△ MENU/TOP △

Holtz Communications + Technology

Shel Holtz
Communicating at the Intersection of Business and Technology
SearchClose Icon

Apple: The new Microsoft

Apple Computers may not be able to make much of a dent in Microsoft’s domination of the computer marketplace. The company seems to be making a bid, though, to compete head-to-head with Microsoft when it comes to arrogance. In fact, as Microsoft humanizes itself with employee blogs and an effort to reach out to constituencies (through tools such as Channel 9 for the developer community), Apple is headed in the other direction. The company—flush with success from market domination with the iPod—is turning into a draconian monster when it hears something about itself it doesn’t like.

First came the lawsuits aimed at the Apple enthuasiasts who run Web sites like Apple Insider, seeking to force the company’s fans to disclose the sources of information about the company’s upcoming products. Now, apparently unhappy with a biography about to be released about Apple founder and CEO Steve Jobs, the company is pulling the book from its own store shelves and has actually tried to get the publisher, Wiley, to halt distribution. Compare that to blogs from companies that happily allow critical comments from readers. In a world in which transparency and openness are becoming the price of admission, Apple is presenting an image of a company with closed doors and narrow attitudes. Even the mainstream media—outlets like the Houston Chronicle—are beginning to characterize Apple as an opponent of the First Amendment.

Is anybody doing corporate PR for this company? Or is the financial success associated with the iPod leading Apple’s leaders to believe that they can thrive no matter what people think of them? Personally, I’m getting so fed up with Apple’s attitude toward free speech that I’m about ready to ditch my iPod in favor of an iRiver device. Now if only I can find an alternative to my PowerBook…

04/28/05 | 2 Comments | Apple: The new Microsoft

Comments

  • 1.Shel,

    Like you, I too believe that Apple has handled these two cases poorly and its handling of the coverage has been appalling. However I do, unlike you, agree that Apple reacted in a relevant way.

    On the first case, that of its claims against the blogs, I believe that protection of intellectual property is important & that companies must be able to have 'teeth' to protect their secrets. I cannot sypathise with the writer in the Houston Chronicle that trade secrets should be confined to "anything technologically groundbreaking or unique, on the level of the Coca-Cola formula (to cite the quintessential "trade secret"); indeed, several devices resembling Asteroid have been on the market for some time". Surely a company's plans to enter a market gives it competitive advantage not just that it plans something unique otherwise there would be little reason not to publish up all your strategic plans. Even the new 'open' Microsoft is unlikely to allow their head of strategy to blog openly about what the company is planning to do.

    My personal take is that if somebody gained from taking commercial secrets and making money by selling them to a competitor it would be wrong. I see little difference in taking these commercial secrets and making money by publishing them & taking advertising revenue.

    For me, John Gruber's post on this topic was useful: http://daringfireball.net/2005/03/discovery_ruling

    On the second decision, there seems to be a similarity between Apple removing books for sale and GM withdrawing advertising from the LA Times. (http://blog.holtz.com/index.php/blogger_uncovers_facts_about_la_times_reporting_commends_gms_decision_to_pu/). Do I believe that it is the right response? No (well not withdrawing all Wiley books). Is it unique in using its commercial power in this way? No.

    Apple is using its stores as a brand building experience. Clearly a book titled 'iCon Steve Jobs' isn't going to help it there & like the guy you reported recently doing tours in Disney's parks it does have the right to control the experience in its property.

    Reuters reported, on Apple wanting the book to be stopped that the author had said "My understanding is that Wiley requested or asked if there were any factual changes to be made in the book or errors and that's when they (Apple) said the only thing satisfying to us would be not to publish the book,". That hardly to me sounds "actually tried to get the publisher, Wiley, to halt distribution". (Reuters article: http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=8303862)

    Now that Apple are successful and have a high profile some will start to knock it like any other successful, high profile company. Now it needs to learn how to influence a large community and ensure that their are enough good stories coming out about positive things it's doing that when it feels the need to 'put its foot down' it is seen as the exception, not the norm.

    Andrew Marritt | April 2005 | Geneva, Switzerland

  • 2.A subscriber of Wired magazine could see this armored apple logo with a critical analysis on Apple's latest legal strategy. This is a well-known story already reported in the Post.
    Tom McNichol maintains that Apple's crackdown on three Apple zealot s...

    http://micropr.net/blog/?p=112 | April 2005

Comment Form

« Back