BY PAUL MOZUR
BEIJING—The Chinese Communist Party's main
propaganda outlet assailed Apple Inc.'s customer-service practices, the
latest indication that China might move to check foreign companies'
domination of the country's smartphone market.
The People's
Daily newspaper, the party's traditional mouthpiece, in a front-page
article on Monday accused the electronics maker of declining
journalists' requests for interviews and issuing an "empty and
self-praising" response to a recent critical report by China's national
television broadcaster. The article was accompanied by a cartoon with a
figure representing the company, saying, "Apple statement: empty."
An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment on the article. China is Apple's second-largest ...
媒體札記：批蘋果英國《金融時報》中文網專欄作家徐達內【作者微博】
二、下一個谷歌
蘋果會成為下一個谷歌嗎？
最有資格預測的莫過於谷歌前大中華區總裁@李開復，已經更多地轉型為“公知”的他，昨天下午貼出3年前央視、人民網、新華網以及環球時報譴責谷歌中國傳播淫穢色情內容的歷史網頁，問了一句“能否從當年的谷歌涉黃事件推測蘋果事件的下一步？”
是自問也是自答。另一位曾經服務於國際IT巨頭中國業務的意見領袖——@謝文，倒還算樂觀：“谷歌和蘋果的區別在於：官員們很少用谷歌，卻多擁有蘋果產品。所以，禁止蘋果產品恐怕很難，畢竟富士康僱著數百萬中國工人。最大的可能是罰款，例如，給每個官員家屬終身贈送全套蘋果產品並終身免費更換和保修。”
這種對中共喉舌持續揭批蘋果的動機推測，代表了互聯網上的多數派。他們也就是環球時報前天在《蘋果為什麼批不得？ 》中為之嘆息的那些“起哄”網友，把人民日報的評論說成是“主流媒體堅決要把外國產品批透搞臭，力挺國產奶粉和兩桶油”。
當真是兩個輿論場冰火兩重天。當中共中央機關報會師央視，向蘋果發動一輪又一輪的抨擊時，那些“震驚與憤怒”的消費者在微博論壇上形單影薄，麥克風被反唇相譏央視“8點20分發”的異議者牢牢佔據。
以媒體傳播為研究方向的@張志安昨晚找到李承鵬在“3.15”次日寫就的《CCTV，你再沒資格跟我說道德》，決定要做“遲到的轉發”——而那位擁有近700萬新浪微博關注者的作家，前天起也已經註意到了老對手們的動態：“繼央視，人民日報也狠批蘋果：'西方倨傲的本錢，優越感作祟，資本逐利本性瘋狂'。活像大字報。蘋果並非不可批，315找幾個知名網友發博批也沒什麼問題。問題在於央媒組團梯隊猛批，除聲稱保護國貨為國人維權外，與越來越多用戶使用規避審查的App Store發表作品有何關係？它最在乎這個，但願我多慮了。”
所以，在這些猜忌喉舌遠勝洋企的自由派知識分子看來，昨天門戶首頁那句“人民日報連續3天批蘋果：無與倫比地耀武揚威”的標題，恐怕後半句更像是在描述批評者本身。
這篇匯聚官辦媒體動向的報導，源自昨日新京報。當時，這份媒體還以堪稱國內獨一份的勇氣站在“老大哥”們面前，幫蘋果說了幾句：“若蘋果公司確有涉嫌違法之處，接下來應該出場的是法律。輿論口誅筆伐，質疑其傲慢和霸氣，更像是'道德評價'，與此相比，'法律評價'更有力量，也更客觀。”
搜狐和新浪都找到了這篇並不在常規評論版的文章，並作推薦——這或許已能算作是一種打抱不平。及至今天，又有異口同聲的《監管蘋果的利器應是法律而非道德》被刊載，而且，是在身為團中央機關報的中國青年報，頭版。
徐百柯和他的同事們證明了自己能夠保持個人微博言論和媒體公開態度的一致：“必須指出一個讓人稍感不安的事實：針對蘋果公司在中國售後服務的問題，目前的批評有一種泛道德化傾向。作為蘋果產品的用戶，我更願意看到監管機構準確地依據法律，迅速對蘋果公司實施處罰，而不是停留在由網絡和媒體所宣示的那種憤怒上。”
當然，中國青年報在文末還是承認了“蘋果用戶以及更大範圍公眾的憤怒，毫無疑問是有道理的”，只不過，更要強調的是“解決問題不是靠用唾沫淹死一家公司，而是靠用法律監管好一家公司。”
人民日報的同志也上網，也有微博。既然你說要“法律監管”，今天就有：“記者從國家工商總局獲悉：針對'蘋果'在售後維修服務中存在的問題，工商總局向全國工商系統下發《關於加強對蘋果等電子產品企業利用合同格式條款侵害消費者權益行為執法監督的通知》，要求各地加強對'蘋果'等電子產品企業的合同監管，以法律為準繩、以事實為依據，依法查處違法違規行為，營造規範、和諧的市場消費環境。”
唾沫也需要。除了《蘋果稱維修條款已修改，中消協律師點評——只是換湯不換藥》，再加上一篇以讀者來論形式刊發的《用硬規則破“蘋果式傲慢”》：“作為一名普通消費者，在震驚與憤怒之餘更擔心的是，風過之後究竟能不能促動長期痼疾的根本解決……在加大執法查處力度之外，也要看到，與國際上動輒數百億的罰單相比，違法成本低是洋品牌在華屢次'犯險'的主因。因此，抓緊設定更符合國際慣例的懲戒標準，抓緊構建更利於誠信經營的消費環境，才能讓傲慢的企業在'硬規則'面前'軟下心'，知恥而後勇地合法分享'中國紅利'。”
進入連續第5天，不知道南方都市報的那些編輯記者們這下還能不能找到吐槽點。紙面上保持冷眼旁觀，但這家向以桀驁不馴著稱的媒體旗下頗有幾個出言無忌的部門微博賬號，最突出的莫過於@南都深度，冷嘲熱諷的力度絕不遜於那些私人賬號：昨天發起“你還會買蘋果嗎”的網絡投票，收穫超過6成的“會，這和愛國毛關係”；展示人民日報、人民網早前那些類似“中國的喬布斯在哪裡”的呼喊，譏笑一聲“蘋果，你的確不能沒有他”；將《人民日報駐美國記者趕赴矽谷與蘋果總部溝通記》全文張貼，奚落“這也算是新聞史上的奇文吧”——在那些信奉新聞專業主義的同行看來，這種只記錄了採訪經過的文章，實在是沒有發表價值。
（注：本文中之點評僅代表作者本人觀點。本文編輯劉波。）
In August 2011, I
outlined why I believed that Chrome was more important to
Google
than Android. At first blush, this sounds kind of crazy, but when you
look at the bigger strategic picture it makes sense. With former Android
head Andy Rubin relocating to work on other projects at Google, and
Chrome head Sundar Pichai taking over Android, it means that the Android
and Chrome teams are now under unified leadership. This, I believe, is
the signal that Android and Chrome are on a path to merge.
To understand the business side of things, it is important to
remember that Google makes the vast majority of its revenue from search.
Google’s web properties generated advertising revenues of $8.8 billion
in Q4 2012 alone. Google doesn’t release exactly how much it makes from
Android, but I don’t believe they make even close to $8 billion from it
annually, let alone in one single quarter (as they do from web-based
advertising).
Android has been a relevant strategy to give hardware makers a chance to compete with
Apple.
But as we can see from various market developments, it appears the
hardware vendors now either want to forego Android and minimize their
dependence on Google, or create their own solutions entirely. I’m thus
convinced that Android as we know it today will look very different — if
it exists at all — five years from now.
This is where Chrome and Chome based hardware comes in.
Chrome Hardware
Right now Chromebooks are still in their infancy. They’re rapidly
developing and getting better with each generation, but I don’t believe
they’re even close to Google’s bigger vision. The Chrome web app
solution is getting more apps but not at a level or pace necessary to
gain a critical mass relevant for the mass market. This is where Android
and future Android app development will play a role.
Google has a large global developer base for Android but not yet for
Chrome web apps. Chrome is designed to run only apps developed for the
web, where Android is designed to run apps that are installed. Once
these two development environments merge, developers will be able to
design both Android and Chrome web apps with the same set of tools,
consistency and unified application stores. Google, with its expertise
in cloud services, could bring a cloud-based virtual Android environment
to Chrome, perhaps giving us the ability to run Android in the browser,
seamlessly, on all Chrome hardware.
The other benefit Android brings to Chrome is an environment built
for touch-friendly applications. Google just released its Chromebook
Pixel, which is a touch based Chromebook. The only problem is there
aren’t really any touch-based Chrome web apps. Android is built for
touch, and those assets will bring value to touch-based Chrome systems
down the road.
The Future of Chrome Hardware
What this ultimately leads to is new Chrome-based hardware. Right now,
Chrome OS is stuck in a clamshell, PC-like form factor. The merging of
Android into the Chrome OS solution could open the door to Chrome
OS-based phones and tablets as well. As we know, the Chrome OS solution
allows for extremely low-cost hardware because of how light a client it
is, which means that a Chrome-based solution for phones and tablets
could conceivably lower cost barriers.
This seems hard to imagine now, especially given that in
China
you can purchase an Android tablet for $45. Regardless, Chrome and
Android merging would do more for hardware solutions than if the two
remained separate.
The Browser
This merging of Android and Chrome has traditional browser-based value
as well. The Chrome browser runs on all Windows PCs (with the exception
of Windows RT), Macs and even iOS devices. What if Android — and more,
importantly Android apps — could be used from within any Chrome browser
on any device? This would drastically increase the potential reach of
Google’s services across the computing spectrum.
Since Google makes so much of its revenue from search, they need to
make sure their search and web based assets remain front and center on
all key hardware platforms. As companies like Samsung, HTC, Sony and
even Amazon or Facebook look to take Android further for their own
benefits, they take them further from any benefit to Google. Google
knows its search being front and center runs the risk of being usurped
by those looking to use Android for their own benefit and not
necessarily Google’s.
Google must be aware of this, and the merging of Google and Chrome OS
will give them more opportunities to keep their services front and
center. Google first bought Andy Rubin’s Android, Inc. and used it to
drive new growth for themselves and others. I view this merger as if the
Chrome team just bought Android and will now use it for further growth.
Bajarin is a principal at Creative Strategies Inc., a technology industry analysis and market-intelligence firm in Silicon Valley. He contributes to the Big Picture opinion column that appears here every week.
SEC批準Facebook IPO故障賠償方案
美國證券交易委員會週一早間公佈，已批準納斯達克向因Facebook Inc.上市交易而遭受損失的客戶賠償6,200萬美元的方案。
