Nearly a week after publication the article still trends -- when the algorithmic winds blow the right way -- near the top of TheStreet's charts. Of course, the subject matter welcomes divisiveness, as evidenced by independent submissions of the piece to the popular social sharing service Reddit:
It's a "piece" alright. A masterpiece to Apple (AAPL) fans and those who understand what has made Apple great. And a piece of absolute crap to Apple haters who present Google's (GOOG) Android marketshare as support for their seemingly righteous, yet horribly misguided hate for Apple.
And make no mistake. That's what the negative response is all about -- hate for Apple. Because nobody could possibly love Android.
A few lines from a Jay Yarow report at Business Insider (via Yahoo! (YHOO) Finance) ring relevant here. Yarow was writing in response to the rumor that Apple would like to make iPhone 6 $100 more expensive than previous models:
Because the iPhone is the only phone that matters this year, carriers may cave and give Apple the price bump it wants ...
This seems like a strange move for Apple. At a time when its rivals are going down in price, Apple wants to go up.
So instead of a starting price of $199 on a two-year contract (the way it is with iPhone 5s), Apple wants $299 as the introductory price point. And the wireless carriers don't like the idea.
Neither here nor there prediction -- it'll be a $249 phone. It's neither here nor there because, as Yarow stated, "the iPhone is the only phone that matters this year."
Apple focuses on nothing other than producing the best hardware it possibly can, regardless of what its "rivals" do. As I noted in the demolish article, do not confuse concern over Android with panic. If it was iPhone 5 or 5s would have been a large-screen model. But Apple has waited for a reason.
It wants to get it right. It wants to sneak attack Google. Killing Android with a scalpel not a sledgehammer and hatchet. Almost as if keeping Android's trend line in the down direction was an unintended consequence. Something that just sort of happened as Apple was going about its business.
Apple doesn't want to produce the smartphone equivalent of Microsoft's (MSFT) answer to the iPad. The Surface tablet failed despite Steve Ballmer's misleading pump jobs. (Where was/is the SEC on that noise, by the way?). It failed because it was a poorly conceived and terribly executed non-answer to something bigger than a piece of hardware. iPad -- big and small -- creates an experience unlike any other mobile device on the market. Apple wants to ensure that when it does a bigger smartphone screen, it not only does it right, but to an extent that makes all that came before iPhone 6 look and feel obsolete.
That's what Apple's about to do with iPhone 6. In relation to specifications, as TheStreet's Richard Saintvilus nicely outlined last week, but, more importantly, with respect to the experience.
If an iPhone's less sexy today than it was 2, 3, 5 years ago, it's not because of Android. It's because of Apple. In many respects, I still believe iPhone does not need to be revolutionary, however I also understand the power of change not merely for the sake of change, but to shake up the experience.