Apple Executive Reviews To All Be Fives.

Apple has curtailed the iPod Store’s practice of summarily assigning all Apple products a rating of five out of five but has implemented the same practice for executive reviews, which help determine compensation.

From now on, all Apple products in the iPod Store will not be rated, while Apple executives will all be given five stars out of five on their performance reviews.

“There was a lot of customer complaint about the iPod Store ratings of Apple products,” said Senior Vice President of Worldwide Marketing Phil Schiller.

“You know… how they were really self-serving and talked down to our customers and were completely meaningless and just showed we can only get so close to being a truly customer-oriented company.

Any-hoo, we canned the store ratings, but we really liked the whole ‘We’ll tell you the rating!’ idea, so we said what if… what if… our executive reviews were all five out of five?”

According to sources, the executive group slipped the proposal to Steve Jobs in the form of a birthday card for Senior Vice President of the iPod Division Jon Rubinstein. The card featured a collection of whimsical animal characters by Sandra Boynton, each identified with the name of the Apple executive.

Jobs unknowingly signed the proposal and put his own name next to the little kitty.

Schiller shrugged off the deception.

“We do good work,” he said. “I’m sure Steve would have given us fives anyway. Just like Apple customers would give fives to all of our products.”

If not for a few na’er-do-wells, Schiller claimed, Apple would happily have allowed customers to rate the company’s products.

“We must constantly be vigilant for subversive PC elements within our very midsts. They seek to destroy our very way of life. That’s why we… uh… couldn’t allow people to rate… um…

“You know, I have a 3 o’clock, so…”

Schiller indicated that he is looking forward to his next review.

36 thoughts on “Apple Executive Reviews To All Be Fives.”

  1. Wow

    Apple Evaluations work just like evaluations in Education. Evaluations of teachers and administrators, not students.

    I give John five out of five stars.

    (Doesn’t really mean anything when you think about it.)

  2. Curses. I was using tabbed browsing and CARS opens as my third tab, after AtAt and The Straight Dope.

    (Sorry Moltz) If I want that elusive first post, I’ll need to reprioritize my life and tabs.

  3. Okay, who else thinks Dan and Brian are the same person? I mean two *normal* names posting at the same time? Yeah right. Nice try, better luck next time.


    P.S. I might believe DigDug, or pox, or… Rory.

  4. I give that five thumbs way up.

    Well, I would, except that one of them is up my butt.

    You really don’t want to know about the three extra thumbs, either.

  5. Well, they might get 5 stars, but the compensation scales still say they get their 2% raise. HR is trying to make sure people strive to get ahead in terms of new positions higher up in order to get a bigger raise. Does that mean they are trying to get the upper echelon to ‘eliminate’ Jobs to get a pay raise? Interesting…just what causes pancreatic cancer to begin with? Perhaps a small bit of radioactive rock placed in someone’s desk…hmmmmm…

  6. I think Dan, Brian, Bellidancer, Huck, UhhDude, greenacres, and MacStansbury are all the same person. He goes to an all male boarding school in Ohio and gets picked on by some dude who calls himself Glaaku.

  7. I am Spartacus! (And that’s GLAARKU, with all caps, if you please.)

    I am not Dan, Brian, Bellidancer, Huck, Prancer, Vixen, Sleepy, Dopey nor Doc, either.

    And yeah, I was picked on in school. The guy’s name was Roy or Rory or something….

  8. Should be “ne’er-do-well,” John. It’s a contraction of “never.” Unless, a course, you hae got a wee scot thing goin’ on here.

  9. This edition is not credible. You really think The Steve identifies himself with a little kitty (OS X names notwithstanding)?

  10. I’d like to go on the record right now and say that I am not, nor have I ever been, Dan. Or them other people. But especially not Dan. Or Brian.

    Think about it, I am literally addicted to the First Post, so do you think I would give up the free advertising that comes with the First Post on the CARS? And to say I was Dan? Dan? Come on…get real!

    I think there’s already too many Dans on this planet for me to start being one.

  11. Fie, fie on you Rory. Thou mayst not cast aspersions and allegations on thy fellow posters. Thou hast violated the First Law of Posting.

    Law 1 Thou shall takest thy fellow poster at face value.

    Corollary 1 Even thoughest thou never seeth thy fellows face, thou must pay at least lip service to their claim (ipso facto, the lips are central to the face.)

    Corollary 2 If thy fellow poster claims to be a mythological being, accord him/her/it all due respect, but findth reasons to delay delivering onto him/her/it thou banking identifies or credit card numerals.

    Corollary 3 Only the JOHN mayest knowth the truth behindth the mask of anonymity. Thou shall fallest not into hubris by claiming the “Powers of JOHN.”

  12. “Ipso facto”? Did you just say “ipso facto”? I stepped in some of that once. It was not pretty. Let’s leave out the “ipso facto” next time, no one wants to see that.

  13. Um, can we have some clarification on just which JOHN this whole “Powers” thing refers to, cause I’m all for some cool powers!

    I want to fly. That would be a cool power. Or be able to read credit card numbers at 50 feet. Evil, but cool.

  14. I don’t know, I think Dan’s post look a lot like MacStansbury’s posts, but with glasses. And I’ve never seen them together in the same place or post at the same time. I need more proof. If fact who’s to say that I’m not MacStansbury.

  15. Whuffo you steppin’ on no ipso facto! I had a fuckin’ shitty stomach ache an’ now I gots nuffin’ ta make it better.

  16. actually, all of these posts are made by moltz in some bizarre self-referential joke.

    get it?

  17. How could anyone one familiar with this site imagine JOHN could refer to anyone but John Moltz?

    John, did you read what Del wrote about you?

    I don’t think I am some bizarre alternate personality of John’s, but November raises an interesting point. (Now put your hat back on and sit down)

    November states that all posts are written by “moltz”. That means November is stating that he is “moltz”.

    Dear Blank, Thank you for your clear and important corollary. Sorry I missed it. But that brings up a question. Obviously “November” violated your corollary by asserting the true identity of all posters is “moltz”. But did “November” violate your corollary by naming himself Moltz and/or did I by pointing out the logical conclusion of November’s statement?

    Considering further, your corollary may itself violate the First Law, in that it implies people are not using their “real” names.

    But what is real and as November cynically observes, who is real?

    AAAAAaaaaarrrrrrgggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh… Brain overload!

  18. I don’t think any of the above posters read this article. Except for maybe Boynton and his kitty.

  19. Yes I did. kinda. Well I saw that there were no posters so I quickly scanned the article and wrote a haste commnet, AND ENDED UP FIFTH! So much for intellectual honesty.

    Law 2 Thouest mayn’t read the articles and score the first post.

    Anyway, I still commented on how like education the Apple Executive Evaluations are like. Do you have any idea how badly a superintendent has to fail before he gets anything less than a superior rating? I know of a district where the supe took the district to the brink of bankrupcy and retired with a pat on the back and a quarter million dollars in thank you money. Of course, in Education you give stellar evaluations to awful administrators to try to trick other districts into hiring your mistakes. I am actually not talking about formal evaluation which are highly secret, just the kind of thing where someone says, “Hey, I hear your superintendent is in trouble,” and we say, “No, no…He’s a great guy… a wonderfull leader. Say I have a fantastic idea…why don’t YOU hire him. “

  20. Boynton and HIS kitty???

    She’s a she. Sandra to be precise. Shocking for some of you I know, but true.

  21. I actually read the first couple of lines before posting. Then after I posted the first time I went and read the whole thing. Something about executives. The comments section really has little to do with the stories.

    Frankly, I don’t even understand why he writes anything in there anymore.

  22. Sure, I meant “Boynton and HER kitty,” but I figured someone would misinterpret what I said.

    I just don’t need any more sexual harassment lawsuits this year, ‘kay?

  23. The articles are all meaningless now, just a trigger for people to post.

    What’s not fair is that the articles are posted at about 4am my time so ive not much chance of getting first post. my life is so miserable and futile.

Comments are closed.