Why Apple doesn't need a Viral Hit on Youtube

Is Apple making a mistake by mostly ignoring all the social media channels (Facebook, Twitter, Youtube et.al.) everyone else is (at least) trying to leverage extensively these days? Michael Learmonth thinks so. In an AdAge.com article entitled "Why Apple's Oscar Ad Won't Go Viral" he writes:
Apple's approach is particularly striking given how much energy even the least tech-y major marketers spend to get web views on, say, their Super Bowl campaigns to squeeze additional return on their multimillion-dollar investments. (...)
"They have willfully abstained at a time when everyone else is hopping on this bandwagon," said Matt Cutler, VP at Visible Measures. Apple's enthusiastic user base can be reliably trusted to devour anything related to the company or CEO Steve Jobs. Apple never has to even ask. But given that enthusiastic support, Apple ads tend to underperform on the web (...)
The iPad ad in question currently has about 600K views on Youtube. Not that bad, but Michael is probably right: that's hardly a stunning viral success for a brand like Apple -  at least in terms of number of views. But is a high view count on Youtube really that important here? 
I think not, because Apple's products are so viral that they don't need their ads to be. It is a lot more interesting to see, how the "underleveraged" global community is transforming this thing into something much bigger without Apple getting involved. It's just a boring TV clip, right? But tons of people around the world keep analyzing it like it's some kind of Rosetta Stone 2.0. Here are just two examples:
Being able to create this kind of excitement/engagement is why Apple's marketing is brilliant. And I think they are not achieving that despite their ignorance of social media (and the calls for more openness), but because of it!