Ah, the iPhone 4.
People scrambled for every bit of leaked information, bloggers even committed crimes to snag one. Consumers stood in line to purchase it. And Apple marketed it as the most perfect object of desire ever. Therein lies the rub.
Listen, I’m a huge Apple devotee. Have been ever since I first gazed upon that Asian woman combing her hair on the screen of the very first Macintosh. But even I am getting a little bit perturbed at the ridiculous level of superlative that marks the stage debut of an Apple product.
I love my iPhone, and have since version 1. But no phone is perfect, and especially so on an imperfect network. Apple’s current marketing strategy seems to be based upon the idea that iPhone is perfect. It ignores the physics of radio propagation and the less-than-stellar AT&T network. And by doing this, Apple invites criticism.
That criticism is, in my opinion, as over the top as Apple’s marketing. A sign of times, the criticism begins as blog comments from rabid anti-Apple trolls, is fanned into flame wars, then is picked up by mainstream media (who are always a bit behind the curve and obviously reading the most inflammatory blogs to pick up possible controversy).
The media has learned, as Greenpeace did years ago, that the word “Apple” in a headline guarantees eyeballs. And the current brouhaha is following the same lines as Greenpeace’s vaunted campaign did. That one went something like this:
Apple was among the most environmentally conscious computer makers in the world. They were very progressive in eliminating dangerous chemicals and reducing packaging, and while not perfect they were far ahead of their competitors. Still, Greenpeace realized that if they were to target, say, Dell or HP for a green campaign, no one would care. So instead, they created a campaign taking Apple to task for their environmental policies, ignoring far worse offenders. It got publicity for Greenpeace, but did it help the planet?
Consumer Reports seems to have gotten the idea. They blasted out to the blogosphere the results of what appears to be a totally unscientific test, claiming that the antenna on the iPhone 4 is defective and they can’t “recommend” the phone. The next day, they announced that the iPhone 4 is the best smartphone. Well, which is it? Why didn’t they make a big stink about whatever smartphone was worst, and post all over the internet saying they can’t recommend that one?
‘Cos the internet would respond with a yawn.
Apple gets attention. They’ve carefully cultivated that attention by being secretive, simple, and quiet in a bold way. But in today’s world of 24/7 communication and internet commenting, they’ve left a vacuum that is being filled with trolls.
Millions of iPhone 4s were sold in one weekend. Are there millions of complaints? No. But a handful of squeaky wheels are driving this — the vocal minority.
For the record: I have an iPhone 4. My signal indicator at home drops to nothing when I cover the “death spot.” But I’ve never gotten reception in my house, with any phone. Out in the world, it works as advertised. I tend to believe that Apple (with AT&T’s collusion) deliberately calibrated the bars on the phone to make it appear that the signal is stronger than it is. More bars in more places, right? Frankly, I think that holding my hand over the antenna is just showing me the real network strength.
Apple press conference tomorrow. Interesting thing to ponder: Microsoft just released then discontinued a phone within the space of 6 weeks. Did anyone care? Did they demand a refund, a recall, or a press conference?
