|
|
|
|
|
by kaolinite
4105 days ago
|
|
Whoa, whoa, whoa. I was following quite closely when Marco Arment's article was published and the storm erupted around it. Marco's comments have totally been taken out of context here: the reason he regretted publishing the article was not out of fear of Apple primarily but because many publications took it and used it to justify the "Apple is doomed" narrative which Marco personally doesn't agree with. He was quite sad about that because the article was a serious piece highlighting particular problems that need addressing but it was just used as fodder for "This wouldn't have happened if Steve Jobs was alive..." headlines. Whilst I didn't see the particular tweet when it happened, it's pretty clear that Cabel Sasser is also talking about the press in his tweet (note "dramapress"). Whilst elements of this article do seem a bit biased, there are some good points later on which aren't taken out of context. It's a shame that it started out with this. |
|
Yes the media distorts things. But that does not mean that it is invalid to say 'this wouldn't have happened under Steve.' Jobs had clear differences from the new leadership.
Further, the media's inevitable distortion of stories should not make criticism something regrettable or something to hide in blog posts or podcasts. If the developers in question have legitimate grievances, which they clearly do, then those should be aired accessibly and publicly. Otherwise what's the point of writing them?