Number crunching is hard work. First, you need to collect numbers, then determine if the numbers are valid, then do a little crunching, and, finally, compare numbers with others or a specific perspective or assertion. Rob Pegoraro could use some math skills.
He isn’t the only one. Apple has numerous critics of the not-so-higher order and they have one thing in common. No numbers. “Apple is doomed!” Guess what? No numbers to back it up. “Apple’s quality has gone downhill!” Where are the numbers to explain when and how and where?
Walk, Chew Gum
A few weeks ago Apple had a series of software issues; critical bugs that needed instant response. Fortunately, the company came through, fixed what was broken, fixed some of what was broken again, but took all kinds of heat with many critics crying out “Apple should stop working on thinner and lighter Macs and focus more on making software that works.”
That was typical, emotional, ill advised, and downright stupid response. As if the same Apple designers and engineers that churn out Mac updates are the same as the ones that work on macOS. Rob Pegoraro writes for The Washington Post, and regardless of what you think of Amazon honcho Jeff Bezos’ personal hobby, I would advise Post editors to, 1) critique before publishing, and, 2) hire better; math skills are required to defend headlines such as this:
Why doesn’t Apple make its devices as carefully as it’s making Apple Park?
Ostensibly, Apple’s new headquarters is well designed, well manicured, and a lovely example of careful planning and perfect construction. Anyone who has been involved in designing, constructing, and living in anything knows perfection isn’t part of the equation.
Design chief Jony Ive defended Apple Park this way:
We didn’t make Apple Park for other people. And so a lot of the criticisms I think are utterly bizarre — because it wasn’t made for you. And I know how we work, and you don’t.
People in the audience laughed. Hahaha. LOL. He’s probably correct, you know.
But the people paying for Apple products could be forgiven if their only laughter was of the bitter variety. Because while the company should have sufficient resources to obsess over both its headquarters and its software and hardware — even factoring in greater pressure to ship a new operating system or smartphone on time — the reality seen by Apple customers suggests otherwise.
No it doesn’t. Where’s the math to prove that?
Is there a list of Apple’s software bugs to point out that such mistakes never happened in the past, or are happening with more frequency today? Nope. Pegoraro is engaging in obvious bullcrap analysis, pandering to readers’ penchant for negativity bias. It’s a thing. Criticizing something or someone is a time honored method to get people to believe what you say without having to provide any proof whatsoever.
The President of the good old U.S. of A. does it, so why not Apple critics? Because it’s wrong. It’s not insightful analysis, it’s meaningless contrarian drivel; spewed often on any topic, timely or otherwise, for the benefit of no one except the spewer.
On the day of Ive’s appearance in Washington, his employer rushed out a patch for macOS High Sierra to fix a bug that allowed unrestricted, password-free access to that operating system — a level of vulnerability that Mac users righteously mocked in Windows almost 15 years ago.
No they didn’t.
Pegararo himself wrote the article linked to in the quote above and nowhere is it mentioned that Mac users scoffed at the Windows of the era (almost 15 years ago). That’s just Fake News. In fact, Pegararo points out the advantages with macOS and Linux vs. Windows.
Even Apple’s hardware, traditionally a point of justifiable pride for the Cupertino, Calif., company, hasn’t been looking as reliable lately. Users of its new, $1,299-and-up MacBook Pro laptops have complained about battery life well short of Apple’s estimates and “butterfly switch” keys that, as Casey Johnston recounted in an October post at the Outline, can fail if dust gets lodged under one — after which the only recourse may be replacing the entire top case of the laptop body.
Gimme a break.
Where’s the math to support that assertion? Apple might have a problem with MacBook keyboards. I don’t and never had but that doesn’t mean there are not issues Apple should address. At to the battery life problem Pegararo links to another Post article regarding the late 2016 MacBook Pro’s battery life problems. Surprise. It wasn’t really a problem after all. Even Consumer Reports managed to skewer Apple before we found out they did their tests wrong.
Fake News, Rob.
Regarding getting close to Apple…
The closest most can get is to visit one of Apple’s stores. Since the first one opened in Tysons Corner more than 16 years ago, they’ve been both marvels of design and a pleasant place to try to buy Apple’s work. They also remain a good place to get help when its software and hardware don’t testify to its ability to get the details right — which seems to happen a lot these days.
“Seems to happen a lot these days?” Oh, really? How many? Crummy analysis doesn’t get any crummier, Rob. Do some real research, come up with numbers regarding what’s going wrong and what’s not. Oh. Wait. Numbers are not easily obtained? Then do a survey of Apple customers on specific issues to see how wide spread it really is instead of how wide spread it is within the confines of your little and highly opinionated mind.
Apple critics, including Pegararo, Dvorak, and others, make a living being critical, but cannot summon insightful analysis on a topic because that often requires math, and math is hard.