Apple Pulls Reviews From Online Store Product Listings

[PickUrPoison]

Seems you are complaining for the sake of complaining. If you have a better solution to the problem lets see it and implement it to Amazon, Apple, etc. Why are you hear complaining about it if there are many likeminded people who are affected.

If you cannot see that I did address your post well that is your personal problem.

I said Amazons ratings are broken, though tagging verified purchaser helps, and that I read reviews instead of being misled by stars.

You replied with some nonsense about filters, which has no relevance.

It seems like you are arguing for the sake of arguing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[revmacian]

I guess Apple does not like the truth of what people actually think about its products.

The problem is that it isn't all truth. Some of it is driven by entitlement, unrealistic expectations, misunderstanding, cognitive disorders and the like. Oh, and let's not forget denial.

 

[code-m]

Apple’s solution to fake one-star reviews is to take down reviews. Other companies just delete all negative reviews.

Every Apple product has a serial and is usually associated with an AppleID, it would not be difficult to log into ones account and write a review on Apple.com that is registered and verified. If one purchases an item and still feels it is a one start well their still purchased the product and can write whatever they want. Apple might be looking at revamping they online store product review page. I don't feel there is anything nefarious on their part yet. Best to hold off on judging, yeah.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Review bombing? The reviews in this very screenshot are COMPLETELY relevant.

$130 pencil cant include a spare tip like the first (cheaper) one?
$130 pencil has very little impact resistance and drops destroy them

But yeah .. go on further about review bombing.....

As I said, I suppose inauthentic reviews is a better term.

And far from being “completely relevant”, the first review illustrates (part of) the problem perfectly. The reviewer didn’t complain about “$130 pencil cant include a spare tip like the first (cheaper) one” like you say—they complain about no replacement tips available at all. A one star review that is inaccurate, misleading and completely useless, since replacement tips ARE available, you can buy them in the Apple store.

 

[code-m]

I said Amazons ratings are broken, though tagging verified purchaser helps, and that I read reviews instead of being misled by stars.

You replied with some nonsense about filters, which has no relevance.

It seems like you are arguing for the sake of arguing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

If your purchasing decision is based on ratings along that is pretty sad, I read what the product can do, tech specs etc. The reviews are just icing on the cake as it has always been all over the place with too many variables. I don't necessarily see it as broken, any system needs to be revamped and evolve. That is what Amazon, Apple, etc are doing.

Why are you reading unverified reviews with one star ratings, are you just seeking the negative to align with your preconceived idea of that product. It is human behaviour to look for either the positive in a product to reassure themselves that their initial decision was the correct one. I suspect that is why you are looking at one star reviews. I look at where the majority of the rating fit. For example if the APP has 50 ratings and most of them are between 3-4 stars then I know that some who have had a poor experience was maybe due to some other issue or user expectations, similarly goes for those giving a 5 star rating.

I mentioned that one does not have to spend 10-15 mins on reviews when there are filters, I am an analyst I know how to pick apart the key information for a whole lot of noise, I suggest to sharpen your online product reviewing skills will save you a lot of time and you will stop complaining about a broken review system.

 

[ericwn]

Review bombing? The reviews in this very screenshot are COMPLETELY relevant.

$130 pencil cant include a spare tip like the first (cheaper) one?
$130 pencil has very little impact resistance and drops destroy them

But yeah .. go on further about review bombing.....

Drops can have a potential harmful effect on electronics? No way! Super Apple specific problem. The iPad forum must be full of it.

Btw the little impact resistance that some claim to be the case is probably why you only ever need one tip.

 

[ericwn]

This thread is the perfect reason for removing all those whiny reviews.

It can’t be the reason as it was created after the reviews were taken down.

 

[PickUrPoison]

If your purchasing decision is based on ratings along that is pretty sad, I read what the product can do, tech specs etc. The reviews are just icing on the cake as it has always been all over the place with too many variables. I don't necessarily see it as broken, any system needs to be revamped and evolve. That is what Amazon, Apple, etc are doing.

Why are you reading unverified reviews with one star ratings, are you just seeking the negative to align with your preconceived idea of that product. It is human behaviour to look for either the positive in a product to reassure themselves that their initial decision was the correct one. I suspect that is why you are looking at one star reviews. I look at where the majority of the rating fit. For example if the APP has 50 ratings and most of them are between 3-4 stars then I know that some who have had a poor experience was maybe due to some other issue or user expectations, similarly goes for those giving a 5 star rating.

I mentioned that one does not have to spend 10-15 mins on reviews when there are filters, I am an analyst I know how to pick apart the key information for a whole lot of noise, I suggest to sharpen your online product reviewing skills will save you a lot of time and you will stop complaining about a broken review system.

Like I said I think the rating system is broken, and I prefer to read reviews instead.

 

[B4U]

Ostrich policy.

 

[blairh]

what does this mean?

You can only leave a review if you actually bought the product from Apple.

 

[dampfnudel]

If it’s just temporary, as part of a change to introduce verified reviews by people who actually made the purchase, that’s fine. Amazon and others have done that for a while now. If not, it’s a bad move that will provide more evidence that this is no longer Steve’s Apple.

 

[Rogifan]

Um, no.....

Censorship - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient."[2][3][4] Censorship can be conducted by governments,[5] private institutions, and corporations.

How is Apple censoring anyone? You have the right to say whatever you want about Apple products. That doesn’t mean Apple is required to provide you the platform to do so.

 

[AnonMac50]

Are you buying from Amazon or eBay? Many of those are cheap counterfeits.

Or maybe your just unlucky, or rough on your things. I’ve never had issues with MagSafe or Lightning cables over many years including traveling with them, never used the battery cases.

All of them are official Apple products from the online store or physical store. I try to be very careful with my wires, but I have had any of my other wires break, just the Apple ones. Even my non-Apple lightning cables lasted longer.

 

[V_Man]

While this certainly looks like they are hiding something. I’m it’s not a big deal

 

[Unregistered 4U]

hire an army of arbiters to nitpick “constructive review”

But, it only takes a moment to imagine your idea...

Apple announcing “We’ve just hired an army of arbiters to nitpick constructive reviews and highlight them!”

to see that it would be followed with the normal social media frenzy. “APPLE IS PICKING AND CHOOSING THE REVIEWS THEY WANT US TO SEE!!!” YouTube video thumbnails with bold red text and screwed up angry faces!

Spending more money to end up with pretty much the same outrage as spending less money (removing the reviews, the system that supported them and the folks on the back end that kept it running) just doesn’t make sense. Drop the reviews, people rail for a bit, and add “dropping reviews” to their list of grievances against Apple (to trot out anytime Apple is doing anything that gets even the slightest bit of attention).

Meanwhile in the real world, professional companies that analyze customer satisfaction continue to report that Apple’s is among the highest in the industry.
[automerge]1574517827[/automerge]

I'd be interested to hear of other places if people have suggestions.

I’ve been using The Wirecutter for reviews. They let you know what their favorite is, and then provide the rationale for WHY it’s their favorite. Provides comparison reviews of the ones they didn’t pick and why, and even gives information about the also-rans that they didn’t even consider in the nomination. You get to read what features they felt were important enough to matter in the selection and that helps you to understand whether or not those features are important to you. I usually come away from the site being able to pore through feature lists of items they haven’t even reviewed and determining if one will likely be better for me than another.

 

[SAIRUS]

Why don’t you promote Apple yourselves with your own reviews. These executives and managers don’t have time to pay someone to maintain their systems. They make money off your work.

 

[DevNull0]

How is Apple censoring anyone? You have the right to say whatever you want about Apple products. That doesn’t mean Apple is required to provide you the platform to do so.

Just out of curiosity, what is your definition of censorship? The word clearly doesn't mean what you think it means, but I'm not sure what you think it means.

From my Wikipedia link that you just quoted in your reply:

• Corporate censorship is the process by which editors in corporate media outlets intervene to disrupt the publishing of information that portrays their business or business partners in a negative light,[19][20] or intervene to prevent alternate offers from reaching public exposure.[21]

 

[I7guy]

Just out of curiosity, what is your definition of censorship? The word clearly doesn't mean what you think it means, but I'm not sure what you think it means.

From my Wikipedia link that you just quoted in your reply:

I’m with @Rogifan on this. Nobody is censoring anybody. Want to post a negative (or positive) review, find your own outlet to do it. Would be different if certain reviews were selectively disappearing, that could be construed as censorship.

 

[Rogifan]

Just out of curiosity, what is your definition of censorship? The word clearly doesn't mean what you think it means, but I'm not sure what you think it means.

From my Wikipedia link that you just quoted in your reply:

So it would be censorship if Apple was leaving up the positive reviews/ratings and only taking down the negative ones. Instead they took them all down. How is that censorship? Some YouTube videos have comments turned off. Some articles on The Verge don’t have comments. Would you call that censorship?

 

[turbineseaplane]

lmao

Threads like these need an auto "expiration" where they lock themselves..

It just devolves into endless bickering

 

[DevNull0]

So it would be censorship if Apple was leaving up the positive reviews/ratings and only taking down the negative ones. Instead they took them all down. How is that censorship? Some YouTube videos have comments turned off. Some articles on The Verge don’t have comments. Would you call that censorship?

You still need to give your definition of censorship.

Are you now saying that by whatever your definition is, selectively deleting content you don't like while leaving content you do would be censorship. But if there's a little bit of content you wouldn't mind being in with all the content you want to suppress it's not longer censorship? Very strange.

Of course, even if that were your definition, Apple still actively engages in censorship in their dealings with the press.

 

[I7guy]

You still need to give your definition of censorship.

Are you now saying that by whatever your definition is, selectively deleting content you don't like while leaving content you do would be censorship. But if there's a little bit of content you wouldn't mind being in with all the content you want to suppress it's not longer censorship? Very strange.

Of course, even if that were your definition, Apple still actively engages in censorship in their dealings with the press.

Your definition of censorship is strange (by your words) to say the least, if you think Apple engages in censorship in dealing with the press. By that low water mark, censorship is rampant and unchecked.

There is always the court system to fall back on. But what Apple did is not censorship.

 

[DevNull0]

Your definition of censorship is strange (by your words) to say the least, if you think Apple engages in censorship in dealing with the press. By that low water mark, censorship is rampant and unchecked.

There is always the court system to fall back on. But what Apple did is not censorship.

I gave my definition which is the one from Wikipedia. If you want to call that strange so be it. You're the one that will not actually provide a definition and you and Rogifan keep moving the bar around without a definition.

And yes, by that definition, Apple, and every other American company, do engage in the practice to the maximum their clout allows, and Apple has a lot of clout. That however, is not what we're talking about on this thread. We're talking about this particular action of Apple's, removing reviews being censorship.

So, once again, what definition of censorship are you using? I gave mine and I'm consistent with it. You're using the term in a wishy-washy way where you keep changing what you think it means.

 

[C DM]

I gave my definition which is the one from Wikipedia.

A company or organization not providing a public place for ratings or reviews doesn't appear to fit that definition. Certainly many companies and organizations don't do that--it would be rather odd to say that they therefore have always been engaging in censorship.

 

[I7guy]

I gave my definition which is the one from Wikipedia. If you want to call that strange so be it. You're the one that will not actually provide a definition and you and Rogifan keep moving the bar around without a definition.

And yes, by that definition, Apple, and every other American company, do engage in the practice to the maximum their clout allows, and Apple has a lot of clout. That however, is not what we're talking about on this thread. We're talking about this particular action of Apple's, removing reviews being censorship.

So, once again, what definition of censorship are you using? I gave mine and I'm consistent with it. You're using the term in a wishy-washy way where you keep changing what you think it means.

The definition from Wikipedia is basically an anecdotal opinion, and your opinion is based on that.

Rogifan made a good point and I refuse to give a definition because it’s immaterial. Apple is under no obligation, to provide the means or methods for user reviews.

If Apple engages in abridging one first amendment rights there would be a lot less negative posts about Apple in this website. Case closed.