Most corporations in the computer industry are usually rather upfront about details or advancements in technology. They love to brag and they love to inform others about their advancements. Not so much Apple. Apple loves keeping secrets. Well, they sure like to brag about the same experiences users are going to have, but little else.

And while this sort of talk about Apple is nothing new, something did strike me while reading a story about why Siri was restricted to the iPhone 4S.

But while the article it self does contain some technical details about how Siri gets your voice so clear and some technical stuff that certainly will be interesting to some who has little particular interest in Siri or the iPhone, it highlights something striking about Apple.

I cannot say if it was all Steve Jobs' idea, or whether more crafted the very workings of the Apple marketing machine. Because while it certainly remains unique in the industry, it is genius. The article highlights an interest in the workings of Siri and why it was only for the iPhone 4S. Apple hadn't disclosed themselves exactly why, so someone decided to investigate.

This gets press attention. Apple creates mysteries that it itself can solve with single statements, but refuses to do, because then it won't have other people spend time solving. And it means more press attention.

Before the announcement of the iPad, there was an incredible anticipation for what Apple was going to announce. Yes, many had betted correctly on a tablet, but the fact that there was no confirmation and that the communities had been wrong in the past made it all the more exciting. Apple was a master of unnecessary hype. One might argue that the iPad may have sold better purely because of its momentum at its presentation and unveiling rather than appreciation for the product itself.

When Steve Jobs died, I began to wonder whether Apple was going to change. Whether Tim Cook would be more usual in terms of industry protocol. Be more open. So far, however, Tim Cook have proved (to me at least) that he is worse in some aspects than Mr Jobs. But who knows if that is just the transition. I always felt that Mr Jobs was what kept Apple alive. And while they could certainly survive on his fumes for a few years, they would eventually disappear.

Unless, of course, they paid attention to what Steve Jobs did and said. But who knows if they did, considering what an asshole he was to them.