You could call it the year of humility; 2011 saw its share of epic shakeups in the technology world, but it also saw an unprecedented number of them shake right back and go away almost as soon as they happened. From Verizon to HP to Netflix, the biggest names in tech made big decisions that were ultimately — and often almost immediately — reversed.
You can thank social media for playing a large part in the speedy course changes. With Twitter and Facebook leading the charge, negative reaction to a public decision now skips the murmur phase and goes straight to ear-splitting viral roar. Comments on web pages, blog posts and bad press all combine to create a torrent of indignation that few companies can endure.
Occasionally social media itself was the offender, with services at times clumsily rolling out new features that its users rebelled against. Various networks almost cannibalized themselves in this way, as they struggled to find their footing as viable businesses.
Big, public reversals by corporations are nothing new of course. Probably the most notorious one in modern history was the introduction of new Coke in 1985, which the company stubbornly stuck with at first, then soon relented. New Coke was actually around in one form or another until 2002, when it was permanently discontinued.
Reversals aren't necessarily more common now, but they sure happen a lot faster. Tech companies are probably the most vulnerable because of the connected nature of their customers. With the touch of a button, consumers can "Like" anything. But that same ease can turn anger into full-fledged movements in minutes, and no company is immune.
Here are Mashable's picks for the most notorious reversals by tech companies in 2011. Let us know in the comments of any we missed.
Netflix owes a lot to the DVD format. After all, the company wouldn't exist if it hadn't began by mailing the discs to movie watchers frustrated with Blockbuster and its late fees. But when Netflix announced it was divorcing its video-streaming service from the format, spinning off the DVD-rental business into a new service called Qwikster, customers did not like it.
Those customers were already steaming over a big price increase for the privilege of keeping both streaming and DVD delivery, so when they learned they would now get two bills, and need two accounts, Netflix went from a criticized digital brand to a reviled one. Netflix scrapped its Qwikster plans a few weeks later. Just as well -- the Twitter handle was owned by a mondo stoner.
When the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee released a list of 150 supporters of the Stop Online Privacy Act -- a bill that would give unprecedented censoring power for the government and corporations to fight piracy -- the one that raised the most eyebrows was GoDaddy. After all, the company had made a name for itself as a scrappy digital company for the little guy, and here it was acting as an agent of The Man.
When users campaigned against the company, including a Drop GoDaddy Day for customers with domains on the service, GoDaddy completely, publicly and unequivocally reversed its position. Users are still angry, though, and new CEO Warren Adelman will have a challenge in piecing back together the company's reputation in the new year. Our guess: the PR campaign will involve TV commercials with scantily clad women.
Yes, it was unofficially called the Dickbar. No, it wasn't because introducing a prominent window for trending topics in Twitter's iPhone app was offensive -- even though it was to many users -- the vaguely vulgar name was a reference to company CEO Dick Costolo. It was actually called the Quickbar, and most of Twitter's users were not happy to have it screaming whatever Kim Kardashian was doing whenever they fired up the app.
The move was a clumsy attempt to steer users toward the service's advertising channels, since paid-for promoted topics often appear in the day's trends. The problem was that on the iPhone's small screen, the bar's size far outweighed its usefulness to most users. After a non-stop stream of bad feedback, Twitter retweeted... er, retreated and rushed out an update that killed the feature.
When Apple finally unveiled its plan for an in-app subscription model -- letting publishers offer subscriptions to digital magazines, for example -- developers were wary. Among the conditions was Apple's insistence that app makers not offer subscriptions at cheaper rates outside of the app. Publishers were less then enthused. Eventually Apple loosened its policy, letting publishers charge whatever they want -- a rare mea culpa for the company.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario