Slashdot Mirror
Apple Limits Lengthy iPhone X Testing for Most Reviewers (wsj.com)
Tripp Mickle, reporting for the Wall Street Journal: Apple departed from its traditional preview strategy for what it bills as its most important new iPhone in years, prioritizing early access to the iPhone X for YouTube personalities and celebrities over most technology columnists who traditionally review its new products. Apple provided the iPhone X to a small number of traditional testers for about a week, while limiting most others, The Wall Street Journal included, to a single day with the device before reviews could be published (alternative source). About a half-dozen personalities on Alphabet's YouTube video service were granted time with the device before its release. The change in strategy meant the iPhone X, which hits stores Friday, got less testing than most of its predecessors before reviews could be published. Crash reviewers largely echoed those sentiments, adding the caveat that they could discover issues after they spend more time with the device. Most pledged full reviews for later in the week. The review strategy is "unusual," said Jan Dawson, an analyst with Jackdaw Research. "It's possible Apple wanted some reviews out early and those would be the more enthusiastic ones." He said YouTube reviewers tend to be more positive when given early access to devices, and that most reviews aren't overly negative. "Unless Apple felt like there would be some bad elements in the reviews, why would you hold back?" Mr. Dawson asked. "Why would you be selective about who gets it first?"
A quality review should be based on a period of real-world use of the product.
Basically sounds like they're using their position to limit the scope of reviews that might otherwise have been more detailed.
My suggestion would be that honest journalists would withhold their review until they got a decent amount of mileage out of the product;
Only problem is sometimes the public listens to the FIRST source to write an article to make their decision rather than the better-researched,
and a lot of people quite frankly don't even bother with reviews because it's Apple, they'll be in line the first day it's available....
What's that you say? Spend $1000 on a phone based purely on a name with basically no real reviews to go on? Sure!!! -SMH
The illusion of them being innovative and having the best product. In actual reality, that has stopped a while ago or was never true in the first place, depending on the specific aspects. So they now lean heavily on the "cult" aspect of their marketing. It seems to work, this time again, because people are irrational and there are enough that will fall for the illusion. Of course, if Apple continues to not deliver anything but the illusion, eventually the whole house of cards will come crashing down.
Now, don't get me wrong. I have absolutely no problem with people that buy an iPhone in order to feel better about themselves. It is their money and if they do feel better about themselves as a result of how they spent that money, then that is money well spent. The problem I have is that the current strategy makes Apple less and less viable as an alternative and may even kill Apple as a company in the longer term. An Android mono-culture would be very bad for everybody though and that is why I think that Apple urgently needs to get back to making good technology and actually being innovative, instead of just doing excellent marketing.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
The sad thing is when it seems like Apple is cashing in on that goodwill, rather than building on it. We shall see.