3 ms·

I actually think Toyota's mistake was taking the complaints too seriously and responding with such concern. Apple's approach, of dismissing the 'problem' and b

by ryanjmo 16y ago

I actually think Toyota's mistake was taking the complaints too seriously and responding with such concern. Apple's approach, of dismissing the 'problem' and blaming it on the user, seems much more likely to help the whole thing blow over. When you express too much concern about a possible problem, I personally have found that it legitimizes the problem to those observing the situation. Although, this comment would be much more interesting if I had any data to back it up.

rriepe 16y ago
I think you're right about Toyota, but I don't think the opposite extreme is justified either. Apple's flippant handling of the situation just shows that they have a crappy attitude. Sony's the same way; when they got complaints about a shoddily made button on the PSP, they completely dismissed them, with some line about it being a work of art or something. It leaves a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths. Sure, Apple can afford it (much more than Sony anyway) but it still doesn't make it the right move. They're too prideful to admit it's a flaw, but I can guarantee that this will be fixed in the next iteration of the iPhone. And they'll come out with this same crap line, "We did fix it, even though it was never a problem."
mechanical_fish 16y ago
I think this whole Toyota metaphor is too strained to be useful. Toyota's problem was tied up with the fact that car crashes kill and injure people. That not only makes it a lot easier to raise a mass panic, but also raises the stakes a lot: Juries understand and fear car crashes, lawsuits over car crashes pay a lot of money in awards or settlements, and there is an entire division of the legal industry with years of experience in litigating over these specific issues. Whereas it's hard to see a lawsuit over poor cellular reception going anywhere. I presume that somewhere in my cellular agreement is a clause stating that AT&T isn't liable for dropped calls. I mean, if that clause didn't exist surely the citizens of San Francisco would own AT&T by now?
- ryanjmo 16y ago
  Yeah, that is a really good point. Do you think if Toyota shrugged it off more that would of been more or less useful if it became a legal matter?

by ryanjmo 16y ago

rriepe 16y ago

I think you're right about Toyota, but I don't think the opposite extreme is justified either. Apple's flippant handling of the situation just shows that they have a crappy attitude. Sony's the same way; when they got complaints about a shoddily made button on the PSP, they completely dismissed them, with some line about it being a work of art or something. It leaves a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths. Sure, Apple can afford it (much more than Sony anyway) but it still doesn't make it the right move. They're too prideful to admit it's a flaw, but I can guarantee that this will be fixed in the next iteration of the iPhone. And they'll come out with this same crap line, "We did fix it, even though it was never a problem."

mechanical_fish 16y ago

I think this whole Toyota metaphor is too strained to be useful. Toyota's problem was tied up with the fact that car crashes kill and injure people. That not only makes it a lot easier to raise a mass panic, but also raises the stakes a lot: Juries understand and fear car crashes, lawsuits over car crashes pay a lot of money in awards or settlements, and there is an entire division of the legal industry with years of experience in litigating over these specific issues. Whereas it's hard to see a lawsuit over poor cellular reception going anywhere. I presume that somewhere in my cellular agreement is a clause stating that AT&T isn't liable for dropped calls. I mean, if that clause didn't exist surely the citizens of San Francisco would own AT&T by now?

ryanjmo 16y ago
Yeah, that is a really good point. Do you think if Toyota shrugged it off more that would of been more or less useful if it became a legal matter?