh, right:

because discussing magazine articles is offtopic

.. and offtopic stuff isn't objectionable? Again - if it's not objectionable, why is it being deleted?

Your own definition proves that this is indeed censorship.

Re:Look it up

[Gary Perkins]

Ok, as a former sysop of oldschool BBSes, I gotta pipe up my two cents. First, I get pretty tired of hearing people scream censorship whenever something is deleted on a forum. As others have pointed out, it IS their right to do it.

You might not like it, but there it is. And since we're quoting dictionaries, here's the breakdown:

A censor is not necessarily a bad thing

censor

/snsr/ [sen-ser]

–noun

3. an adverse critic; faultfinder.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/censor

I believe my boss has censored me a number of times at work for my language...

Now, with that said, moderators (or censors, if you really want to be nasty about it) are only human. With so many posts, they have to pick and choose which offtopic, flamebait, etc posts to delete. From what I've read, there's still several ontopic discussions about the issue, so if they don't touch those threads, then it's hardly even censorship.

Re:Look it up

[AmaranthineNight]

I can't speak for the GP, but I would be saying it with a straight face. It's neither asking a support-related question nor providing any support-related answers.

Nobody reading a post about a magazine review is going to learn anything that can help them solve their antenna issue. People who are posting with antenna issues (but not posting a discussion topic about the review) are not having their topics removed. An article about a product is not automatically relevant to technical support discussions about said product, even when that article is a very well-researched review. Technical support is about stating a problem that you, personally, are experiencing and trying to find a solution. Posting a third-party review does neither.

Re:Look it up

[stewbacca]

It's a support forum. Does the CR article provide a fix? No. They lament that the device is unusable as a phone, even though there are easy fixes (a piece of tape, or a case).

Re:Look it up

[Syberz]

a magazine article about the iPhone is off-topic in a tech support board dedicated to the iPhone?

Here's probably what happened:

iPhone customer: Yeah, reception sucks on my new iPhone 4.
AppleGeek: No it doesn't, I bet you're holding it with your hands? You're doing it wrong.
iPhone customer: Uh, there's a bunch of threads on the subject, many of us are having the same issue.
AppleGeek: They're doing it wrong too.
iPhone customer: There's even an article in Consumer Report that mentions it! Here's the link -->
AppleGeek: *pulls out the ban-hammer*
iPhone customer, having a half-caf decaf soy mocha latte with a lemon twaist at Le Expensive Coffee: Where'd my thread go?

*Bonus points to whoever gets the "lemon twaist" reference.

Re:Look it up

[ImNotAtWork]

The CR article identifies a problem, consumers are easily dismissed but a widely circulated periodical pointing out flaws should at least help as reference when you are reporting the problem. I am not calling CR the holy grail of journalistic and ethical excellence but it is held in high regard among people who are trying to buy items (justified or not).

Re:Look it up

[Gary Perkins]

Nobody is diputing it is Apple's right to delete whatever posts they want to. But it is still censorship, even though they have the right to do it. Sorry but taking down post that show your product in a bad light is absolutely censorship. Whether or not it was a smart move is what is being discussed. The two things that are facts in this matter are - 1) Apple had the right to delete posts 2)Doing so is a form of censorship.

I'm not arguing that it's not a form of censorship. Sometimes censorship is a good thing. In this case, after reviewing the cache, it looks like it was probably the right thing to do. It was not the proper forum for that post.

I just skimmed the first part of the Use Agreement and it reminds me very much of what we used to post on boards ten, twenty years ago. The main gist of it is, it's a tech support forum. Ask tech questions, answer tech questions.

Clearly the post was out of line, thus removed. Now, here's the kicker: Imagine, if you will, that you have this immensely popular product, and it attracts an incredible amount of discussion online. If you weren't VERY careful with how you moderated your site, and you let it go, how long until it becomes so out of control that it becomes a big joke? While it's not a message forum, Yahoo Chat comes to mind...

Re:Look it up

[yyxx]

The multiple posts about an external magazine review have been removed because discussing magazine articles is offtopic for a tech support board

I see. You mean Apple's tech support goes something like this:

Customer: I'm having reception problems. I think your antenna is broken.

Apple: You're crazy. Our products are perfect. Nobody else is having this problem.

Customer: Lots of people are having this problem, and Consumer Reports confirmed it.

Apple: References to other publications are offtopic, so we now have good cause to delete this thread.

Re:Look it up

[stewbacca]

My problem is that they let one issue be a show stopper, when they otherwise like the phone. Maybe that one problem isn't a show stopper for other people, so they shouldn't base their entire "cannot recommend" based on one issue (that is apparently fixable by adding a case, or, as Steve would say, not holding it like that).

How about they say, "this is a great phone, but you may want to take the antenna issue into account when deciding to purchase one or not."

Re:Look it up

[Parts09]

Bronson Pinchot in Beverly Hills Cop?

Re:Look it up

[ukyoCE]

I'd say a review from a well-respected magazine like Consumer Reports that discusses their confirmation of technical problems in the iPhone belong in the tech support board. Professional and objective confirmation of a major product flaw is pretty serious and relevant.

On the other hand, I would fully expect them to limit the number of threads discussing the same topic, and to pick one that isn't a complete troll about it. I haven't seen any indication that this is the approach Apple's forum moderators are taking.

Re:Look it up

[Syberz]

You win a cookie ;)

Re:Look it up

[mjwx]

So, a magazine article about the iPhone is off-topic in a tech support board dedicated to the iPhone?

Are you saying this with a straight face?

Yes, there are no tanks in Baghdad according to Apple's new forum moderator.

Re:Look it up

[delinear]

Actually this is exactly what I look for on these kind of forums before I buy a phone. In this case there's plenty of anecdotal evidence from users posting about antenna issues, but it would be nice to see a more respected source before making a decision. Obviously this isn't really a problem in this case as the whole world now knows about the issue, but the point stands in general that a user posting with a semi-authorititive source to back them up is more persuasive than a user just posting their personal experience. The "tech support" part is meaningless - there are lots of threads there not asking or answering technical questions, but even if every issue was purely technical, for the reason just stated, I'd rather see someone with a back-up source ask the question than someone who, for all I know, might just have dropped their phone down the toilet.

Re:Power Play by Consumers Union

[LynnwoodRooster]

This seems like a power play to provide more relevance to Consumer's Union than a specific attack on Apple. I am by no means an Apple fan but this issue seems potentially overstated.

Absolutely overstated! I mean, who really wants their phone to actually BEHAVE as a phone! Insanity, I tell you, insanity!

Re:It's a support forum...

[dhermann]

"I'm sorry, sir, but you have violated the Terms of Service of this call by referring to an external site. I will have to censor you for the remainder of our conversation. Is there anything else I can assist you with today? ...Sir, by your silence I must conclude that I have resolved the issue. I went ahead and filled out a comment about how happy you are with our product on the Consumer Reports website. Thank you, and please remember that the new season of Glee is available on the iStore for $31.99."

It's not censorship.

[Lester67]

That word has been bastardized beyond belief... in an effort to cry about how "oppressed" someone *feels*, they've watered down true censorship.

Apple made a "business decision", maybe a crappy one, but it is still a business decision. The First Amendment (for us U.S. folks) guarantees you the right to say something, but it doesn't require someone hand you the soap box... nor does it suppress *their* right to free speech in countering your argument.

China practices true censorship. People go to jail in an effort to silence them. The government shows up at the door and demands that you delete, or deletes it for you.

Re:It's not censorship.

[garyok]

Ass. Censorship is suppressing information you don't want people to see. Coercion is when you make people do what you want against their will. Imprisonment is when you lock up people you don't want to see. They are different words because they are not the same thing.

iHistory

[gmuslera]

You can make your own history, delete, or even rewrite it. There is an app for that.

Beware, if you don't hold iHistory with an iron grip could be public reception problems.

Take a look in the Apple support forums, please

[RLBrown]

Naturally, as soon as I read the Slashdot summary, I read the original at TUAW. The TUAW posting was as represented by the Slashdot summary: Apple is said to have killed all mention of the CR article in its forums. Being an Apple support forum member, I logged in. Yes, the particular posts were indeed labelled "you do not have permission...". EVIL, I thought. But then I poked around -- there are massive threads discussing the antenna in the Apple Support Forum, many dumping vile on the antenna engineering. So what was so offensive to Apple in the handful of posts that they did censor? TUAW helpfully pointed out that Bing had cached the offensive posts. Well, let's have a look there. The deleted posts were less about the antenna issue, and more about the quality and accuracy of CR testing. Expressed in highly emotional fan-boy terms. It would seem that Apple has not touched the real ongoing discussions of the antenna issue, but just taken down the threads that strayed into CR bashing. BTW, as a CR subscriber, I read the original article there, too. Yes, after giving good marks to most iPhone 4 features, it considers the antenna issue to be a fatal flaw. But it does not discuss the claims that the signal must be marginal in the first place, for the hand grip to make a difference. Nor discusses the possible smokescreen of bar generation algorithms.

Re:Take a look in the Apple support forums, please

[AmaranthineNight]

Thanks for doing the legwork on this one. You confirmed my suspicions about this situation exactly.

Re:It's a support forum...

[easterberry]

"Oh man! I love Glee! I'm gonna call Steve and tell him about that deal... Steve? Steve? Huh... can't seem to get through."

first...

[Tom]

For years, it was clearly ignorance, but the Apple hatebois are getting really worked up recently.

So are we at the "then they fight you" stage now?

Re:first...

[mjwx]

So are we at the "then they fight you" stage now?

Because Apple has censored that stage everyone is still at the "laugh at you" stage.

Re:first...

[daver00]

I know you were making a light hearted snipe at the Apple hate club, but seriously I think Apple hate is justifiable at this stage, until they change one or two aspects of their marketing practices. The problem, for me, is they are monumental liars, and they are fucking smug about it. So far with iPhone 4 they have released their own version of Skype and called it a revolution in phone tech with obvious overtones that they have now invented video calling. They have also made the utterly ridiculous claim that they invented a new grade of stainless steel, and a new type of glass-polymer laminate. Seriously, invented is the word they are using. They are then beating the drum about these 'inventions' by reeling off irrelevant figures, the stainless is 20x stronger than pig iron, their glass is 80x harder than plastic (seriously I'd say its about 5000x harder than bread but what the fuck information is being conveyed here?). They are just fucking liars, and I mean regular marketing teams lie, but this is fucked up. During the iPhone 4 keynote, Jobs talks about how he always dreamed of a technology like facetime, and that now, thanks to Apple, its real. Like fuck man you never used Skype, ICQ, MSN, Gmail chat, or a regular fucking mobile phone before? WHY would you make this claim? That just takes a fucking dump on the work of hundreds and thousands of software engineers in the past, fuck those guys their work is meaningless now that Apple have copied it. Then the fanbois run with this shit.

Fuck them, they are liars, and the smugness is fucking unbearable. Its fine if you look at this and most regular people see through the crap, but this disease is spreading, people who know no better buy into it and start repeating these lies. Its fucking offensive what they get away with, and they deserve to be hated on right now, until they tone it down a notch or two. Forget the growing 'trendiness' of Apple hate, these guys are literally reaping what they sow, seriously let them eat the shit sandwich they have made for themselves.

Welcome to the world of Nazi computing that is wor

[Joe The Dragon]

Welcome to the world of Nazi computing that is worse then trusted computing!

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

The question is not whether it's legal

[sean.peters]

The question is whether it's a smart thing to do. And without question, it's not. The issue is now getting increased prominence as a direct result of Apple's own actions. Obviously it would be a lot better in the long run for Apple to face the music, admit their device has a problem, recall it, and fix the problem. But I doubt Big Steve is psychologically capable of admitting an error of this magnitude.

Disclosure: Mac and iPhone (3G) user here.

Re:The question is not whether it's legal

[dzfoo]

I don't know about that... people keep on buying the devices. A few of my friends that bought an iPhone 4 are perfectly happy with it.

The (very loud) cries of a few nerds in the Internet may not travel as far as some think.

        -dZ.

What? No Futurama quote?

[Crudely_Indecent]

You can't mention the Zapper and not quote him!......or...maybe you can.

I'll fix that for you:
Zapp Brannigan's Reporting Strategy

Captain Zapp Brannigan: Captain's journal. Stardate: uhhh...

I like this one better:

[Crudely_Indecent]

Captain Zapp Brannigan: Captain's log. Stardate: 3000.6.
Kif Kroker: Who are you talking to?
Captain Zapp Brannigan: You, Kif. Aren't you writing this down?

I've actually had really good luck with AT&T

[sean.peters]

I bought an iPhone 3G when they came out, and was a little nervous about how the service was going to be. But to my very pleasant surprise, it absolutely blew away what I had before. I rarely have any issue with dropped calls, etc. I think the AT&T service problems depend pretty heavily on where you are - they're probably oversubscribed in big cities.

But... while I had been planning on replacing the 3G with an iPhone 4, this latest issue is giving me second thoughts. Now I'm likely to wait until the dust settles here.

Re:How dare they control their own servers!

[Culture20]

Yes, how dare they? Dominoes Pizza recently made a big deal out of taking strong criticism and changing their recipe. Apple seems to be taking the opposite tack: "Buy a bumper, there are many on the market, including one we just designed concurrently with the iphone4. You're holding it wrong. See, no one's complaining on our forums."
We should laugh and point at the emperor when he wears no clothes.

To be fair...

[sean.peters]

... the defects weren't obvious until you got the phone in your hands. But I think Apple is going to have a serious problem on their hands if they don't face up to reality here. There are certainly a bunch of fanboys out there who'll buy anything Steve puts out, but you're not going to make blockbuster sales just on those fanboys. You need to convince ordinary schmoes that the phones are worth buying, and this incident isn't helping.

Re:To be fair...

[socceroos]

...serious problem on their hands...

I see what you did there...

Dude, come on

[sean.peters]

Obviously you're not going to see a just-started implosion on a 5 year stock chart. Come back six months from now and tell me how their stock price is doing (if Apple does nothing to fix this).

So?

[Androclese]

It is a privately owned company (i.e. Not the Government) removing conversations from their website that they do not wish discussed on their property. They are well within their rights to do so.

If they were performing this action or disrupting the conversation someplace other than their own property, that would be a huge! ...but on their own support forums? Sorry, I don't see the issue. The CS rating is a story worth discussing, but if Apple doesn't want it done on their site, there are other places (such as here) to do it.

Re:So?

[sjonke]

Err, but there are plenty of discussions ongoing in their Apple discussion forums about the CR article, many lengthy. Perhaps, maybe, possible, this claim that they are censoring their forums is just plain wrong? No, that won't do. People want the news they want, and they'll get it, truth be damned.

Re:So?

[VGPowerlord]

They have their right to remove it, just as we have a right to post somewhere else that they're removing it and pretending that it isn't happening.

Re:So?

[MightyMartian]

It is censorship, it's simply not state censorship, and thus doesn't run up against Bill of Rights issues. Censorship isn't defined by who does it.

Re:So?

[Androclese]

I hate to break it to you, but I would, and have, taken this exact same position, no matter what company does it. That it is Apple doing this shady action is irrelevant.

All of these years we misunderstood

[ClosedSource]

The commercial was a sneak preview of Jobs' future business plan.

Once again...

[sean.peters]

... the question isn't whether it's legal. The question is whether it's a smart business decision. Quibbling over the definition of censorship is kind of beside the point here. Whatever you call it, Apple's propensity to silence its critics isn't likely to help the company in the long run.

Re:Power Play by Consumers Union

[LingNoi]

Fan boys such as yourself are really predictable that it's boring. Bad news about your favorite product comes out and the first thing you do is invent some story to cover for a company that doesn't give a shit about you.

The iPhone 4 has a hardware error, it's not some conspiracy theory and your bullshit isn't going to change that fact, so you have two choices. Either accept that even Apple's products can have faults and be a better person for it; or you can continue your fantasy where nobody but other circle jerking mac fanboys take you seriously.

Re:It is their site. -- I have to agree here.

[captainpanic]

I do not see why they are required to allow discussions of that subject considering the number of sites where you are free to discuss it.

Apple knows about the review, why should they let you rub their noses into it? Let alone on their forums there are more than enough rabid supporters that keeping these messages off the site means for more peaceful forums. It would simply be a flame war

I have to agree here. There are millions of websites where you are free to discuss whatever you want... but on most websites, when you sign up, you accept that moderators have the right to remove stuff.

Now, a commercial company like Apple would do well to have someone from the communications/PR/marketing or whatever department on that forum to give an objective reply.

But if the company strategy is to keep the problems quiet, then we gotta accept that.
That may be immoral, but hey... welcome to the 21st century. Companies happen to be exactly that: immoral, betraying, spying, treasonous and self-serving organizations that are not there to make life better for human kind... No. Companies are there to make their shareholders rich.

Consumer Reports precensoring?

[mbourgon]

I do know that Consumers Union (Consumer Reports) is _very_ hardline on not allowing their magazine name or reviews mentioned by companies that are reviewed - that's why you always see the "Best Buy" by "Consumer's Digest" (a company which accepts money in exchange for awards), not Consumer Reports.

Don't know if that's why they're censoring it, but it _is_ a possibility.

Re:Consumer Reports precensoring?

[sjonke]

Or maybe they aren't censoring a damn thing? Have you looked at the Apple Discussion forums? You'll find many CR articles, many lengthy and thus unmissable, certainly unmissable by allegedly censoring mods. When are people going to start using their brains instead of just going with the flow, going with the news they want to hear?

Maybe I'm missing something...

[joeyblades]

How were the articles about the Consumer Reports article relevant to support?

No one would think twice or make accusations of censorship if it were advertisements that were removed.

These postings were nothing more than negative ads, designed to incite, and had nothing to do with support. If I'm looking for support on a support website, I would expect this kind of non sequitur input to be removed.

BTW, I'm not some Apple fanboi. I loathe the iPhone and have no inkling to buy one. Geek-that-I-am, I have no interest in being pinned in to the walled garden... I just don't see the support value of the posts that were removed and therefore find it appropriate that they were removed.

Re:**YAWN**--you mean like this???

[pablo_max]

Oh.....You mean something more like this??? I know it's not a "site" but rather an App with politics contrary to Apples likely, unlike iFart, which is cool.
http://www.niemanlab.org/2010/04/mark-fiore-can-win-a-pulitzer-prize-but-he-cant-get-his-iphone-cartoon-app-past-apples-satire-police/

Stealing market share from Microsoft

[Sir Realist]

...for decades. Might as well hit them on the evil front too...

Yep, some also visible here..

[slashmojo]

Certainly not all the forum posts were deleted (yet!)

http://www.boardtracker.com/search/?q=consumer+report&o=0&s=apple.com

This is why USENET was a good thing

[Animats]

USENET is very resistant to censorship. The comment "The network interprets censorship as damage and routes around it" was actually made about USENET, not the Internet, in response to an incident at Stanford where the administration tried to censor "rec.humor.funny". As long as someone, somewhere on campus had a dialup USENET feed, the missing messages would be recovered and put back into on-campus servers.

There was something to be said for that, instead of a huge number of business-controlled forum systems.

Re:This is why USENET was a good thing

[dzfoo]

That is why civilian corporations would not use USENET as a vehicle for their support fora. What's your point?

      -dZ.

this is SOP for Apple

[lophophore]

This is SOP for Apple.

When Airport Express units started dropping like flies, all reports about the problem were deleted from their forums.

They don't like criticism of their products, true or not.

There's a maxim for that...

[__aapspi39]

Who was it that said "The biggest mistake is denying a mistake." Well this news suggests that someone is taking that to another level.

While a certain mindset is bound to appear in a small section of a companies fanbase, especially when it purveys such a complete lifestyle choice, to see this dysfunctional nonsense creep all the way to the top is really something else. After the way this reception issue has been dealt with you have to wonder what's coming next?

The new mantra might end up being "Think happy place...think (different) happy place."

Maybe they were censoring hateful rants ...

[WebManWalking]

... as running counter to what Consumer Reports is all about. It would seem to be a possibility.

Droid X saturday the 17th.

[swschrad]

that's how you fight back.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Me Too

[swb]

It was a major issue that kept me from buying an iPhone.

As it turned out, in MSP, I get overall BETTER reception with AT&T than I got with Verizon (Motorola Q black). I had a couple of client sites where there was almost no reception on Verizon and now I get a great signal with AT&T.

Dropped calls have been about the same overall, although I have noticed a slight (but totally perception-based, I don't keep score) uptick in dropped calls lately but that may just be an illusion. When you do 1200+ minutes a month on a cell phone, a handful of dropped calls isn't really an issue.

I do think Apple hardware designs occasionally need a second rev to get it right and I agree with you about the iPhone 4. I'm not due for a discounted upgrade anyway until next year (and I have a 32GB 3GS now) and I'd like to see whatever the antenna issue is fixed as well as see a 64GB storage option -- I was surprised they didn't do a 64GB model this year.

Astroturfing

[bonch]

This is Slashdot, so it has to be a conspiracy and not normal forum moderation. It's not as though there are competitors who have a vested interest in anonymously submitting stories like this to Slashdot to try to rile up the anti-censorship nerds against Apple. That would never happen!

Holy crap!

[psydeshow]

The real news here is that they actually paid attention to something that was said in their support forums. :-p

As said to the Best Buy Employee

[pRtkL xLr8r]

"I don't care. I want an iPhone 4."

Apple is rather evil...

[PortHaven]

Don't understand why so many defend Apple's behaviors (but are so keen on jumping on Microsoft).

Re:Apple is rather evil...

[joeyblades]

Seriously?

Given Apple's marketshare versus Microsoft's marketshare in the computer OS realm, I think you will find a disproportionate number of Apple bashers to Microsoft bashers.

Not to defend Apple's behaviors, but I have to admit, when viewed from a business perspective (if I were a stockholder) I would tend to agree with most of them...

what a fail

[ClioCJS]

FAIL .. UR DUM

Re:**YAWN**--you mean like this???

[alanshot]

And your point is? its still Apple controlling Apple's sites and services; no big deal.

My point is that companies control their own stuff, some more than others. Where I would have issues is when Company A starts attempting to control the content on Company B's website because they dont like the otherwise honest and legal (and painful) factual content.

If Apple were threatening the Consumer Reports folks with a lawsuit, etc. Then I would agree, they are doing bad things.

Welcome to America, where you are free to be a douche, even if it does piss people off.

pah

[ThatsNotPudding]

The multiple posts about an external magazine review have been removed because discussing magazine articles is offtopic

Oh Slashdotta, please.

Here is what I think...

[MEC2]

(This comment has been removed by Apple)

Soooo..

[VMaN]

.. basically the apple forum mods are like Winston Smith from 1984.. Cutting out unflattering news clips etc?

I didn't know Apple has sent C&D letters to CR

[Irick]

Because otherwise it is just moderation of their support boards. People who are having problems don't need to be reminded they are having problems, they need to find fixes for them. Would people be in the same ferver if someone got a "Windows is better" post deleted from a Linux support board? Reactionary dribble. Everyone seems to be wanting to make Apple into the sith empire.

You know what?

[swehack]

I don't care, as a proud Mac OS X user I really don't care if Apple is acting just as evil as every other major corporation of that size.

I don't pretend to understand what it takes to run a company that size, I judge the product I want to use and right now that is Mac OS X which I find much more suitable for every most daily work I do than Microsoft Windows for example.

Don't get me wrong though, I still think people should keep an eye on them and expose these things, it won't affect my choice in operating system or computer though.

I'd hold off if I were you

[sean.peters]

I'm still likely to take the plunge, but mostly because the 3G phone is pretty damn slow. If I had a GS I'd probably skip this iteration.

Re:Power Play by Consumers Union

[ody]

Absolutely overstated! I mean, who really wants their phone to actually BEHAVE as a phone! Insanity, I tell you, insanity!

This guy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_teRloJf6yE

Apple as Empire

[ClosedSource]

Q. Is it not obvious to anyone that the Empire is as strong as it ever was?
A. The appearance of strength is all about you. It would seem to last forever. However, Mr.
Advocate, the rotten tree-trunk, until the very moment when the storm-blast breaks it in two,
has all the appearance of might it ever had. The storm-blast whistles through the branches of
the Empire even now. Listen with the ears of psychohistory, and you will hear the creaking.

-from Foundation

I just don't care

[snowwrestler]

I don't care that Apple is censoring their own forums. I've used Apple products for years and never once visited the Apple site forums. It's not like there is a lack of places to learn about and/or discuss Apple products on the Web. I like Macintouch.com for instance.

To be honest I always assume that the forums on corporate sites are heavily moderated by the corporation. Just like I assume that if I ask a saleman what he thinks of his product, I'll get a sales pitch. I think anyone acting shocked over this is either putting us on or very naive.

Surprise: people and businesses exhibit self-interest. Caveat emptor. I'm long over getting offended at every little demonstration of this.

It's clearly time.

[crhylove]

To fully begin the Apple boycott. It really doesn't matter though, as Android is clearly taking over. Cyanogen for the win!

No...

[fyngyrz]

It's hardly wrong to censor posts that violate the terms of use for a message board.

You're confusing the idea that you have the power to control something, with the rightness of doing so. Censorship is wrong. Period.

The problem with censorship is not that some fellow being offensive for the sake of his own amusement is censored; the problem is that, just as we see every day here on slashdot, once the power is in place, what actually gets censored is what the censor disagrees with.

This is why censorship is always wrong. Because it is a power that is inevitably abused on the one hand, and serves no real useful purpose on the other.

And that's exactly what we're seeing happen at Apple; these posts are 100% relevant to Apple; to the iPhone 4; to consumers who have bought, or may buy, the iPhone; the facts of the matter, as reported are of extreme interest to all parties -- and Apple's reaction is to delete the threads.

On slashdot, post an opinion that isn't in line with the majority, and you will be censored. Slashdot, like Apple, declines to fix the broken system, because the Slashdot folks themselves benefit, they think, from being able to knock off posts at will. Read their comments about using those powers of moderation -- it's quite clear they're ready and willing to abuse them (and experience shows that they indeed do exactly that... some commenters are followed from thread to thread and systematically modded down. You can't even *do* that with normal moderation powers -- you run out of points in 15 posts.)

At Apple, if you don't drink the Kool-aid, you're the enemy, and you're going to get it right in the neck. It's really the same thing as what happens here on Slashdot (and a zillion other venues on the net), and it happens because censorship is allowed at the corporate and individual level, even when those entities are creating a forum for use by the public.

At your home, when some guy comes to your door, we allow you the power to say, no, you can't come in, and I'm not going to discuss it. If you run a store, and we find you're doing that, for instance, because they guy in question is black and you don't like that -- we say, oh no, you're running a public enterprise and you will serve the public, or you will serve no one at all. That's a good model for how online discussions should be handled; the power to select is the power to abuse, and we know that when such power is extended generally, abuse is inevitable.

Yes, people might say things you don't like. But (a) you (and others) can answer them, and (b) the world is full of such events. Get over it. Steve Jobs -- and the people who follow his directions -- act like children in a schoolyard with their petty abuses. It is not admirable, and in the end, it is not right in and of itself, nor is it right that society keeps the window open for such abuses. Yet they do have that power. So let's call it what it is: A thing done wrong, with a power that isn't illegal because the system has failed, not because anyone should have the right to control speech in a forum open to the public.

And yes, I'm an Apple customer - Macs, iPods, iPads, software. I have absolutely no personal respect for Steve Jobs remaining. He's an utter loony, condemned by his own repeated bizarre practices.

+10 to GlobalIndustrial.com

[Theovon]

I just wanted to take this opportunity to mention a POSITIVE experience with an online vendor. I was absolutely taken aback by their excellent customer service. Basically, they had mislabeled a product, and as a result, I bought something I couldn't use. They CALLED ME ON THE PHONE and informed me that they were issuing me an immediate full credit including shipping. (At that point, I had already bought a substitute from Radio Shack.) I immediately went to resellerratings.com and gave them a great review.

Publication is called Consumer Reports

[noidentity]

The name of the publication is Consumer Reports, not Consumer Report.

This makes me wary of buying any Apple product

[Theovon]

I've had mostly good experiences with my MacBook Pro. Ok, there was some trouble with the RAM, the network adaptor, and it keeps eating batteries. But it's a better experience than I've had from other PC makers. But this whole iPhone 4 situation really shows Apple's true colors. If there's something wrong with something they made, they're going to pull a Dell and LIKE ABOUT IT. This makes me wonder what kinds of design flaws I'll see in the next Mac I buy. Ok, so no technology is perfect, but a tendency to try to cover up mistakes is not good for business.

Is there a point to posting the article?

[Imazalil]

Is there really a point for people to start up new discussions on Apple's support site because of the Consumer Reports article? I'm sure there must have been plenty of posts re. reception issues since day one. The Consumer Reports article doesn't really add anything new to the discussion, so what is the point? Why not just append it to the other support discussions like normal people.

Browsing though a few stories over there and it's obvious that all the 12 year olds are done school and have nothing better to do between bouts of WoW than to troll Apple Forums, it's almost as bad as the comments on Engadget.

Not trying apologize for Apple in any way here. Just curious.

You've got it all wrong...

[God_TM]

The little strip between the two antennas was added as an undocumented feature: Picture a boss/girlfriend/telemarketer that is calling you. Don't like where this converstation is going? You simply have to move your pinky finger down and voila, no more call (and you can blame the network). It's seamless... It just works.

Jumping to conclusions?

[hkmwbz]

It looks like there are open threads on the issue already. I'm guessing that what happened, was that people are too lazy to search for the stuff that's already there, so instead of the discussion being kept in one place, it started spreading all over the forum. That bogs down the forum and buries threads about other things.

I can't really fault Apple for cleaning up the mess after people who can't be bothered to at least do a quick search, especially when it's a high-profile case like this (which makes it easy to find the existing threads since they are typically among the most active).

As long as they don't hide all threads about it, I actually don't see the problem. I would have wanted to keep my own forum clean as well. Dozens of threads on the exact same topic will tend to bury other threads, and I just don't think that's acceptable. Show some decency towards people who want to discuss other things in the forum!

How about...

[denzacar]

Two jugs of Kool Aid forming an Apple logo?

And if we are to go full monty with the ad hominems like with Bill Gates - these two guys could have been separated at birth.

Re:The Real Surprise...

[gmhowell]

C'mon, you're bright enough to know that cell service is a highly localized issue. In my house, I can get fully advertised 3G service from AT&T for as long as I care too. With Verizon, the service is so spotty I frequently missed text messages. At work, both are aces.

I spent six months as an OTR truck driver. Plenty of guys had two phones to deal with the fact that NO network is universally perfect.

It's only evil when Apple does it

[Lars T.]

Not when Dell or HP or Lenovo does it.

Apple and its supporters

[theolein]

I'm a Mac user and I have an older iPhone, and I have to say that the denial that Apple supporters have in suppressing any negative comments or reports on Apple is simply amazing. It seem to be almost pathological.

Re:Apple and its supporters

[tgatliff]

Some might be in denial, but a huge part of this is simply marketing firms being paid to try to spread bad information on the iPhone in hopes of selling competitor phones. Not many people out of over 2 million are reporting what Consumer Reports is saying. Also, I own one of those "flawed" phones, and cant make it reduce bars no matter how I hold it...

Good comments?

[SirKron]

Where did all the good comments to this story go? They were just there...

Police Report

[hemlock00]

I could see the resulting police report riddled with the words "Angry", "Chair", "Balmer stealing toys" all throughout.

Hrrmm

[Lars T.]

http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2503228&tstart=0

Tom222555 Posts: 3 From: UK Registered: 17.10.2009 New! Consumer reports has un-recommended the iPhone 4 Posted: 13.07.2010 03:05

xupeiran Posts: 1 From: New Orleans LA Registered: 12.07.2010 New! Re: Consumer reports has un-recommended the iPhone 4 Posted: 13.07.2010 03:07 in response to: Tom222555 Click to reply to this topic Reply email Email I'm sure this thread will be deleted soon lol... Windows 7

JPBOSS Posts: 167 From: Atlanta, GA Registered: 11.08.2009 New! Re: Consumer reports has un-recommended the iPhone 4 Posted: 13.07.2010 03:07 in response to: Tom222555 Helpful Click to reply to this topic Reply email Email This thread being deleted in 5, 4, 3, 2.... iPhone 4 iOS 4

Re:Say Again?

[RLBrown]

You are right -- I read the main review and did not catch the "during testing" link. But at 10 AM tomorrow, we can hear what Apple is going to do. My guess is (1) free bumpers for everyone, and/or (2) a custom cut stick on laminate, for just the half inch around the gap, installed at any retail location or mailed on request. The worst thing they could do is deny. It might be a marginal effect, irreproducible and unquantifiable, but it is in the public meme and the public will not let go of it. So it needs a fix -- any fix, even a placebo, but a fix has to be made.

New Apple Theme Song?

[DrackenFireBreather]

To the tune of "Home on the Range"

Oh give me a phone
that I can say that I own,
but the manufacturers say 'no way'.

Where I download an app,
but they say that it's crap,
and take it off without me saying 'ok'.

Oh! Oh! The shame!
Where the iPhone is pwning me all day!

Where seldom is heard
because the antenna is a turd
and drops my calls when I "hold it that way"!