How Apple Broke the PR Rules - And Got Away With It(blogs.hbr.org)
blogs.hbr.org
How Apple Broke the PR Rules - And Got Away With It
http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/02/how_apple_broke_the_pr_rules_a.html
8 comments
I think the real reason explaining why apple has been able to get away with that is the fact that by (1) denying the issue, then (2) minimizing it by saying its a problem with all other phones, and thus (3) making the antenna problem an industry wide one, they were able to play win some time.
You see, the iphone -- or for the matter, any apple product -- can only be fully appreciated within a specific mindset, by adopting a specific reference frame, or point of view. To me, apple had to restore this my-iphone-has-so-many-feature-i-dont-care-about-the-issues POV that enabled them to initially sell a device with a lot less battery longevity than other competitor in the past.
Playing on time and making this a industry wide issue that is not so important, both allowed them to win more customer but also to allow those to adopt/restore this POV. Thus the more they had owners who just signed a X-years contract to get the new iphone the more they had advocates for their case.
The way I see this : its the ultimate win of the fanboy/evangelist strategy agains't the traditional "be-aware/show-you-care/do-your-share" PR moves.
You see, the iphone -- or for the matter, any apple product -- can only be fully appreciated within a specific mindset, by adopting a specific reference frame, or point of view. To me, apple had to restore this my-iphone-has-so-many-feature-i-dont-care-about-the-issues POV that enabled them to initially sell a device with a lot less battery longevity than other competitor in the past.
Playing on time and making this a industry wide issue that is not so important, both allowed them to win more customer but also to allow those to adopt/restore this POV. Thus the more they had owners who just signed a X-years contract to get the new iphone the more they had advocates for their case.
The way I see this : its the ultimate win of the fanboy/evangelist strategy agains't the traditional "be-aware/show-you-care/do-your-share" PR moves.
When I bought my iPhone 4 I noticed the attenuation issue when I first started talking on it. So I stopped holding it that way. Then it went away. A few weeks later, the bumper program came out and once I got mine, the problem went away entirely. Bottom line: if your phone attenuates when you hold it a certain way STOP HOLDING IT LIKE THAT!
All the facts they report are correct but I really don't think this option was "available to any of their competitors to use". The reason Apple "got away with" AntennaGate is because they'd built up so much good will with their customers. So they'd banked enough positive behavior to be forgiven for the negative behavior.
It's like a relationship between spouses. If one cheats it won't necessarily kill the marriage. The marriage will survive based on how good it was in the first place.
It's like a relationship between spouses. If one cheats it won't necessarily kill the marriage. The marriage will survive based on how good it was in the first place.
Do these types of screw ups ever really have that huge of an effect? Even BP seems to have come out looking pretty good. I can't recall this type of thing having a medium-term effect on a company.
I think the real masterstroke was putting the attention on the nebulous antenna problem, so that the quality of the camera --a problem with no fix-- was totally ignored.
It's like a new twist on "the emperor has no clothes" every day. See if you start noticing how many photos you see have giant green color distortions in the middle of the image. Those are iPhone 4 photos, and no one talks about it.
It's like a new twist on "the emperor has no clothes" every day. See if you start noticing how many photos you see have giant green color distortions in the middle of the image. Those are iPhone 4 photos, and no one talks about it.
Because of what you said, I went through about 600 photos I have on my iphone 4(some hdr, some not); I don't notice the problem you mention. Perhaps you just got a defective piece? You should probably go to the apple store and ask them about it, before assuming all iphone 4s have the same problem.
I wouldn't say Apple got away with it. My beautiful wife is looking for smartphones at the moment and asked for my run down - the antenna problem and Apple's ongoing efforts to pass the buck (both in this instance, and in a lot of App Store criticism) were the first things I raised.
Having said that, she'll likely still get an iPhone. Ultimately, she'll benefit most from what Apple do best - closed garden simplicity. So by that measurement, you could argue they did get away with it.
Having said that, she'll likely still get an iPhone. Ultimately, she'll benefit most from what Apple do best - closed garden simplicity. So by that measurement, you could argue they did get away with it.
> I wouldn't say Apple got away with it. [...] Having said that, she'll likely still get an iPhone.
It looks like Apple did get away with it.
It looks like Apple did get away with it.
Which was the purpose for my second paragraph. But for every person like my beautiful wife, there will be someone (or some fraction of someone) for whom the anntena problem will convince them to make a difference decision.
So I stand by my point that, in my recollection, Apple handled it poorly, that left a lasting effect on the population, and that lasting effect, however small, means they didn't break all the PR rules and get away with it.
So I stand by my point that, in my recollection, Apple handled it poorly, that left a lasting effect on the population, and that lasting effect, however small, means they didn't break all the PR rules and get away with it.
>there will be someone (or some fraction of someone) for whom the anntena problem will convince them to make a difference decision.
From Apple's last earnings call:
"Tim [Cook]: If you look at iPhone, we had record sales with 16.2 million units sold in quarter. As Peter said, we believe we could sell more if we had more supply"
If what you're saying is true, and perhaps it is for around 200 nerds scattered around the world, it seems to be irrelevant to Apple's bottom line.
From Apple's last earnings call:
"Tim [Cook]: If you look at iPhone, we had record sales with 16.2 million units sold in quarter. As Peter said, we believe we could sell more if we had more supply"
If what you're saying is true, and perhaps it is for around 200 nerds scattered around the world, it seems to be irrelevant to Apple's bottom line.
You raised points that had absolutely no bearing on her day-to-day use of the phone. And that's the point. Making something that works extraordinarily well, when no one else can, means never having to say you're sorry.
Apple didn't get away with anything, because there was nothing to get away with. I know android fans hate to hear it and will likely pound me into oblivion for it, but the reality is that the antenna on the iPhone 4 is better than all the previous devices Apple has shipped, and better than most in the industry.
An external antenna is going to pull in more signal most of the time, and this makes it better. Every device must find compromises to provide the best signal as much of the time as possible, along with convenience. Most android and other smart phones use internal antennas and that is a good design from a usability perspective. Apple did to for the first three iphones. For the iPhone 4 they found a new way to put an antenna on the outside of the phone, without having the silly pull-out antenna that predominated ten years ago.
This gave them better signal pulling capability in almost every situation, with the usability of an internal design. This is a significant innovation.
Which means that the entirety of antenna gate was fueled by anti-apple forces (eg: hack journalists looking for a dramatic story, and general apple haters who posted to blogs and spread the story).
Apple got away with it because there was no real defect in the antenna. The observable effect exists in all modern mobile phones to one degree or another, and this particular design is superior to all past iPhones.
The real lesson here is that a dedicated social media campaign can create massive hassle for a competitor, even when that competitor produces a superior product. I am quite astounded that they were able to make such a big deal out of this. Apple produced an innovative design that was superior in usability and reception, and they managed to turn that into some sort of a liability. They did this even though within days it was revealed publicly that the claims were nonsense by people who understood how radios work. But the few people with technical knowledge cannot beat the masses who don't have it who propagate the FUD. This is the power of FUD, and this is why you see it so often.
Even today there are people who think there is a defect with the iPhone design. For many of them, it is a matter of ideology. They hate apple, and therefore they will continue to believe.
An external antenna is going to pull in more signal most of the time, and this makes it better. Every device must find compromises to provide the best signal as much of the time as possible, along with convenience. Most android and other smart phones use internal antennas and that is a good design from a usability perspective. Apple did to for the first three iphones. For the iPhone 4 they found a new way to put an antenna on the outside of the phone, without having the silly pull-out antenna that predominated ten years ago.
This gave them better signal pulling capability in almost every situation, with the usability of an internal design. This is a significant innovation.
Which means that the entirety of antenna gate was fueled by anti-apple forces (eg: hack journalists looking for a dramatic story, and general apple haters who posted to blogs and spread the story).
Apple got away with it because there was no real defect in the antenna. The observable effect exists in all modern mobile phones to one degree or another, and this particular design is superior to all past iPhones.
The real lesson here is that a dedicated social media campaign can create massive hassle for a competitor, even when that competitor produces a superior product. I am quite astounded that they were able to make such a big deal out of this. Apple produced an innovative design that was superior in usability and reception, and they managed to turn that into some sort of a liability. They did this even though within days it was revealed publicly that the claims were nonsense by people who understood how radios work. But the few people with technical knowledge cannot beat the masses who don't have it who propagate the FUD. This is the power of FUD, and this is why you see it so often.
Even today there are people who think there is a defect with the iPhone design. For many of them, it is a matter of ideology. They hate apple, and therefore they will continue to believe.
> I know android fans hate to hear it and will likely pound me into oblivion for it
No, I downvoted because comments like that are very annoying and go against the HN guidelines:
See this please: http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downmod you.
No, I downvoted because comments like that are very annoying and go against the HN guidelines:
See this please: http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downmod you.
No, I'm sorry, the design is flawed. I own one. Our family has owned the iphone 1, 3, and now 4. Yes, the iphone 4 is the best "phone" of the lot, but 1 and 3 were lousy- far too poor for me to risk using as my primary business phone. Which is why I waited for the word on the 4 before I bought one. The main problem was something I could fix with a case- I use cases anyway, so it wasn't a problem for me. Or so I thought.
Turns out, there is another flaw, one that I never had with a 2006 motorola on the same network and used under exactly the same conditions. The iphone 4 has an echo- some times- that makes it very difficult to talk. When I'm talking on the phone I get an echo in my ear of what I'm saying. If I have any mobility I can manage this by moving to another room or sometimes just changing the direction in which I'm holding the phone.
I love the iphone, it does a lot of things brilliantly, but it has never been a terrific phone.
Besides, they advertised for an antenna engineer just after the brouhaha.
And, in fairness to them, I never dropped a call because of the antenna (in the week or so I used the phone before the case). I actively tried to a couple of times, but it didn't drop.
Turns out, there is another flaw, one that I never had with a 2006 motorola on the same network and used under exactly the same conditions. The iphone 4 has an echo- some times- that makes it very difficult to talk. When I'm talking on the phone I get an echo in my ear of what I'm saying. If I have any mobility I can manage this by moving to another room or sometimes just changing the direction in which I'm holding the phone.
I love the iphone, it does a lot of things brilliantly, but it has never been a terrific phone.
Besides, they advertised for an antenna engineer just after the brouhaha.
And, in fairness to them, I never dropped a call because of the antenna (in the week or so I used the phone before the case). I actively tried to a couple of times, but it didn't drop.
If you're hearing an echo, that means echo cancellation is not working, either in your network or the network of the person you are calling. I don't believe handsets do any echo cancellation.
One degree to another does not excuse 'noticable worse than the rest'. You're right, large parts of the hate -was- unjustified. As an engineering student, I understand the necessity of tradeoffs, and acknowledge the advantages of the external antenna.
That doesn't mean they couldn't have done it differently, and still have a better antenna. For example, the CDMA iPhone4 (from the AnandTech review) actually has two CDMA antennae, positioned in such a way that the only way you can duplicate the 'death grip' is the cradle with both hands.
The launch phone ran into -significant- signal degradation in a common use case. This -should- have been anticipated better. And the whole "you're holding it wrong" thing did not help.
That doesn't mean they couldn't have done it differently, and still have a better antenna. For example, the CDMA iPhone4 (from the AnandTech review) actually has two CDMA antennae, positioned in such a way that the only way you can duplicate the 'death grip' is the cradle with both hands.
The launch phone ran into -significant- signal degradation in a common use case. This -should- have been anticipated better. And the whole "you're holding it wrong" thing did not help.
Which is what Apple does best in every category in which they're successful. Is the iPod the most feature-laden PMP? No. It is still the best across the categories that matter for most users. Same with the iPad: I know no 'normal' user with an iPad that doesn't like it. And they almost all have some point of "I wish x was better." It's just that the goods far outweigh the bads.
Oh, and their branding doesn't hurt, either.