Now, the problem with expecting an apology from microsoft, and why I feel it is petty, is because there was nothing they did that was anti-consumer. "Anti-consumer" gets tossed around a lot lately and the reality is: Microsoft has been open and transparent about their consoles features from the get-go. People woukdnt be ranting if they had nothing to rant about.
I'd argue otherwise, particularly on the transparency bit. This is admittedly totally speculative, but I seriously wonder whether any of the DRM issues would have come to light had they not found their way to the rumor mill from the get-go. If people had never gotten wind of the always-online, used games restrictions and what-not, how do we know MS would have ever let that information come to light if not compelled to reveal it? And even when pushed, they tried to give us things like "the power of the cloud" nonsense that folks saw for what it really was right away. So their message has hardly been transparent, and that's a big part of the problem of their public image, why people are so ready to call out MS' PR folks on everything they say.
A second reality: no one ever forced anyone to buy the damn thing. In fact, people are Pissed about a product that just went into manufacturing. People should really give this a thought. The product MS IS releasing is based off the feedback from consumer.
Debatable on the grounds of whether it was truly listening to consumer feedback for the sake of truly listening to feedback, or if it was simply a reaction to pre-order numbers. But that's well-worn territory.
It's really simple, if people don't like a product, no one ever forces their hand to make a purchase. That IS the consumer choice. We live in a capitalist society. A company need not apologize for a product that has yet to be manufactured and delivered to a customer. This is absolutely mind boggling to me.
Just to make something clear, I don't realistically expect MS to actually apologize for anything, it was simply my idea of an example of what MS could do differently to break the circle of "rep says something, everyone calls him out."
And the point I was trying to make in my previous post was that, there's more to the whole issue than just consumer choice here and now - it's the establishment of precedent. The precedent that consumers will come to accept these kinds of policies - and to take that even further, the precedent that MS could implement these policies again in the future, or in some other form. If people come to accept that, it then establishes precedent that other companies can get away with the same thing.
That is what folks are afraid of - surely you recall the popular narrative of "Well Sony's gonna have their own DRM too, just wait and see" leading up to E3 - that if one can get away with it, others will follow, all at the consumer's detriment. We've already got a shining example of just that with Sony now requiring PS+ for online play. (And here I bet you thought I was giving Sony a free pass, heh)
It's consumer vigilance. Sometimes it's about more than just "don't buy it if you don't like it," it's about stopping a bad thing before it can spiral out of control.
And for what it's worth, by this point I wont harp on anyone for buying an Xbone. Sure, you like the games or XBLG or the controller or whatever, go ahead and get one. At this point, the device is absolutely fine, even if I personally don't particularly care for it myself. But that doesn't mean I, and others, won't call out MS reps when they try to peddle their bullshit message again.