Apple gets a lot of criticism for its “my way or the highway” approach to pretty much everything: app store terms, product design, colors, and so on. While this is an approach that definitely has its perks – you can tell when committees start to get involved in the design, and the end result is rarely good – it also offers a degree of obduracy that is common to all other parties that do Having to do it can be frustrating to deal with the company.
But that philosophy doesn’t mean that Apple isn’t willing to make changes when necessary. Innovation is another hallmark of the company, after all, and sitting on your laurels in the technology market is seldom a road to success. It’s just that sometimes changes don’t come from people within the company, but from external forces.
In recent times the company has taken a number of surprising setbacks from previous guidelines, and while it may not always be done with the goodness of its heart – as much as can be said of a company – it proves that Apple can learn, and maybe improve … even if it sometimes has to be dragged, kicked and shouted.
Links of a chain
The App Store has caused a lot of frustration, especially for developers, but to a lesser extent for consumers. While the recent decision between Apple and Epic was mostly in Cupertino’s favor – and the one determination Apple has lost is far from complete – the company already has some concessions to running the App Store following an investigation into Japanese fair trade made commission.
As a result of this investigation, Apple agreed to allow “reader apps” (those that require subscriptions to view content) to include a link to their website – something that previously violated App Store rules. In addition, this change will not be limited to Japan, but will be rolled out worldwide over the next year.
While it’s not the most magnanimous decision (it’s an “in-app link,” singular, and we haven’t seen what the guidelines call), and it’s clear that the main drive has been to gain more regulatory scrutiny Avoid, but it’s still a positive change that developers and users alike will benefit from. And it’s proof that government action, which is financially bigger than many countries, can actually force Apple to change the way it does business. With antitrust threats looming from the US government and the European Union, it at least gives hope that the company can be made to improve.
Ports in a storm
This pressure doesn’t have to come from governments either. Take the new MacBook Pro as an example. After several years of lackluster models that ignited fires because they abandoned “old” ports and had problematic keyboards, Apple has released brand new pro laptop models that bring those features back and fix almost all of the above complaints. It’s almost like the MacBook Pros didn’t even happen in the past few years.
While the cynical view could argue that Apple took all of these things away only to be able to turn them over and sell them back to us, I would be a little more benevolent: mounting pressure from professional users made the company realize that the product they were making , wasn’t what most of his customers wanted.
Or in other words, they hit Apple right in your pocket. Not that MacBook Pro sales are a huge chunk of corporate profits, but the ultimate question is, could they sell? more when they brought these features back? It’s early days to see how well the new laptops performed, but the reviews have been friendly, and when the sales figures finally come in next year, I have no doubt they will confirm those predictions.
Parts as a whole
And that brings us to the company’s most recent U-turn. After years of insisting that the only way to officially repair your iPhone is through its own AppleCare or an Apple Authorized Service Provider, Apple announced last week that it would offer replacement parts, Manuals and tools will be made available. The program starts with certain iPhone 12 and 13 components that are frequently pinned, such as the screen, battery, and camera, but it will expand to include more components and devices over time, including M1-powered Macs.
As an attentive technology journalist pointed out, this timing was not accidental, nor was the decision born again from Apple’s altruism. Rather, it was likely initiated by the Securities and Exchange Commission, which was pursuing a shareholder resolution urging Apple to investigate the implications of the “right to repair” rules. It’s possible Apple saw the writing on the wall and decided to stay one step ahead of the game by announcing this self-service repair option.
Ultimately, however, I would argue that the outcome is more important than the motive. Regardless of how Apple chose to make the change, the company has Tat create, and like the App Store and the new MacBook Pro, this move will likely benefit consumers (and therefore Apple in the long run). While the company prefers to do things its way, it’s clear that outside forces can push Apple into new behaviors – and that means there is always hope for change.