Apple Exec: We Feature Competitors' Apps 'All The Time' on the App Store

[spicymints]

Terms apple is listed first:
Music
Numbers
Pages
Keynote
home
Calendar
Preview
Contacts

Terms Apple is not listed First
Music Streaming
Spotify
Tidal
Spreadsheets
Excel
Sheets
word Processing
electronic publising
Word
Slides
powerpoint


You get the idea, when the name of the Apple application is the same as the search term, voila, it comes up first. when the name as the search term is a comptetitor's product, that name comes up first, when the name is generic, who knows, but maybe most popular. spreadsheet yields Excel, so.....

And seriously, even if a free Apple app came up first versus a paid competitor, 1) apple makes no money on that, 2) if they were equally good, wouldn't you choose the free app?

This argument is all in the minds of the haters, and has been for some time

Ok, that's part of the argument. Now how doest the ranking algorithm work. You got the keyword relevancy. Reviews? Its most likely inconsistent. I don't have an iPhone so I can't run some tests to determine how the ranking works.

 

[MacBH928]

no one is accountable for discussing matters (*). One is accountable for crimes.
However, discussing matters can be used as evidence of intent. A common example is a manager asking someone to do X just to hear from the lawyers that it would be illegal or borderline or not by policy etc (it happens to me often). The fact that the manager said X and discussed it doesn’t mean that he’s liable. However - should he proceed in doing whatever X is - the emails can be used to prove that he had enough knowledge that he was committing a crime. In other words, emails and conversation will help in determine mens rea, on top of providing evidence of a fact.

*= obviously it also depends on the matters at hand. If you’re trying to organize a terrorist attack, then what you discuss will make you accountable.

I do agree but hopefully whatever those discussions are would not be misunderstood or taken out of context as many people deal with internal jokes, quoting others, or say things as a prank...

 

[cyb3rdud3]

I do agree but hopefully whatever those discussions are would not be misunderstood or taken out of context as many people deal with internal jokes, quoting others, or say things as a prank...

And they really should not do that. It creates a bad, unprofessional and toxic atmosphere that can have serious consequences.

There is nothing wrong with being serious and professional at work. And if one wants to be a joker then become a standup comedian. To suggest to not take it seriously as it was just a joke or some banter won’t be sufficient.

 

[MacBH928]

And they really should not do that. It creates a bad, unprofessional and toxic atmosphere that can have serious consequences.

There is nothing wrong with being serious and professional at work. And if one wants to be a joker then become a standup comedian. To suggest to not take it seriously as it was just a joke or some banter won’t be sufficient.

I guess we all should act like robots during work then. This includes anything from 2 employee stores to mega corporates.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

I guess we all should act like robots during work then. This includes anything from 2 employee stores to mega corporates.

Being professional doesn’t mean you have to act like a robot.