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
Maybe because they're not idiots and want to control their image / marketing.
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.
I was so disappointed with what they did to Jabba the Hut in The Wrath of Khan. I couldn't even watch the whole episode.
The sad thing is when it seems like Apple is cashing in on that goodwill, rather than building on it. We shall see.
The iPhone X, will it blend ?
1) I have root access and can remove all the bloat / spyware that comes pre-installed from the carrier
2) I can move between carriers
3) It has a removable battery
4) The camera / microphone have dedicated hardware switches that enable / disable them
5) It is somewhat waterproof ( Don't need to dive with it, but some rain protection is nice )
6) It has a standardized connector ( USB-C ) and a GD headphone jack
7) The call quality / reliability is on par with a landline
8) It isn't so damn big that it comes with optional leather straps so you can use it as a shield
9) A fast and unthrottled data plan, similar to my standard home internet plan
10) Moving music, photos, video ( or any files ) does not require I-Tunes. Just plug in with USB cable and go.
*Extra bonus if it doesn't come saddled with a contract and / or ludicrous costs for their overpriced phone / data plans.
Meet this fairy tale list of requirements and I might consider one of your shiny gadgets.
Maybe
You want a removable battery because ... why?
Battery-pack cases, and spare waterproof battery-pack chargers, are rampant. You're afraid the battery will "wear out" before your phone does?
Well, a USB-C port was first placed on a smartphone only two years ago. Your desired connector standard is so new that any phone you bought supporting it has not had a proper chance to "wear out" its battery, and half of those phones are still under warranty.
And yet, this port standard is a deal breaker for you now that it's around?
Perhaps you need to admit that you are just as susceptible to the fast pace of innovation in the smartphone world as all the other people you scoff at. Perhaps those people you think are acting based on "marketing" have their own list of must-have features that is just as arbitrary as your own.