2 ms·
Way back when apple first released boot camp for the intel macs, I worked retail. A customer came in one day fuming mad and demanding a refund of their new MacB
by tpmoney 5y ago
Way back when apple first released boot camp for the intel macs, I worked retail. A customer came in one day fuming mad and demanding a refund of their new MacBook. They described a series of issues they’d been having for the past month, some of which were known issues that were addressed with a firmware update months earlier and some of which sounded like nothing that should be able to happen in OS X at all.
After some taking the customer allowed us to take a look at things before we did the refund. It turned out her nephew, whom she had turned to for help setting up her new computer decided for her that she didn’t need a mac, she needed a mac running windows. He had resized the Mac OS partition to as small as it would go, installed windows and configured boot camp to boot entirely into windows. As a result all the problems she’d had under windows remained (made worse by not having antivirus because “macs don’t need antivirus”) and she never got any of the firmware updates because Mac OS was never booted and never checked the update servers.
Boot camp was an involved process at the time, with plenty of scary warnings and no official support at all. But the end user never even saw them because the “tech” person in their lives just set it up anyway.
The result of this was a few hours of employee time and and out of policy assurance of return long after the normal return policy if the customer still wasn’t happy trying the proper Mac and Mac OS experience for a while.
No amount of disclaimers, not taking responsibility or sign tapping would have gotten a better response, and not taking that responsibility even though Apple explicitly disclaimed responsibility would have resulted in brand damage, costs in terms of returns and restocking and the loss of future sales that (later happy) customer represented.
In the end, customers aren’t impressed with your signs and disclaimers. If apple is the product vendor, they will demand apple fixes it.
- Apocryphon 5y agoThat's fair, but it would seem that the entire set of problems related to Boot Camp have since gone away over time, and Apple's brand has been no worse for wear. (Though I'm not even sure how widespread Windows on Mac use is these days, and the Apple Silicon licensing issues would seem to pose a threat to that continued use. Yet I haven't seen any urgent fears about that lack of support.) At some point you're just going to have to expect users to grow and learn alongside the platform. Edit: I should also note that Apple is perfectly fine with taking credit, as product vendor, for content that they are hosting on one of their apps, but not actually producing: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30191126 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30191126 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/apple-podcasts/id525463029 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/apple-podcasts/id525463029 2nd Edit: > No amount of disclaimers, not taking responsibility or sign tapping I've also wondered about that. Apple is a master of UX patterns. The whole green vs. blue message bubbles alone has become a social/cultural signifier. Let's say the UX was similarly tweaked if a user had sideloading enabled, maybe an unsightly header. If there were similar color filters or distinguishing UI that specified installed apps as not from the App Store. Wouldn't that be enough to create user behavior to distinguish between "official" App Store apps and sideloaded ones? Emergent behavior will arise from simple prodding. The green/blue division is real.