[zepto]

I’m not convinced that all platforms have the exact same error ratio - that would be interesting if supported by research.

But that’s irrelevant.

My statement isn’t a comment on Apple’s error ratio.

It’s a statement about how people respond to what they see as the market leader.

People care about problems with Apple in a way that they don’t with other players, because they are perceived as better. There is money to be made in trying to tear Apple down. That’s just part of the dynamics of the attention economy.

Whether this is just a function of spending on marketing, seems highly unlikely.

My understanding is that Google and the Android manufacturers as a whole far outspent Apple in the early years of the iPhone, and didn’t end up with the same perception.

In any case, however it was achieved, we do agree that they are perceived differently to the other players, and this is what my comment is based on.

[julianmarq]

I should have been clearer. My point is not whether there's any basis to Apple being better or not, most everyone knows that's impossible because the average Apple engineer is no better than the average engineer in the rest of FAANG or Microsoft or [insert pretty much every other large company here].

My point is that it's completely irrelevant to the discussion. That Apple fans think Apple is better in no way justifies the practices mentioned in TFA, so their "perception by others in comparison" is not really here nor there.

At least as far as I can see, I could be wrong of course.

[zepto]

Nowhere am I saying anything is justified.

Average developer quality isn’t going to be the only factor in defect rate. Development process, strategy, technology and management all play a role, and my impression is that all of the major players have had varying defect rates over different era of their development.

But indeed that’s not relevant.

But - I’m not talking about ‘Apple fans’. I’m talking about the public perception.

Apple is obviously treated differently from the other players, when it comes to media coverage.

That isn’t a justification for anything - I have in more than one place said I agree that with Gruber that Apple is wrong to do this.

However it does rebut the argument that things that don’t hurt other companies wouldn’t hurt Apple, and it may partially explain their choices.

[julianmarq]

If by "hurt" you mean that people would stop believing that Apple is better and instead would be looked at with the same standard as every other company[0], then I don't see any problem with people no longer believing that impossibility. But I guess that's a different discussion.

[0]: Assuming that the idea that Apple is, right now, treated any differently by anyone other than its fans has any merit to it, of course.

[zepto]

Apple is clearly treated by the media differently than other companies, in both positive and negative ways.

Sure you don’t see any reason why apple shouldn’t have the perception of them ‘hurt’.

But that’s not the point - the point is that Apple doesn’t want the perception of themselves to be hurt, and so they are going to act accordingly.