I think you probably hit the nail on the head. Boring, pre-recorded, hi-res infomercials (called films), verse live, adrenaline anything can happen moments with Steve. You gotta admit, with Steve, you were at the edge of your seats. Tim is just a snooze fest if you watch all the keynotes from 2011 up to now.
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 Issues Takedown Order for Popular YouTube Channel That Archived WWDC Keynotes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is what happens in giant companies. Departments become power centers that make decisions solely to exercise their power, not for the general good of the company, let alone customers or humanity.
This is all Tim Cook's fault. Look at his background and how he likes to generate money. It's one of the reasons we have 20 different iPhone variations and iPads. If Steve Jobs were alive we wouldn't have so many different iPads and iPhones. Remember when you could name most of the Apple products? Now there's iPhone, iPhone SE, iPhone Max, iPhone ultra, ultra max, SE max, Max se, Max ultra endless.
Exactly what direct benefits to Apple were eliminated? Please be specific. People have confirmation bias about this as only perceived benefits were eliminated:
- Free marketing? Apple doesn't need it.
- Brand awareness? Apple doesn't need it and for those who may not be aware of Apple, they wouldn't watch these videos anyway (imo)
- Gain of sales in any significant amount? No.
- Loss of sales in any significant amount? No.
- Internet memes? Yes.
- Brand image? Nope.
- Increase in value of stock? Not likely.
- Someone making a dime from Apples' copyrighted materials? Yes.
More a consequence of age.
There are kids today that like or love the company and, in the future, when Apple’s focused on the next younger generation, it’s possible they, too, will have the same loathing.
Are you going to seriously argue with Apples' incredible revenue and say it their strategy was wrong?
If Steve Jobs were alive the iphone 6 wouldn't have been released. Wearables wouldn't be a thing etc.
The bad old days I guess.
I wonder what other videos were up? For example, even if they didn’t monetize the videos, if someone came to his YouTube channel for one of those free videos and then watched ANY of his monetized content, then that, of course, is why he had them there.
And, if Apple allowed this, then they’d have to allow anyone that wants to get viewers to their channel by hosting those videos.
Choose your battles Apple. Really, wasting your energy on this?
One benefit eliminated:
-Not pissing of the online Apple fans/users for something petty and unnecessary.
How big of a benefit that was? Idk, I mean we're all going to buy something Apple eventually so I guess they got away with their pettiness.
I still see several sites with older Apple content on YouTube. Not like everything has disappeared. Just do a search. But some of the 360p videos have a brief banner saying trademark and any encoding, rebroadcast, retransmission requires prior written approval from Apple Computer. The ways things are it’s doubtful that happened much, there might be other reasons why his site was picked on?
So is Apple going to post them on their own website than?
Otherwise this is just a strawman argument.
I’m sorry it’s censoring history at the end of the day. Apple made a public address and they are allowed to make it disappear from existence. If a company makes a public address they should be required to provide access to it for the lifetime of the company and if the company no longer exists it should become free domain.
At the end of day Apple does not provide access to all past keynotes.
It’s censorship. When you make a speech to the public you do not have the right to take it back and make it disappear from history. Nor should you have that right. Yet people are defending a company which should have even less right to do so.
At the end of day Apple does not provide access to all past keynotes.
It’s censorship. When you make a speech to the public you do not have the right to take it back and make it disappear from history. Nor should you have that right. Yet people are defending a company which should have even less right to do so.
The reason is controlling the brand. You never let someone get a foot in the door on your brand to prevent it being tarnished. You link to people's intellectual property, not steal it. Deciding to save something for posterity is ok if it is for your purposes only and one of those is not sharing it. Of course one must ask why relive the past.
An additional concern is that no one should be profiteering off of their intellectual property no matter how mundane. You cannot create archives of TV shows and movies as they do not belong to you.
An additional concern is that no one should be profiteering off of their intellectual property no matter how mundane. You cannot create archives of TV shows and movies as they do not belong to you.
Your labeling these recordings are derived from public addresses, how is a presentation before an audience that paid some admission for MacWorld, or WWDC free to the public? Some broadcasting companies might be given snippets for new releases, but we assume they were all granted permission. Look online, is any company really furnishing historical keynotes or developers sessions these days? There is always the chance someone has it on YouTube for sure, but YouTube also has a lot of content not authorized being streamed, examples of recent TV, Movies present. Perhaps after permission is granted this stuff will return, as it’s not exactly something most people could be bothered to see, except from a historical news or educational reason.
Hmm, I'm not so sure! The younger generation might love the products Apple produces. But love the company? I think with their extraordinary success, Apple really have changed how they behave, and not in a good way. I don't think my age is a factor (but get off my lawn, anyway! 😁)More a consequence of age.
I wonder what other videos were up? For example, even if they didn’t monetize the videos, if someone came to his YouTube channel for one of those free videos and then watched ANY of his monetized content, then that, of course, is why he had them there.
ahhhh - the "Maybe What If Possible Could Be" scenarios.
Reminded me of Nintendo. They shut down a lot of videos featuring gameplay of their own games. Some have said that hurt them more since that free publicity would've created extra "oomph" to push more of their games and awareness to the market. This too feels heavy handed
Apple doesn't care if they piss of fans and users, imo or if those same fans and users are pissed off enough to not buy future products. What occurs to you as petty and unnecessary, may have a very good reason behind the removal.