It can just be mostly an automatic scrubbing account thst just tweets whatever it comes across as being posted.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple iOS 8.0.1 Issues Linked to Maps Debacle, Same Manager Oversaw Both Projects
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The majority of 'news' articles on this site, particular those like this one, make me wish it was a forum only. This is just embarrassingly poor.
This is now my favorite "Steve jobs would have never"
----------
Where are you getting multi million from? Apple says only 40,000
This article is some seriously awful trash. I know macrumors is barely above the level of gutter press but you could at least TRY to stay there instead of stooping to this.
"Internal turf battles also can impact quality testing"
Doesn't sound to me like an article/leak created by Apple. That's not something that any company would like to become a part of its public image.
And what do you make of large mainstream reputable news agencies like Bloomberg?
I understand perfectly and agree. Very good insight. My current company tends to micromanage. A bunch.
Maybe Apple needs some more Beta Testers for their software? Only 100? That seems small to me for such a company.
Come on, MacRumors, you should know better.
Software is a team effort. And finding a problem that exists in 5% of devices is extraordinarily hard. Just because a bug happens, doesn't mean one person is incompetent.
Fingerpointing is about the worst thing that can happen after such an incident. It's so easy to make one person the scapegoat and just move on.
The question should never be: Who do we fire about this? It should be: How can we modify our process so that human error is caught (more often).
(And remember, these aren't publicly elected officials that are accountable to YOU. You know nothing about the framework in which they have to do their job, and about the tasks they have been given. Blame Apple instead.)
Software is a team effort. And finding a problem that exists in 5% of devices is extraordinarily hard. Just because a bug happens, doesn't mean one person is incompetent.
Fingerpointing is about the worst thing that can happen after such an incident. It's so easy to make one person the scapegoat and just move on.
The question should never be: Who do we fire about this? It should be: How can we modify our process so that human error is caught (more often).
(And remember, these aren't publicly elected officials that are accountable to YOU. You know nothing about the framework in which they have to do their job, and about the tasks they have been given. Blame Apple instead.)
This sounds like allot of companies to fail to test things probably....
One person, not talking to other people, or fail to update.
Yea, We've all been there.
Its good the article removed the individual names, but the only problem now is,, We all know it
Obviously, some poor employee at Apple didn't wanna get fired...
Oh well... nature will take it's course...
One person, not talking to other people, or fail to update.
Yea, We've all been there.
Its good the article removed the individual names, but the only problem now is,, We all know it
Obviously, some poor employee at Apple didn't wanna get fired...
Oh well... nature will take it's course...
If he's the head of the team of hundred, he is being paid an awful lot of money to not allow something like this to happen. Lots of money for lots of responsibility. If he can't handle the possibility, maybe he shouldn't be fired, but get a job with less responsibility. Go back as a simple software tester with a much, much lower salary.
This isn't about a software tester. This is about the head of the department. You ask how he could possibly test millions of phones being used in different ways. I don't know. But I'm not paid what he gets paid. He gets paid tons of money because he is supposed to know the answer. If he doesn't, he needs to be fired.
The guy whose job is on the line is the one whose responsibility it was to modify processes so that human error is caught more often. He didn't do it. He failed. With a big salary comes big responsibility. If you don't justify the big salary, why should you get it? He's paid ten times more than the individual testers because his job is exactly to do what you suggest should be done now, and he didn't do it.
Bloomberg engages in editorialism and clickbaiting in their newsroom. They are good for market data but sometimes put out articles of dubious quality.
Agreed.
Without knowing all the circumstances, including what kind of pressure and deadlines were going on, it seems very unfair to pin this on one person.
I find the fact MR identified the person in question pretty horrible, and am glad their name has been removed.
How about a list of all their successes for a bit of context? No? Not as a good a story I guess.
I have no doubt Apple will fire this person if they have personally messed up badly on more than one occasion and that was all there was to it. If they don't, well to me that suggests there may have been more to it, such as any combination of possible reasons we aren't being told about how it happened.
For all we know, this person told their bosses it wasn't ready and they were overruled. Or was simply put under pressure to ok it when they ideally would have liked more time. Or lots of other possible reasons we can't even imagine. WE DON'T KNOW. So I think people should stop conclusion-jumping.
Note I'm not saying the iOS 8 update wasn't a debacle that shouldn't have happened, or that it wasn't a very bad and serious thing. But let's not clamour to make one person a sacrificial scapegoat without knowing all the facts, eh?
I find the fact MR identified the person in question pretty horrible, and am glad their name has been removed.
How about a list of all their successes for a bit of context? No? Not as a good a story I guess.
I have no doubt Apple will fire this person if they have personally messed up badly on more than one occasion and that was all there was to it. If they don't, well to me that suggests there may have been more to it, such as any combination of possible reasons we aren't being told about how it happened.
For all we know, this person told their bosses it wasn't ready and they were overruled. Or was simply put under pressure to ok it when they ideally would have liked more time. Or lots of other possible reasons we can't even imagine. WE DON'T KNOW. So I think people should stop conclusion-jumping.
Note I'm not saying the iOS 8 update wasn't a debacle that shouldn't have happened, or that it wasn't a very bad and serious thing. But let's not clamour to make one person a sacrificial scapegoat without knowing all the facts, eh?
Adam Satariano? Yes he should be fired. And anyone in Apple PR who allows Apple execs to do another interview with BusinessWeek should be fired as well.
I believe Craig Federighi was mentioned only once in this story. Apple needs to do an internal investigation to find out who leaked this guys name. Whoever that is needs to be fired.
There probably is a compelling story here about issues with internal processes at Apple but Bloomberg stupidly decided to go the gawker route and make it about embarrassing and shaming one person. If anyone should be taking the heat its Craig Federighi, not some mid-level employee who never should have been named.
For the people screaming 'censorship!', remember there are libel and slander laws. There is no absolute freedom of press.
This is a good thing for you. Otherwise anyone can make up anything about you and ruin your life.
We do not yet know the circumstances of what happened. For all anyone knows this individual was out sick and someone else signed off on the release. You just don't know. You don't ruin someone's career and livelihood based on unnamed sources and whispers.
This just becomes a 'crucify him!' moment. It is Apple's responsibility to deal with what happened internally. If they feel this person is responsible then fine. This person cannot defend himself publicly either. His NDAs prevent that. So he's in a terrible position this morning.
This is a good thing for you. Otherwise anyone can make up anything about you and ruin your life.
We do not yet know the circumstances of what happened. For all anyone knows this individual was out sick and someone else signed off on the release. You just don't know. You don't ruin someone's career and livelihood based on unnamed sources and whispers.
This just becomes a 'crucify him!' moment. It is Apple's responsibility to deal with what happened internally. If they feel this person is responsible then fine. This person cannot defend himself publicly either. His NDAs prevent that. So he's in a terrible position this morning.
So let me get this straight: the guy is held responsible for screwing up Maps, so they put him in charge of the system software? Riiiiiiight.
Maybe MacRumors can also out the guy who made THAT decision.
I'm sure he said "you're" fired. He valued language.
Maybe MacRumors can also out the guy who made THAT decision.
I'm sure he said "you're" fired. He valued language.
Trouble is, you don't have this straight, since nobody outside of Apple knows what really happened. The Bloomberg article quoted "people familiar with Apples management structure." Maybe those people had a grade against this employee or weren't as "familiar" as they made themselves out to be.
My point is that news organizations should be extremely careful before they name names, especially in this day and age where every story, especially negative ones like this, spread virally across the Internet. And once the bad genie's out of the bottle, as it were, it's almost impossible to put it back in. News organizations have a greater responsibility than ever to fact check, but that doesn't seem to happen. A post a few weeks ago on computerworld.com actually pointed back to a forum post here on MacRumors!
MacRumors is in an odd position, since some of what it reports is legitimate, verified news, but much is speculation with little basis in fact. That's OK, as long as the sources for any article are shown, so readers can decide for themselves. But the lines between the two are blurrier than ever.