h*******e
发帖数: 404 | 1 Instapaper 的作者在 The Magazine 上的一篇好文章：
Anti-Apple Anger
Why do Android fans seem so angry about it?
By Marco Arment
I’ve noticed a very clear trend among tech sites I read: Android fans are
unusually quick to fill the comment box with rage on articles that mention
anything positive about Apple or its products. The reverse — Apple fans
leaving angry comments on pro-Android articles — is almost completely
absent from the sites I’ve seen, including sites like The Verge that have
many readers in both camps.
Recently, I wrote about a mediocre experience at a Microsoft Store and my
tepid impression of the Surface, and I saw the same effect coming from die-
hard Microsoft fans responding via email and Twitter: not just
counterarguments, but seemingly deep-seated anger.
The anger from Microsoft and Android fans at anything pro-Apple usually has
undertones of disbelief and frustration, as if to say, “I can’t believe I
have to say this again. Why don’t you get it? What’s wrong with you people
?”
But I never see Microsoft fans attacking Android fans, or vice versa. And
the rise of anti-Apple anger has risen dramatically as Apple has been so
successful in recent years.
What is it about Apple and its success that makes people so angry?
The Apple attitude
Most people don’t care about technology choices as much as we do. Maybe
they’re too busy to spend more than an hour choosing a phone. Maybe they
just have other things they’d rather spend time thinking about.
They perform minimal research, they’re more swayed by prices and sales, and
they’re more susceptible to being railroaded by retail salespeople. They
get their gadget or computer home, start using it, and suffer mild to severe
irritation with it for a few years until the cycle repeats.
Most of these people aren’t posting angry comments on The Verge.
Some of them once considered an Apple product. Some of them may have even
asked around about it. And some of them might have asked one of us about,
for instance, the iPhone.
And we told them, “It’s great! That phone you’re using now is a piece of
crap. Go out right now and get an iPhone! It’s only $200.”
Some stopped at that point, quietly put off by the suggestion that they
previously made a poor buying choice, and that they can and should casually
drop a significant sum of money on a nonessential gadget that may require a
more expensive monthly plan than their current phone.
Some actually went out and got an iPhone. It worked out well for most of
them, but some hit snags. Maybe they wanted to play videos in a format that
the iPhone doesn’t support. Maybe it didn’t interact properly with their
corporate email or calendar server. Maybe their old phone had an important
app or feature that isn’t available on the iPhone.
Apple’s products are opinionated. They say, “We know what’s best for you.
Here it is. Oh, that thing you want to do? We won’t let you do that
because it would suck. Trust us. If you don’t like it, there’s the door.”
“But I need that.”
“No, you don’t. Here, try this partial workaround or alternative solution
instead. It Just Works!”
“I tried that. It didn’t work.”
“…It’ll probably be fixed in the next version. Maybe it’s because of
iCloud. Oh, that’s weird. I’ve never seen that before. Try clearing
everything out and starting over.”
Apple’s products say “no” a lot. No, you can’t have that hardware
keyboard or removable battery. No, you can’t install that app. No, you can
’t have that feature.
These are usually compromises to improve the products in other ways. But if
that missing app or feature is important to you, it’s easy to be put off by
Apple’s refusal to deliver it, especially since it’s done in such an
opinionated manner, as if to say, “Not only do we not offer that, but
nobody should need that.”
As Apple has grown, so has the number of people who have fallen on the wrong
end of its opinionated product design. It leaves so many markets, features,
and needs unaddressed that many users are effectively forced into
alternatives.
And two alternatives offer to please everyone.
The wild Northwest
Android and Windows share a common selling point: they give users and
manufacturers (and, for Android, cellular carriers) much more control over
their platforms and devices than Apple would ever permit. When Apple’s
choices or attitude show someone the door, a buyer usually ends up here.
Microsoft also has a huge advantage with Windows: a lot of people actually
need the Windows versions of the Office suite, or other Windows-only
applications, to do their jobs. Boot Camp, Parallels, and Fusion are clunky,
complicated, and expensive solutions for people who need to run Windows
apps. Those people should usually just buy Windows PCs.
And a good portion of geeks care strongly about areas in which Apple is less
“open” than its competitors. Apple’s opinionated design restricts its
customers, usually because Apple believes that the result of being more
permissive would be worse overall, including increased risks of security
exploits, malware, and manual system maintenance. Generally, Apple tries to
protect users from complexity, side effects, and technical ugliness of their
choices, but they’re also always looking out for Apple’s own interests
first. It’s a benevolent dictatorship.
Where Apple says “You can’t do that because we think that would suck,”
Microsoft and Android usually say, “You can do whatever you want, even if
it sucks.” They give users enough rope with which to hang themselves, even
when that results in asphyxiation, and it’s up to the users to tolerate or
fix any resulting problems themselves. Google and Microsoft are platform
libertarians: they don’t kick away the chair, but you have to cut yourself
down.
Our technology choices reflect our values. People willing to yield some
control to Apple for their needs are more likely to enjoy the benefits that
Apple’s products bring by exerting that control. But people who don’t like
being told what to do — people who believe they know what’s best for them
, want full control over everything, and are willing to accept the resulting
responsibilities — will be more comfortable with the alternatives.
The philosophical differences between these approaches, and the frequent
failure to understand both viewpoints, are the roots of anti-Apple anger.
Understanding
As we see too often in politics, people fail to empathize with those with
different needs or priorities than their own.
It’s much easier to get defensive and try to discredit the other side,
which is at the root of “fanboy” accusations. Apple fans accuse Windows
and Android users of being crass plebeians, and in turn are accused of being
uncritical (“faithful”) sheep blinded by marketing and seeking status
symbols.
The apparent asymmetry in angry comments is likely because the Apple-fan
attitude of aloofness keeps most Apple fans away from dedicated Android and
Windows sites and articles, whereas the anti-Apple attitude probably drives
many people on that side to try to “rescue” or convince Apple fans that
they’re blind or idiotic.
Apple’s recent success also exacerbates anti-Apple frustration. The
computing industry clearly favored Windows’ libertarian-like policy for two
decades as Apple languished and inexpensive Microsoft Windows PCs dominated
the industry. But, in the last few years, the tides have shifted
dramatically as PCs have lost some ground to Macs, and iOS and other “
closed” smartphone and tablet platforms have succeeded. Nobody likes to
think that their side is “losing,” especially after it was winning for so
long.
But neither side is absolutely correct for everyone: just as there’s no
universally correct political philosophy, users of every platform have good
reasons to choose it.
The Windows and Android communities need to better understand why so many of
us choose Apple, and the Apple community needs to better understand the
large market of people who can’t or won’t. | d***a
发帖数: 13752 | 2 "Nobody likes to think that their side is “losing,” especially after it
was winning for so long."
LOL...
This is a good piece of intelligent writing. |
|
