According to Futuremark, “when a device is suspected of breaking our rules it is delisted”. Among those that have been delisted – in other words, sent right to the bottom of Futuremark’s official performance chart and stripped of their scores – are HTC’s One and One Mini smartphones, and Samsung’s Galaxy Note and Galaxy Note III tablets.
I’m shocked Samsung would stoop to such levels.
I’d be shocked if they had stopped.
it could be worse:
http://www.cultofmac.com/255618/how-apples-blacklist-manipulates-the-press/
If you believe him.
That’s not worse.
Wow…had no idea it was that bad but it makes sense. I’ve always thought the Apple world is afraid of speaking against Apple. That’s why you get vitriol or silence when competitors release and praise or silence when Apple releases.
Anyways…off topic but that was illuminating. I also fully expect Google, Samsung, etc probably operate in a similar fashion.
Par for the course.
Mike Elgan: a guy who made a living for years writing IT-friendly diatribes about how Apple had done nothing original, should emulate Microsoft’s business model if it wanted to compete with the grown-ups, and how great it would be when the Zune would easily kill the iPod. He helped perpetuate some of the biggest myths about Apple that ignorant gadget-nerds still quote.
Then he realized Microsoft was no longer the heaviest hitter in the room, and he switched horses, writing about how Apple has created nothing original, should acknowledge Google’s superiority if it wants to compete with the grown-ups, and how great it’ll be when Samsung devices kill the iPhone and iPad. And younger ignorant gadget-nerds recite the new litany.
Now he’s resentful for not being given access to report on Apple alongside the grown-ups, and he’s calling it a “blacklist.” It’s not. He’s just a hack who panders, poorly and transparently.
Yeah, it could be worse. You could be reading Mike Elgan: a guy who made a living for years writing IT-friendly diatribes about how Apple had done nothing original, should emulate Microsoft’s business model if it wanted to compete with the grown-ups (which it tried, almost destroying the company), and how great it would be when the Zune would easily kill the iPod. He helped perpetuate some of the biggest myths about Apple that ignorant gadget-nerds still quote like creationist gospel.
Then he realized Microsoft was no longer the heaviest hitter in the room, and he switched horses, writing about how Apple has created nothing original, should acknowledge Google’s superiority if it wants to compete with the grown-ups, and how great it’ll be when Samsung devices kill the iPhone and iPad. And so younger ignorant gadget-nerds recited the new litany.
Now he’s resentful for not being given access to report on Apple alongside the grown-ups, and he’s calling it a “blacklist.” It’s not. He’s just a hack who panders, poorly and transparently.
How perfectly appropriate he’s writing for Cult of Mac.
So aside from your disdain for Elgan, whom I barely know except for a podcast on TWIT he frequents, do you truly believe Apple doesn’t have a list of people they will not talk to? Is it the negative connotation “blacklist” has that you disagree with but not the heart of his article?
[real questions, no sarcasm/tone/etc]
I believe Apple’s press relations have a list of people and organizations who aren’t considered worth communicating with or inviting to events, and a list of others that are prioritized for exactly the opposite treatment. I’m almost certain Apple’s not unique in this regard. And I suppose “blacklist” is as good a term to describe this as any.
Just as I’m almost certain that Apple knows Elgan’s history of trolling for linkbait, spreading FUD, and outright belligerence about almost everything Apple has ever done, despite his disingenuous claims to the contrary.
The fact that Elgan’s complaining publicly about this doesn’t boost his legitimacy, and the fact that he’s doing so on Cult of Mac is hardly surprising.
Ok. I hear ya.
So do you think if Gruber or The Loop gave a bad review or ripped Apple like they do Google/etc, would Apple “blacklist” them or reduce their access?
If so, do you think The Loop/Gruber/etc slant their stories or shy away from true thoughts for fear of this?
Anyone who’s read Gruber for more than a few weeks knows he rips on Apple when he feels they’ve made bad decisions. His criticism is heartfelt and comes from a genuine understanding of what constitutes better-working products, unlike Elgan, whose arsenal almost entirely consists of misinformation, cheap shots and exaggerated rhetoric.
The Loop similarly calls out Apple’s missteps, although less formally, less strenuously, and not as often.
The equivalence you’re seeking isn’t there.
If you were a Korean mob boss and you were in charge of running Samsung, wouldn’t you run Samsung exactly the way it is currently being run?
Just sayin’.
Ehhh…we definitely disagree on the tone of them saying “I don’t agree” and “_____ sucks ____” [fill in with a company and reference of your choice in the Google arena]. Loop and Daring are verrrry light on Apple and always have an excuse or reasoning for their decisions.
I’ve seen both disagree or say they don’t understand something but not anywhere near the same as with Apple competitors (see Rockstar coverage vs other patent trolls). Jim at least plainly states he’s biased so I get and respect that but I wonder if they are this way out of personal opinion or fear of backlash. I think a little bit of both.
And therefore all these — including Elgan — are equivalent in worth or integrity in your view?
No. I’m not too familiar with Elgan. I only learned his name a few months ago.
I’d put Jim’s [writing/publishing] integrity over Gruber’s purely based on Jim stating outright: I’m biased. That’s no disrespect to Gruber. As a writer, I follow him because he’s simply superb. I just disagree with his content a lot of the times. 🙂