I like Apple products _in spite of_ that smug voice, not because of it.

Yes, the voice is clear and simple -- just like the products -- but I curdle when I read Apple's copy, and have empathy for the brand haters.

"If you don't have an iPhone, well: you don't have an iPhone.*

I found those ads particularly offensive.

Smug and self congratulatory perhaps, but offensive? I don't think that's an accurate description.

It plays into the caricature of Apple customers being holier-than-thou cultists. I can tell you it bothered me as an iPhone user since v1.

Offensive like an offensive smell, not like an offensive remark.

Heh, reminds me of this comment:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3420672

Why?

For me it is one of the reasons why I avoid Apple products.

Check out Apple's identity statement that they put on press releases [edit: this one's at least a year old]:

> Apple designs Macs, the best personal computers in the world, along with OS X, iLife, iWork, and professional software. Apple leads the digital music revolution with its iPods and iTunes online store. Apple is reinventing the mobile phone with its revolutionary iPhone and App Store, and has recently introduced its magical iPad which is defining the future of mobile media and computing devices.

Compared to, say, Microsoft's:

> Founded in 1975, Microsoft (Nasdaq “MSFT”) is the worldwide leader in software, services and solutions that help people and businesses realize their full potential.

Apple’s is a bit long and overly specific (Seriously, iWork? The software you last gave a serious update more than three years ago?) but that’s more a sign of an identity statement that has grown organically over the years instead of being rewritten from scratch from time to time.

The general idea is good but I would simplify it quite a bit.

I hadn't noticed, until sp332 pointed it out, that they were no longer leading with "Apple ignited the personal computer revolution in the 1970s..."

Both would benefit from a rather large number of [citation needed] tags, so I'm not sure which is better.

It's called advertisement.

I'm sure Google wouldn't describe itself as "a good search engine. Most of the time works pretty well, but if you search many common words you'll only find spam".

Voice matters and it hard to build, especially for engineers. http://voiceandtone.com/ from MailChilp offers a good framework of designing a voice by cataloguing touch-points between the software and the user. You may or may not find MailChimp's voice fitting, but the framework itself is quite useful.

This is a Github internal memo doubling up as marketing. Smart.

"Here's everything we offer, soup to nuts." isn't really The Apple Voice. That's more the "overly informal and conversational" voice you see so often these days.

I'll take informal and conversational, as long as it's also direct and informative. The worst possible output is marketing-doublespeak or the meaningless-checkbox-comparison page.

I'm just wondering what Github's voice is towards Githire?

Interestingly, this post comes at a time when the Apple voice is changing. I think they're taking it to the next level.

This was discussed in the blog of Ken Segall, who previously worked with Apple (and with Jobs) on Apple's copy, including the "Think Different" campaign.

Here's the post: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3548981

Increasingly, Apple is relying solely on imagery. The example billboard has no text on it other than the product name.

Apple is showing, rather than telling, and it is transcendent in its ability to do so-- it has established enough credibility with consumers that "easy to use", is no longer a message it has to communicate.

Further, this also globalizes the brand as images do not have to be translated to the local language, allowing a single voice to be present worldwide.

When a company achieves this level of domination, as shown by how we can speak of it in almost ethereal ways, and as it builds a new mega-building, and as it loses its founder/decider/symbol you've got to think it's approaching its high water mark.

Consider just as skyscrapers correlate with recessions (http://www.businessinsider.com/skyscraper-index-skyscrapers-...), Apple is almost certainly going to begin to unravel.

Every company is almost certainly going to begin to unravel. Business has cycles; success precedes failure. The skyscraper index is laugh.

That may be, but I think you want to think about specifics, not "seems like it's already pretty big!"

Apple had 8.7% of the phone market last quarter. It's as low as that because the majority of phones sold today are not smartphones. Do you think that will remain true for the next 10 years?

Well the people who actually have money in the game disagree. They are very well positioned for future growth. Shorting Apple is suicide.

The same people were convinced in 2008 that housing prices would still go up. Not that they're necessarily wrong this time, but I would maintain skepticism.

That is what Enron was saying look how that turned out. Having a huge share price P/E only supported by the next must have object is in the long run not sustainable.

Does this mean that HN posts about Apple should just be a bunch of ASCII images?

Apple fans try and write in the Apple Voice. Example: HN comment threads about Apple.

I would go so far as to say most HN comments mimic that style

It's called tone.