But even by Apple’s standards, its handling of news about the health of its chief executive and co-founder, Steven PJobs, who has battled pancreatic cancer and recently had a liver transplant while on a leave of absence, is unparalleled.
先生Jobs received the liver transplant about two months ago, according to people briefed on the matter by current and former board members尽管对先生非常感兴趣Jobs’s condition among the news media and investors, Apple representatives have declined to address the matter, reciting with maddening discipline only that Mr乔布斯将于6月底回到公司。
先生Jobs was actually at work on Apple’s sprawling corporate campus on Monday, according to a person who saw him thereCompany representatives would not say whether he had returned permanently.
所以，请注意时代仍然没有关于乔布斯据称的肝脏移植的新闻的第一手资料仔细阅读采购：据现任和前任董事会成员介绍此事的人士说那是第二手资料 - 董事会成员告诉他们的“人”知道关于它（我不知道是谁前任的board member(s) could be? Apple hasn’t had much turnover on the board in recent yearsAnd why would a former board member know about Jobs’s current health status? Curious.)
即便是苹果公司的高级官员也担心会遇到他工作One official, who is normally more open, when asked for a deep-background briefing about MrJobs’s health after the news of the transplant had become public, replied: “Just can’t do itToo sensitive.”
“Deep background” This term is used in the U.S., though not consistentlyMost journalists would understand “deep background” to mean that the information may not be included in the article but is used by the journalist to enhance his or her view of the subject matter, or to act as a guide to other leads or sources. Most deep background information is confirmed elsewhere before being reported.
The rest of the article details specific examples of Apple’s policies for guarding the details of products in development; the implication is that Apple is a weird and creepy place because they try to keep a lid on secrets.
Philip Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president for marketing, has held internal meetings about new products and provided incorrect information about a product’s price or features, according to a former employee who signed an agreement not to discuss internal mattersApple then tries to track down the source of news reports that include the incorrect details.
我不禁觉得这个故事在“纽约时报”上是一个相当透明的抨击They couldn’t get any original information regarding the story they really want — Jobs’s liver transplant — and so like a child throwing a tantrum when it doesn’t get its way, they wrote a story about how there’s something wrong with Apple because its employees keep their mouths shut.
Apple’s decision to severely limit communication with the news media, shareholders and the public is at odds with the approach taken by many other companies, which are embracing online outlets like blogs and Twitter and generally trying to be more open with shareholders and more responsive to customers.
所以，是的，无可否认，Apple不会通过网络日志进行沟通我也认为他们应该这样做我喜欢谷歌的方法to official blogging — they don’t write about即将到来产品和服务，但他们确实写了他们发布的新东西，提供了如何以及为什么使用它们的见解和提示（谷歌对于即将上市的产品及其运营基础设施的细节等事情非常隐秘。）
But: what’s the argument for how Apple has suffered for its secrecy? Yes, Apple is far more secretive than most companies, but they’re also far more successful通过利润和收入以及增长来衡量，认为大多数公司应该更像苹果公司，而不是相反的方式，是不是更有意义？
False information I’ve received tends to come from third parties; for example, several iPhone case manufacturers were convinced that Apple was going to announce a smaller “iPhone Mini” at WWDC this month. ↩︎