A Close Reading of Two Apple Apologies

Seriously?<p>Do these people have honestly nothing better to do with their time?

Jobs had to rectify damage to a core aspect of Apple's branding, high prices justified by a perceived value proposition which the massive price drop upended because it made Apple enthusiasts feel that their brand loyalty had been abused. Jobs formalism was a function of his having to go entirely off message.<p>Cook's tone is entirely consistent with the narrative the press has built around Maps - it sucks but Apple is sincerely trying to improve it. What goes without mention in the press is that Apple knew it sucked and used its sucking to generate press coverage for its launch. It's no accident that the letter was released Friday so as to dominate the weekend news cycle. It is also no accident that Apple isn't offering to make customers whole. Apple has been out in front of this story since before the launch. That's why all the press since the initial story lost its edge has been positive.

The link is mobile. Here's the original link: <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-09-28/a-close-reading-of-two-apologies" rel="nofollow">http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-09-28/a-close-read...</a>

One is apologizing for an actual issue with the product (however severe it is or isn't). The other is apologizing for the "issue" that the product became more affordable. Perhaps the difference in the substance of the complaints has something to do with the tone of the responses to them?

Reality Distortion Field vs. Excellent Customer Service: Which is more effective?

0=

Well, Cook is definitely coming out more approachable. Even if you look at iPhone5 innards, it is actually the most repairable iPhone since iPhone 3G. Does it look like Cook is willing to be more open to customers and take their inputs? At least it looks like that to me....

All I'm seeing here is that Tim Cook will not be taking Apple in the same direction as Steve would've, as they're very different people.