The Mac Sucks!

Michael Krigsman on Windows 7, Linux, and the Mac

Wed, 04 Feb 2009 13:28:27 -0500

ZDNet's Michael Krigsman posted a blog entry recently entitled "Why I love Windows 7, hate Linux, and think the Mac is Lame." Krigsman has been involved with Windows, Linux, and Macs "since the early days" and says that he's finally settled on a platform (Windows 7) with no regrets.

He describes early versions of Windows as "virtually useless", says that Linux is "sleek and powerful, yet nearly impenetrable for most users", and that "Macintosh adherents tend to be frivolous time-wasters dazzled by cheap sensory effects". I don't really agree with him, though I do understand where his opinions originate.

The earliest versions of Windows were pretty much useless. They were Microsoft's attempt to come up with something vaguely Mac-like, and they failed. Since then, however, Windows has steadily improved over time. In my opinion, Windows Vista didn't fail because of its flaws, but because Windows XP was (for the bulk of users) fast enough, stable enough, secure enough, and reliable enough for the vast majority of users. Where people were ready to give up Windows 98 and its headaches for the more-stable 2000 or XP, there wasn't a similar incentive to switch to Vista from XP. Add to that the bad press Vista got at launch time, and still gets periodically, and it's no surprise the OS didn't meet Microsoft's expectations.

Linux has come a long, long way from its early days. In particular, Ubuntu tends to "just work" on most hardware configurations. It's easy to use, offers lots of free software, and doesn't require high-end hardware configurations. While it's easy for a novice user to start getting in over their head when they start digging deeper than the GUI, there seems to be a helpful community of people ready to lend a hand when it happens. If you go beyond the basics, it can be a lot to learn, but just as many Mac or Windows users never touch the command line, it's not necessary in Linux either.

As for the Mac, well, it's not a bad platform. While I do think Apple has had a tendency to focus on form over function, style over substance, etc., the fact that people remain loyal to Apple proves that there is an audience for all that eye candy. I don't think most Mac users are frivolous time-wasters, though. I know plenty of people who are hard workers and use Macs. I also know Windows users who aren't.

As for Windows 7, I'm planning to cover that more in depth when I've had the chance to spend more time with it. I'm using Windows 7 right now to work on this article, as a matter of fact. I've had no problems with it at all so far. My XP drivers loaded without a problem and worked with Win7. My applications have all installed and run without a glitch. I haven't seen a single crash or blue-screen even though this is beta software. The GUI changes are generally proving to be more productivity-oriented than style-oriented as they were with Vista. In short, I can see myself using Windows 7 when it's released.

Apple Snubs Greenpeace

Sun, 01 Feb 2009 03:55:07 -0500

While touting its latest MacBooks as "the industry's greenest notebook family" Apple has simultaneously refused to take part in Greenpeace's second Electronics Survey that rates the environmental friendliness of companies.

If Apple really has improved its environmental friendliness as its advertising would imply, it seems strange that they would not choose to take part in the survey. Perhaps this is just a bit of sour grapes over the "greenmyapple.org" site Greenpeace posted in 2007?

Mac OS X Trojan Found in Pirated iWork '09

Sun, 01 Feb 2009 03:43:23 -0500

According to an OSNews article, Intego discovered a new Trojan circulating in copies of Apple's iWork '09 found on BitTorrent networks. It's also been found in Adobe PhotoShop CS4. According to the article, "When installing iWork 09, the iWorkServices package is installed. The installer for the Trojan horse is launched as soon as a user begins the installation of iWork, following the installer's request of an administrator password... The malicious software connects to a remote server over the Internet; this means that a malicious user will be alerted that this Trojan horse is installed on different Macs, and will have the ability to connect to them and perform various actions remotely. The Trojan horse may also download additional components to an infected Mac."

According to the article, at least 20,000 Mac users have downloaded the infected software. If you've recently pirated iWork 09 or Adobe PhotoShop CS4 for you Mac, you might want to give some thought as to whether you are unknowingly running an infected Mac... and asking yourself if the "free" software is worth the risk you're taking.

Apple Australia Smashes Macs to Pieces

Sun, 01 Feb 2009 03:37:34 -0500

Having been under fire relatively recently for the environmentally unfriendly chemicals used in its products and manufacturing, Apple has been trying to clean up its act in recent months. That's evidenced in late-model MacBook ads talking about how "green" they are. So it's interesting to see the story reported an APC magazine about how Apple Australia hired workers to destroy a large number of seemingly functional Macs. If it's true that this is standard practice at Apple, then it would certainly go against the environmentally friendly and responsible image the company has been trying to portray.

Iain Thomson Still Hates the Mac After 25 Years

Sun, 01 Feb 2009 03:28:28 -0500

The vnunet.com site posted an article entitled "Mac at 25: Why I still hate them" by writer Iain Thomson on January 23, 2009, discussing the Macintosh's 25th anniversary from an "alternative" point of view. Thomson begins the article by saying "So we've had 25 years of GUI Macs, but I for one won't be putting up any bunting or hiring a marching band. Why? Because I hate the things."

Thomson details his many reasons for disliking the Macintosh. He does indicate that the introduction of OS X and Intel hardware has alleviated many of the issues, but feels there are still problems with the Mac.

His biggest issue with the Mac isn't the technology, but the people who use it. Thomson says that "There's a certain kind of smug, snooty Apple user that makes me want to reach for the EMP cannon. Apple's fan base bears more resemblance to cults like Scientology than many would like to admit. These people think that, because they paid vast wodges of cash for a machine, it must be better, and who buy into the whole advertising campaign malarkey that Apple has fed them, from the 1984 advert to assuming that they are 'Thinking Different'."

While much of the content is dated in terms of what it says about the Mac (which is appropriate for an article looking back at 25 years of Macintosh), it's an amusing read.

The "Apple Tax" from Microsoft's Point of View

Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:17:10 -0500

It wasn't that long ago that people talked about "The Microsoft Tax" on PC purchases. In order to get the best price possible from Microsoft for Windows licenses to sell with their computers, manufacturers like Dell and HP would make exclusive agreements with Microsoft to sell all their PCs with Windows. At the time, Linux was drawing converts in large numbers, and those people lamented the fact that they couldn't buy a PC without an OS license attached. They referred to this as "The Microsoft Tax" because they reasoned that they were paying more for their PCs because they included a Windows license that they were never going to use. I understand where the Linux folks were coming from. No one wants to pay for something they don't want, need, or use.

It's ironic, then, that the company accused of placing a "tax" on the PCs sold by major manufacturers is itself accusing another company of placing a tax on its users. As reported by CNet's Ina Fried, Microsoft is suggesting that Macintosh purchasers pay an "Apple Tax" when they switch from Windows to the Mac.

Most Mac users probably react much the way Ina Fried did, suggesting that this is an old argument from Microsoft and that it doesn't make a lot of sense. But if you dig a little deeper, there is some merit to what Microsoft is saying. It boils down to the following points:

Macintosh list prices tend to be at least a little higher than the prices of Windows PCs with comparable hardware specifications. That's not always the case, but it's common enough. (I'm not talking about bundled software, fit and finish, or anything more than raw hardware specs and features.)
Windows users who switch to the Mac will have a learning curve to switch to the "Mac way" of doing things. For example, retraining their fingers to press Command-C for copy instead of Ctrl-C has a time and frustration cost to it. I'm not saying this is a huge factor, just that it's a factor.
Windows users who switch to the Mac will either have to give up some familiar applications or spend money on a Windows license for their Macs (possibly along with a product like Parallels). This is not a cost they'd incur staying with Windows or going to a new Windows PC.
There will be compatibility problems. While both the Mac and Windows have come a long way since the 1990s in terms of file format compatibility, there can be problems moving files back and forth between Windows and Macintosh (and/or Linux). These are issues not seen in an all-Mac or all-Windows environment, but since we're talking about "switchers" here, it's implied that there will probably be some swapping of files across platforms. That means there will be some incompatibility as well. Maybe not a lot, and maybe it won't take up a lot of time to sort out. But it's yet-another cost of switching to a Mac.
There are fewer peripheral options. OS X does support a large number of peripherals and devices out of the box. But new devices are being introduced all the time, and it's not uncommon for manufacturers to release Windows drivers for those peripherals first. Linux drivers will likely come later (though not always). Mac drivers will probably come even later, if at all. Some technologies, like SLI video, have yet to make it to the Macintosh product line (and perhaps never will).

As with many things, how much of an "Apple Tax" you see after a switch from Windows to Mac OS X will depend a great deal on your preferences, your uses for a computer, your skill level, and other factors.

If you make only very basic use of a computer (e.g., web browsing, email, and office productivity), you may find that you have no need of a Windows compatibility solution like Parallels. Thus, that's not a "tax" for you. You might have had only older peripherals that you planned to replace anyway and so buying new Mac-specific ones wasn't an added cost. And so on. So not every switcher will see a big "Apple Tax" coming from Windows. Others, however, will really feel the pain.

So while I don't completely take Microsoft's side, I also don't think they're "full of it" either. There are plenty of people for whom a switch to the Mac could be an easy and positive move. There are also plenty for whom it will be a frustrating, expensive exercise. And lots of them in the middle somewhere.

If you're thinking about switching from the Mac to Windows, researching the following factors may help you judge what your personal "pain level" or "Apple Tax" might be:

How comfortable are you paying Apple's hardware prices? If your idea of an expensive PC is $499, you're going to find that Macs give you a bit of a sticker shock. While Mac users tend to hold on to their hardware a little longer than PC users, that's offset a little by a higher up-front price.
What software do you use most, and is there a Mac equivalent? In the short term, you can probably run most of the software you want using Boot Camp or parallels. In the long term, you're probably going to want to switch to native OS X applications if for no other reason than to simplify your life. So do some research now and see if you can find all the applications you need for OS X. If possible, test drive them on a Mac and see if you like them.
Are you the kind of person who likes to play with the latest-and-greatest technology? While Apple is sometimes ahead of the curve, perhaps announcing Macs with the latest Intel processor weeks ahead of other companies, there are a number of technologies that Apple holds back on. For example, they've never done SLI video, have yet to release a Mac with Apple-installed Blu-ray drives, built-in media readers, thumbprint scanners, and other technologies. If that kind of thing will bother you, you might not be the ideal Mac owner.
Are you a heavy gamer? Most new games come out first for Windows and later for the Mac (if at all). If gaming is important to you, you may find the Mac frustrating because you can't play the latest games on OS X, and many games don't work well using the Parallels solution. Your best option in that situation may be Boot Camp, but if you're going to be booting into Windows very often it may not make sense to have a Mac.
Do you share files with a lot of other computer users? What do most of those other people use? If it's a Mac, you'll probably find the document-sharing much less frustrating if you have a Mac as well. If most of them use PCs, expect to start hearing (and perhaps doing) a lot of grumbling when files that swap back and forth between platforms start to exhibit odd problems. Maybe you'll be lucky and it will all "just work" but don't count on it. If possible, test it by moving an extra copy of an important document back and forth between platforms.

There are plenty of sites out there to tell you what other reasons or benefits you might get from switching. Seek out and refer to those as well. The message here is to do your research and make an informed decision.

The MacBook Wheel

Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:14:15 -0500

Parody site The Onion published a bogus Apple product announcement (that looks quite realistic) about a new Apple notebook without a keyboard, called the Mac Wheel. It doesn't seem that far off from something Steve "no buttons, please" Jobs would come up with:

Jobs Admits Health Problems

Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:43:11 -0500

Most of you have probably already read the recently-released news that Apple's Steve Jobs does in fact have a health problem. Statements from Jobs and Apple indicate that the health issue is a "hormonal imbalance" that is causing him to lose weight, one that is being resolved with a "simple and straightforward" remedy. It's also been indicated that Jobs' health explains the reason he isn't giving the final Apple Macworld keynote this January.

Apple's stock has made a slight rebound based on the news, which no doubt reassures investors that Jobs will be around for a while longer.

The more-observant readers will recall a recent article here where we discussed the fact that Apple's 2008 product introductions seemed to indicate less of a "Steve" involvement than was typical in the latter part of the year, so it's interesting to note Jobs' statement that this is a problem that persisted throughout 2008 and became his number one priority late in the year. Given that Jobs says his doctors expect that it will take "until late this Spring" to reverse the situation, it seems likely that any very dramatic product announcements will be put on hold until Steve is ready to take center stage again.

CNet Columnist Switches to Mac - and Back

Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:27:26 -0500

CNet published an article by Rafe Needleman entitled "Switcher's lament: The case against Mac" about the experiences of the author and his wife switching from Windows to Macintosh. His opening statement tells much of the tale: "Think moving from a Windows PC to a Mac is easy? My experience, and my wife's, may encourage you to think differently."

When the author's and his wife's Windows computers began to experience problems, they decided that perhaps the time had come to switch from Windows to Macintosh. His wife was a "heavy e-mail and Internet user but not someone who enjoys tinkering" and he wanted to "see what the fuss was about" with the Mac.

He opens by explaining that the Apple hardware has been reliable and "gorgeous". He says that he's enjoying the stability of OS X and the "genius" of the multi-touch trackpad. However, "when it comes to the different applications my wife and I use, and to moving data from the Windows realm to the Mac, and to accessing hardware we already have, the process of switching continues to be rocky. Not all of the issues we have are with Apple products, and that's rather the point: No platform exists in a vacuum. People use other apps, and have their own training and preexisting hardware. Switching means overcoming a lot of technological inertia."

I'm not going to regurgitate the entire article here. Suffice it to say that although Apple's web site gives the impression that switching to the Mac from Windows is a trivial matter, that's only true to a point. Getting data over to the Mac from Windows can be problematic. Getting existing peripherals to talk to the Mac properly, if they'll work at all, can be frustrating. As the author put it, "It seems that every day one of us will find something on the Mac that doesn't work as it is supposed to.... Things don't 'just work' the way the Apple ads say they do."

The author's switch might have been made easier if he'd loaded Parallels or Boot Camp to access native applications and peripherals with Windows, but then that's really more of a crutch than a solution. The point of switching to the Mac, for the author, wasn't to have Windows available as needed. It was to leave Windows behind and enjoy the full "Mac experience". The ending tells the story better than many "switcher" articles I've seen:

There is one thing I really do like about my new MacBook: It is a good laptop for running Vista (using Boot Camp), even if it is a bit expensive for that purpose considering its specs. But after two weeks of resisting, I am dropping back to Vista on my MacBook, at least during this critical week, when I will be covering both MacWorld and CES and will have no patience for a computer that gets in my way and apps that don't work the way they should. Vista and XP also run inside Mac OS X using virtualization apps like VMWare Fusion, which I have tried and find amazing - but a bit slow for production work. [snip] If I was starting from scratch and buying my first computer, or if neither I nor my wife worked for companies with entrenched non-Mac-friendly e-mail systems, I might be singing a different song. But we're not high school students, we're grownups with serious amounts of technological baggage. The Mac has not been treating us well as we've tried to switch.

I'm not suggesting that every switcher will have the experience Mr. Needleman and his wife have had. Nor will I go so far (without any evidence) as to say that this is even a "common" experience for switchers. What I will say is that this proves what I've always said on this site, which is that while there are people for whom switching to the Mac can be a very positive experience, that doesn't mean it's the right move for everyone.

If you have a number of Windows-compatible peripherals that you want to continue to use, rely on Windows-centric networks for your living, and have large amounts of "legacy" Windows data, you're likely to find (as Needleman did) that switching to Mac could be a lot of trouble... trouble you wouldn't have if you'd stayed with Windows.

Anyone contemplating the switch to Mac from Windows should read Needleman's article and consider it a "cautionary tale" to more carefully evaluate their own situation to ensure they won't have the same frustrations.

Looking Back at Our 2008 Predictions

Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:16:14 -0500

In 2008, we published this site's predictions for Apple and its product line. Below are the predictions we made and how they turned out. All things considered, we didn't do too bad. We're hardly ready to challenge the famous psychics or industry forecasters, but the results were definitely better than 2007's dismal results.

Apple will lose a small amount of market share in 2008 to the Microsoft Zune.

There is some indication that this may have happened. According to the Seattle Tech Report in September 2008, the Zune has won a "tiny fraction" of the market dominated by the iPod.

Apple will release a PDA type of device in 2008.

It's debatable whether this can be said to have happened or not. Certainly, Apple didn't release a specific device aimed at being a PDA. On the other hand, with the introduction of the App Store, Apple has opened the iPod Touch and iPhone marketplace up to a number of personal information management software that has, in essence, enabled the Touch and iPhone to become PDAs. In fact, I am pretty much using my iPod Touch like a PDA or a limited functionality netbook.

Apple's personal computer market share will not exceed 5% worldwide in 2008. Its share in the United States will not exceed 8%.

According to Computerworld on January 2, 2009, the Mac's market share ended the year at about 9.6%, above our predicted 8%, so we failed on this prediction. On the other hand, according to System Shootouts, the Mac's worldwide market share ended 2008 below 3.5%, so our prediction was correct that the Mac's worldwide market share did not exceed 5%. Even Mac Daily News reports in November that experts didn't predict worldwide Mac market share to exceed 4.5% for the year. Interestingly, Mac sales were slower in November, while Windows PC sales rose by 7%.

Apple will be unable to keep the hacker community from unlocking the iPhone in 2008 any better than it did in 2007. In other words, the "cat and mouse game" will continue unabated.

As reported recently on The iPhone Blog, the "iPhone Dev Team" is continuing to produce software designed to unlock the iPhone and iPhone 3G to enable use with carriers other than AT&T (in the USA). So far, Apple has been unable to stop these groups from unlocking the phone.

At least one significant piece of malware will be released into the wild for the Apple iPhone in 2008.

This happened pretty early into 2008. On January 11, 2008, the US Computer Emergency Response Team (US-CERT) warned that a fraudulent iPhone upgrade was released into the wild as a Trojan. Later in the year, eWeek reported that iPhone malware that posed as an iPhone game was discovered in the wild by Sophos.

Mac OS X 10.6 adoption will be slightly slower than the adoption of Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard.

Since Apple delayed the release of Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard until 2009, this prediction was nullified.

Apple will be forced to adopt significant changes to the iTunes pricing model in 2008.

In March, the rumor mill had Fox News saying that Apple was mulling over the idea of "all you can eat" iTunes pricing. In May, Wired reported that variable iTunes pricing might have been under consideration. Aside from these rumors, which didn't become reality during 2008, there was one significant pricing model change to iTunes in 2008. At the Macworld 2008 keynote, Steve Jobs announced that iTunes would rent movies 30 days after they were released on DVD. In addition, Apple was forced to lower iTunes pricing in Britain early in the year. HBO reportedly got Apple to agree to different pricing during 2008 as well.

Unable to displace Windows on the corporate desktop, Apple will look at other ways to grow revenue in the PC marketplace.

In March, Apple released Safari for Windows. While this probably didn't result in any direct revenue for Apple, it did acknowledge indirectly that Apple doesn't think Windows is going away any time soon. Apple's troubled MobileMe service allowed users to bridge the data gap between their iPhone, Windows PC, and Mac, again acknowledging a continuing Windows presence.

Apple will release at least one non-iPod, non-PDA, non-Mac, non-iPhone, non-Apple-TV device in 2008 to continue its "we're not a computer company anymore" line of thinking.

During the year, Apple released new or updated versions of the iPod Nano, iPod Touch, iTunes, MacBooks, a 24-inch Cinema Display, the iPhone 3G, MobileMe, iMac, Final Cut Server, Aperture, Airport Express, and the MacBook Air. However, to our surprise, Apple did not introduce any new "non-computer" devices in 2008. We missed this prediction. Perhaps Steve Jobs' health issues contributed to this?

Apple will take a significant step to reduce the piracy of Mac OS X in 2008.

With the MacBook Air, Apple locked the installation media to the MacBook Air hardware, preventing the bundled copy of OS X Leopard from being installed on other models of Macs. Apple also took legal action against Mac "clone" maker Psystar for selling computers with Mac OS X Leopard pre-installed, claiming that Psystar was "pirating" OS X on these machines due to the lack of a "full" OS X license being available for purchase. While we expected some more significant actions to reduce OS X piracy in 2008, these actions qualify as at least a "step" in reducing OS X piracy in 2008.

In total, there were 10 predictions. Of those Apple nullified one by changing the planned release of Snow Leopard to 2009. For the remaining 9, 1 was at least "half wrong" and 1 was definitely wrong. The rest could be argued to be correct. That gives us a "7.5" out of 9 for 2008 predictions, which works out to an accuracy rating of about 83.3% which isn't too bad.

We're still debating whether we should make predictions for 2009. With so many things in flux (the economy, a new president, etc.) it seems almost a given that there will be a lot of unpredictability in the year ahead.

I Become an Apple Product Owner After 10 Years

Thu, 01 Jan 2009 14:27:07 -0500

As I've discussed before, I've not owned an Apple product since some time in 1998. It's been longer than that since I have purchased one (and it still is). Regardless, this Christmas I received one of the items on my wish list, the Apple iPod Touch 32GB. I haven't had the device long enough to give you a full review, but I have some initial observations that I think are worth sharing because they're not something I've seen covered elsewhere (though I acknowledge that I can't possibly read every iPod Touch article ever written or published).

Though it may surprise some of you, I'm going to start this article with the things I like about the iPod Touch. The display is crisp and easy to read at a variety of angles. The multi-touch interface generally responds instantaneously, and Apple's tradition for including eye candy touches in the interface continues in full force, whether it's the scroll animation in the home display, the way the built-in Safari browser animates the opening of and switching to new windows or tabs, or the browsing of music in cover flow mode. It's a small, thin device that fits easily and comfortably into a pocket. It's light enough that you almost wouldn't know it was there (which I admit worries me a little since I fear sitting on and smashing the screen). The Wi-Fi connectivity has worked well in the office, at home, and a few other places I've been since I got the device. It syncs fairly quickly and with minimal trouble. I've found a number of interesting free apps in the App Store, and continue to browse it periodically to see what new ones I can come up with. When I'm in range of a Wi-Fi connection, it's a fun and handy little device to have with me. In general, I like the iPod Touch and am glad I received it as a gift.

But, no article on a site that's "critical of Apple" would be complete without some mention of the things I don't like about the iPod Touch, and this one will be no exception. There are things about the device that I don't especially like:

The fact that I have to synchronize the music with the iTunes software bugs me. My other (non-Apple) players have allowed me to simply drag and drop music onto the player or synchronize it through Windows Media Player. I'd like the device to function more like an external hard drive when connected to the computer. I guess since I get my music and video from sources other than iTunes (Zune Marketplace, Amazon.com, etc.), I'd rather not have to install iTunes at all.
When I first launched iTunes, it made an effort to import information about my rather extensive (300+GB) MP3 collection. I say "an effort" because it somehow managed to miss all of my comedy MP3s, my podcasts, and some other MP3s in the same directory structures as the items it did discover and import. I have no idea why, for example, it managed to successfully import 3 albums by an artist and not the other 5. All of them were in the same directory structure, all of them were MP3s and not a mix of MP3 and WMA files, and were in any significant respect essentially the same.
When I first attempted to sync the iPod, it wanted to sync the 200+ GB of items it found (out of my 300+GB) onto the 32GB device. Clearly, that wasn't going to work, but that didn't stop iTunes and the iPod from trying. Given Apple's reputation for ease of use and design, why didn't the device and software recognize that 200GB wasn't going to fit on a 32GB device and start asking me to pick and choose what I wanted?
Recognizing that my entire collection clearly wouldn't fit on the device, I went through and hand-picked the artists, albums, and tracks I wanted to include on the iPod. Even though I'd selected that iTunes should sync the "checked" tracks, for some reason it only synchronized a handful of them and thought it was done. Eventually I had to muck around with some of the synchronization settings until I found a combination that caused it to synchronize all the things I'd selected, and only those.
Although the built-in Safari browser does do a nice job of rendering pages, the small size of the screen means that at the default resolution and zoom level most pages I visit are blurry if not outright unreadable. If the device's screen was just an inch or so larger, the zooming might not be necessary and the iPod would still fit comfortably in my pocket.
One of my favorite uses for my MP3 player is to listen to the Bob and Tom radio show podcasts through my VIP subscription on their web site. I thought it would be fantastic to be able to download the podcasts directly onto the iPod Touch and listen to them without having to go through a synchronization process. Unfortunately, Apple prevents you from being able to download files through Safari. This means that in order to get the podcasts onto my iPod, I have to go to my PC, log into the site, download the podcasts, import them into iTunes, hook up the iPod, sync the device, and then listen. In my opinion, this is a very lame restriction for a device that purports to offer me "the entire Internet" in my hand. (Granted, I would have to download the podcasts to my PC to use with any other MP3 player, but for an "Internet enabled" device like the iPod Touch, this seems like a really crappy limitation.)
One of the more enjoyable web sites, to me, is hulu.com. This site offers a large number of television shows and movies for free over an Internet connection. Unfortunately, like many YouTube videos and other sites, hulu.com relies on Adobe Flash technology. Apple, in its infinite wisdom, continues to reject Flash for the iPhone and iPod Touch while allowing other video technologies. I hope they're able to sort this out in the future. Flash would make the device quite a bit more useful (and fun) in my opinion.
While I acknowledge that I'm still getting used to it, I find the on-screen keyboard on the iPod Touch to be a little frustrating. There are times that I tap on a key, see that the Touch has recognized which key I hit (because the right key "zooms up" to greet my touch), and yet still displays the wrong letter in the text field I'm typing in. Although I hope at some point to be able to enter short blog posts through the device, I'm not exactly brimming with confidence at the ability to do so at this point.
For reasons I don't understand, the device will not charge when connected to certain USB ports on my computer. It's easy to identify one of these ports, because the battery icon will "blink" extremely rapidly and the iPod will emit a sort of "sad, sick" sound due to its low battery and lack of charge success. The weird part is that it will synchronize just fine when connected to one of these ports, it just won't charge.
If I use the Touch to its fullest potential while I'm at the office, which is to say that I make use of Wi-Fi connectivity, listen to music, watch an occasional video, check my personal email on my lunch hour, etc., I find that the battery is gone well before the end of the work day. Granted, the Touch is doing more during the day that any of the other media players I've owned (which have done music and video and that's about it), but the other players' batteries have lasted for days between charges... and they've also used standard USB cables so I could if I wanted attach them to my office PC for a quick charge without having to invest in a specific cable or cart one back and forth between work and home. I'd be happier with a slightly larger device that had a much longer battery life, or one that used a standard cable that I have lying around the office.
Maybe I'm missing it (and I acknowledge that I probably am), but most media players I've had offer some kind of on-screen indicator of how far into the track the player has played. That is, there's some kind of countdown or "meter" that shows you're 2 minutes into a 4 minute song. I'm not seeing any indication of that on the iPod Touch's display while it's playing a song. That's a relatively minor nit, but losing a feature you're used to having is kind of frustrating.
The supplied headphones are decent, but not great. To my ears, they sound a little hollow and tinny at times, even with the equalizer set to the type of music I'm listening to (or adjusted to some others to experiment). I'd expect a $400 "premium" media player to include some equally "premium" sounding headphones. Fortunately, the iPod does use a standard headphone jack so I'll be able to rectify that soon.

As I said at the outset, I like the iPod Touch and I'm glad I have it. It's a good player, offers a very rich feature set, there seem to be a number of interesting and useful free apps in the App Store, and I'm enjoying using it. Regardless, I'm a little frustrated and annoyed by some of its shortcomings, things that seem to have either been overlooked in the design or intentionally left out. A lot of what I noted above, such as the inability to download MP3s with Safari, I haven't seen commented on in reviews of the device.

What If Jobs' Health IS Declining?

Thu, 01 Jan 2009 14:25:29 -0500

I've seen more than a couple of reports recently indicating that Apple CEO Steve Jobs' health may be in jeopardy. The last time we had a rash of these reports, they were traced back to a fake news item submitted on a popular news site. That little bit of falsehood sent Apple's stock price plummeting and caused various other issues for the company. Supposedly, the current crop of rumors comes from "reliable sources" and indicates that Jobs' failing health is one reason Apple backed out of having Steve Jobs present Apple's last Macworld Keynote. While I dismissed the notion at the time that Jobs backed out of the speech for health reasons, I did note that it seemed odd that Jobs would pass up the chance to make a farewell performance at Macworld. It seemed out of character for him, to me.

Since I have no more first-hand experience or knowledge of Jobs' health than anyone else outside his circle of friends, I will not speculate here on whether the current rumors are true or not. There simply isn't enough concrete evidence available to me to make any sort of statement either confirming or denying the rumors. But I would like to take the opportunity to speculate on what might happen at Apple, and with its product lines, if something were to happen to Steve. It might be a little inappropriate, but the basis of the speculations here is merely "what if" rather than any suggestion of "what is"...

If Steve Jobs were to vanish from the Apple "scene" how might things change? I have some thoughts on that:

I believe that it's largely Steve Jobs' personal dislike of buttons, extra lines, and cable ports that have resulted in non-user-replaceable batteries in the iPod, iPod Touch, iPhone, etc. Without Jobs there to object, I think Apple's product designers might be more willing to include battery doors, more easily accessible ports, etc., in Apple products. Would this make them sell more? Maybe not, but it would lead to products that are more usable and less "disposable".
I suspect that the reason Apple hasn't really re-entered the PDA space or made an entry into the netbook space is Steve Jobs. Without Steve, perhaps Apple would release a larger, more-PDA-like iPod Touch, a tablet-style netbook, or a less-expensive Mac OS X netbook to compete with the likes of Acer, Asus, HP, and Dell.
I suspect that without Steve Jobs at the helm, Apple might be more willing to negotiate in its deals with the music and movie industry. Perhaps in exchange for more flexibility on price, Apple would negotiate for the removal of DRM from iTunes content. We might even see "subscription" content on iTunes like we see for Microsoft-based players. As a first-time iPod owner I'd like to see that (more on this statement in a future post).
Without Steve Jobs there to "tell us what kind of products we want" and enforcing a culture of secrecy within Apple, perhaps the company's executives would drop the veil of secrecy and discuss product plans in advance with the media, soliciting public opinion. This could result in design changes that overcome product limitations that frustrate some users, like built-in 3G availability in the MacBook Air,batteries users can replace for themselves, support of WMA files in iPods, etc.

Even if all these changes were to come about as a result of a "post-Steve" Apple, I don't know that it would necessarily be a good thing. For example, dropping the secrecy might increase competition for new Apple designs. Subscription content for iTunes might cannibalize existing track/movie sales. An Apple PDA or netbook might not be profitable or successful. Maybe the inclusion of battery doors in the iPod/iPhone might lead to batteries that fall out or some other kind of problem.

Regardless, while I don't wish any illness to Steve Jobs, I do confess that it would be interesting to me to see how (and indeed, "if") Apple might change in a "post-Jobsian" era.

With Sympathies to The Lame Leopard...

Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:36:05 -0500

I'm a fan of The Lame Leopard blog, even though it's pro-Mac, even though it's pretty much anti-anything-not-Apple, and is in many ways this site's polar opposite. I'm a fan because I like the no-nonsense writing style of the author, the fact that the author shares his (I'm assuming it's a guy but recognize I may be wrong) good and bad experiences with the Mac, and the fact that he continues the blog in spite of criticism from his fellow Mac fans.

A recurring theme of the blog is the author's frustration with OS X Leopard and the sleep/wake problems the author sees with his MacBook Pro. When he upgraded an older MacBook Pro to Leopard, he saw a number of issues, which he dutifully reported in the blog. Later, when that older machine needed to be replaced, he began to see some of the same kinds of problems with a new "unibody" MacBook Pro.

I feel for the blog's author because I hate to see anyone struggle with technology. Maybe that's because I'm an IT guy and I like to see technology helping people rather than hindering them. Regardless, I've felt for what the author is going through and hope that in time the various issues he's experiencing with Leopard get resolved to his satisfaction. I really do.

Lately, I've felt for the blogger for a completely different reason. As he reported in a recent post:

I've received some lame comments from people about my complaining. Some people seem to think that I should simply shut up and ignore the fact that the Black Screen of Death is making a brand new laptop completely unusable. What is up with that? You don't want your expensive Mac to work perfectly fine?

This, to me, highlights a "dirty little secret" of the Mac community, one that I probably would have denied in my pro-Mac days, or kept quiet about. Let me explain before you start to flame...

The majority of Mac fans are reasonable, intelligent individuals who have made a commitment to the Mac for thoughtful, considered reasons. These same individuals will also acknowledge that while they may love their Mac's design, construction, and software, that the "Mac experience" is by no means a utopian one. There are occasional crashes, the dreaded "spinning beachball of death", infrequent software or data incompatibilities, and other experiences which are, well, less than ideal. While they still believe the Mac is a better experience overall than Windows or Linux, and have strong reasons for believing this, they are reasonable enough to recognize that the Mac isn't perfect, that Apple isn't perfect, that Steve Jobs is not a god, and that there are people for whom a Mac isn't necessarily the right solution. I have no problem whatsoever with this kind of Mac fan.

There are, however, some Mac fans whose love of Apple, the Mac, and Steve Jobs borders on a kind of mental illness. I've known some of them. This kind of Mac fan could go to their local Apple Store, buy the latest, greatest MacBook, bring it home, see it burst into flame, take it back, get a second one that does the same thing, and still tell you with a straight face (probably even believing it themselves!) that they've "never" had a problem with any Mac they've ever owned, that Apple equipment is of unfailing defect-free quality, and that to even suggest that the Mac experience is anything less than perfect is an affront to all that is good and right with the world. When I talk about people who live "deep within the Reality Distortion Field" these are the people I am referring to, not the typical, reasonable Mac owner.

It's a shame that The Lame Leopard blogger's running into those "unreasonable" Mac fans in his (or her?) quest to solve his Mac's problems. The author isn't making up the problems. From what I can tell, he's made many good faith efforts to fix them. He's not running any third-party software or hardware that might be contributing to the problems (that I'm aware of, or that he's reported). Still, he's having problems that are costing him lost data, lost time, and not a little frustration. To compound that with the frustration of other Mac fans telling him he should (in essence) "shut up and live with it because the Mac is great" is, to me, unacceptable.

I suspect that those "deep within the RDF" users are at least somewhat responsible for the stellar results Apple achieves in customer service and product quality surveys. If even a small number of users is willing to overlook hardware and software problems (whether intentionally or accidentally) with their Apple products, that has to skew the survey figures. And if they're pressuring other, more reasonable, Mac fans to overlook the problems they have, then Apple's results on such surveys are (by definition) inflated.

I understand where such actions come from. When I was a Mac fan, I often felt persecuted. Computer stores usually relegated the Mac to a distant corner of the store, a small number of shelves, and very little floor space. Game developers often put games out first on the PC, then later (if at all) for the Mac. New types of peripherals often came along later to the Mac than to other platforms. It was easy to feel like people looked down on the Mac, even though (in my opinion in those days) it was a better, more stable, and more "fun" platform. When someone asked me about my experiences with the Mac, I felt a certain sense of duty to share only the good experiences, to gloss over or ignore the bad, and to do a sort of "sales job" on the person I was talking to. After all, I reasoned, we Mac fans were persecuted enough and we didn't need to do it to ourselves, or pass up the chance to successfully convert someone to our way of thinking. When faced with one of those "quality" or "support" surveys, I tended to give Apple the highest marks, hoping it would convince someone else to give my favorite platform a chance. So while I'll stop short of suggesting that this is "typical" of Mac users, I can tell you with authority that at least ONE Mac user (back in the day) was willing to fudge things a little to help promote the platform. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to think that others, even today, might be doing so. The pressure other Mac users were putting on The Lame Leopard to "stop complaining" would seem to suggest that this still happens to some degree.

So I remain a fan of The Lame Leopard and I genuinely feel for the author. His (or her) voice is one of "reasonable fanhood" for the Mac, and a critical voice desperately needed in the Mac community. I hope that the more-rabid Mac fans don't silence that voice. That would be a tragedy to the Mac community, and to the tech community as a whole, which needs to remain aware that the Mac isn't perfect and trouble-free... as much as Apple's advertising would like the world to think it is. If you're one of those "more reasonable" Mac fans, drop by The Lame Leopard and share your views in the comments.

Comparing Zune Marketplace and iTunes Content

Sun, 21 Dec 2008 20:59:47 -0500

Since there is both a Zune (120GB) and iPod Touch (32GB) on my wish list this year, I thought it might be interesting to compare the music available from both sources to see if there was a substantial difference.

I began by taking a sampling of some of my favorite artists (this is by no means a comprehensive list, nor is it even a list of my "most favorite" artists), then checking to see how many albums and EPs appear on the iTunes Store and the Zune Marketplace for that particular artist. I tried to be as objective as possible, assuming that if iTunes or Zune list the "same" album or EP twice that there's a reason for it (e.g., maybe one is a remastered version of the other, or an edited version) and counted it twice.

Artist	Albums and EPs on iTunes Store	Albums and EPs on Zune Marketplace
Alien Ant Farm	4	4
Barenaked Ladies	30	60
Beatles	0	0
Bloodhound Gang	10	7
Bowling for Soup	14	11
Cake	11	9
Collins, Phil	13	13
Crash Test Dummies	7	6
Death Cab for Cutie	19	10
Eurythmics	20	23
Ben Folds	19	16
Fountains of Wayne	6	4
Genesis	31	31
Hatfield, Juliana	13	14
Hay, Colin	8	3
Lauper, Cyndi	27	23
Morrissey	28	23
Springsteen, Bruce	32	30
Sting	22	21
They Might Be Giants	21	20
Wheatus	13	6
ZZ Top	24	23
TOTAL ALBUMS AND EPs	372	357

Notes and Observations:

There are some albums and EPs in the iTunes store that are labeled "iTunes Exclusive" and thus shouldn't appear on the Zune Marketplace. This could account for some of the higher numbers on the iTunes side. I didn't notice any "Zune exclusive" content.
The iTunes store more-clearly labels EPs and Singles than the Zune Marketplace does. For Zune, when an entry contained 3 or more songs, it was treated as an EP. For iTunes, an item was only considered an EP if labeled as such. Singles were not counted on either side.
If you attempt to do your own count for the above artists, you may reach a different total than I did, due to the fact that artists frequently release new albums and EPs, the stores tend to acquire additional content on a regular basis, etc. At the time you do your count, the exact totals could vary significantly from mine.
iTunes tends to have the same album "mixed" various ways. For instance, a given album might be listed for its "explicit" version and "edited" version, an "extended" and "bonus tracks" version, a version with "video content included", and perhaps other variations. The Zune marketplace tends to list fewer variants of an album (which you can argue is either better or worse), and this may account for some of its lower total.
In a few cases, the iTunes store seems to list what is apparently the exact same album by the same artist more than once, with no indication that there is a significant difference between the two, and for the same price.

Overall, though, you should notice that there is a comparable amount of music from most of the listed artists on both the Zune and iTunes stores. Thus, music lovers should be reasonably satisfied with either store, though admittedly looking at just the numbers alone the iTunes store appears to have the edge. As explained in the notes above, however, some of this could be explained by multiple listings of the same album or multiple variants of an album.

Which music store is "better" for you is, in the end, a very subjective choice. Your list of favorite artists probably varies considerably from mine. As a result, a "numbers" comparison like the above for your favorite artists may lean toward one or the other service more than mine does. Similarly, if you are an iPod user, the subscription features of Zune are lost on you because the iPod doesn't support Microsoft's version of DRM used for controlling access to subscription tracks. If you use a non-iPod player, the Zune marketplace might serve you better because the iTunes DRM-protected tracks probably won't work on your player, so you'll have to buy the more expensive non-DRM or MP3 tracks (or go through the "burn to CD and rip back to MP3" process, which takes more time and effort). Maybe if you're a "true" music fanatic you will want to use both stores, to ensure that you have the widest selection of tracks available as possible.

If you're looking at media players this holiday season, it's worth looking at all your options. The purpose of this article isn't to sway you toward one or the other service or device, but to give you some "food for thought" in making your selection. Just as a Mac fanatic would tell you that Windows' high market share doesn't mean Windows is necessarily "better" than OS X, the iPod and iTunes' higher market share doesn't mean the iPod and iTunes are necessarily any "better" than the competition. What's important is that you make your own evaluation based on the features of the player and the complementary service(s) to ensure that you're choosing something that's "right" for you.

Steve Jobs Skips Macworld, Apple Backing Out in Future

Wed, 17 Dec 2008 19:20:51 -0500

When I first read CNet's announcement that Steve Jobs wouldn't be speaking at the next MacWorld, that he'd given his last keynote there, I was actually stunned. I know there have been issues between Apple and Macworld in the past, and probably for good reasons on both sides. Steve doesn't seem like the easiest guy to get along with, and trade shows in big cities tend to be expensive, unionized affairs of questionable marketing/sales-producing value. With the economy in the state it's in, maybe this was simply a cost-cutting move and something Apple's been thinking about for a while. As secretive as the company is, probably no one other than Steve's inner circle knows for sure... and even they may be in the dark.

The media and the stock market seized onto this as evidence that Steve Jobs' health might be taking a turn for the worse. Apple says it isn't, and although they probably have a duty to shareholders not to do anything to jeopardize the stock price, I can't see them actually telling a blatant lie they could be caught in later. So Steve is probably OK.

But I have to admit that a little voice inside me said, "What if he's not? Suppose that Steve's health is actually declining. Wouldn't there be some evidence of that in Apple's product introductions, given how intimately Steve is involved in them?" I thought about that.

If you follow Steve Jobs' image and history, you know that he's a very hands-on guy with his companies and products, especially Apple's. It's unlikely that any new product or design goes out the door without Steve having put his own touch or "spin" on it. If his health really was failing, it seems likely that we'd see evidence in the products Apple puts out. So, do we really see any such evidence? Maybe, though I'll be the first to admit that nothing here is all that conclusive (though it does serve as food for thought):

In January 2008, we saw the MacBook Air. It took Apple's thin notebook line and made it even thinner. It eliminated or hid as many external ports as possible. It practically screams "Steve Jobs". So clearly he was fine up to that point in 2008.
In February, Apple added new iPhone and iPod Touch models to the product line. These included more memory, some updated software, and a couple of new apps. No major "Steve-like" changes.
In the next few months, we saw iPod Shuffle price reductions, Aperture 2, XSan 2, some minor MacBook updates, Safari and Aperture updates, expansion of the iPhone 3G into new markets, and various other relatively minor new announcements. Again, nothing in all that screams "Steve".
In October, the "unibody" MacBooks were released, along with a new 24" display. The unibody machines certainly showed a little of the "Steve Jobs touch", but not everyone was wow'ed by them.
Now, in December, we hear Steve won't be speaking at Macworld and that Apple is pulling out of it completely in the future.
Early in 2009, it is expected that Apple will release Snow Leopard, which focuses on improvements behind the scenes and isn't expected to change much visually from Leopard. That really, really doesn't sound like Steve.

If we take the pro-Apple/pro-Steve point of view, we see some evolutionary changes in most of the product line in 2008, a major introduction in the form of the MacBook Air, and something pretty new in the unibody MacBooks. In between, there were incremental changes in various other hardware and software products. No one would call it an "uneventful" year.

If, on the other hand, we take a neutral or even "anti-Steve" look at the 2008 news, we see a slightly different picture. We see that pretty much nothing major was introduced from February through October. The changes in the iPhone line, including the introduction of 3G support, weren't drastic or Steve-like in the way that the rumored "iPhone Mini" could be considered to be. The changes in the iPod line were similarly evolution more than revolution. While the notebook "unibody" changes in October were bigger and more "Steve-like", the desktop Macs pretty much didn't change at all. In fact, the Mac Mini, iMac, and Mac Pro are in most respects an awful lot like the ones we saw in prior years. They all have the "Steve" touch, but it's a touch from years past, not today. The Mac Pro case is a perfect example. It's still essentially the same one used for the earliest Intel-based Macs, and the same one used for the G5. That's not very "Steve-like" if you think about it. Taken as an overall picture, it might lend some credence to the thought that maybe, just maybe, Jobs is getting tired, or isn't feeling as well as he did a year ago.

Looking ahead at the expected product introductions in 2009, the most-concrete one is that Apple will release Snow Leopard (OS X 10.6) early in the year. Instead of being the dramatic (visual) change we saw between Leopard and Tiger, or Tiger and Panther, Apple tells us to expect the improvements to be more behind-the-scenes and performance/quality oriented. That's very decidedly un-Steve-like, UNLESS he's aware that there are significant problems in Leopard that need to be addressed before the OS is taken much further forward. Given how much trouble people seemed to have early on in the release of Leopard (the first time a "blue screen of death" was associated with a Mac), and trouble being expressed with the 10.5.6 update, perhaps that's all we're seeing... Apple recognizing that it's got some serious work to do and getting down to business with that work. (Or, taking the alternate view, Steve hasn't the energy to devote to sweeping OS X changes and the engineers are taking this as an opportunity to improve the foundations.)

If you add all that up: few truly "new" products were introduced in 2008, no major visible features are planned for Snow Leopard, no known plans to re-sculpt the Mac Pro, the Mac Mini getting little or no attention, no real changes in the iMac line, no major changes in the Shuffle, Nano, or Classic iPod lines, you have to wonder... Has the product line just gotten so big that Steve can't put his touches on it the way he once did? Has he started to run out of ways to make the products better? Is he too tired (for health, age, or other reasons) to put the energy into Apple that he did even a couple of years ago? Or does his pull-out of Macworld signify that he's maybe getting bored with the whole Apple "thing" and is ready to tackle some new challenge? Maybe the Macworld keynote is his way of quietly passing the baton on to someone new?

It might be useful to go back and look at the Apple press release library for prior years and look at the rate of new model introductions and changes. I might be wrong, but things seem to me to have slowed down quite a bit these last 3-5 years, especially during the last year. There could be a lot of different explanations for why that might have happened, if you agree that it has happened, and maybe you don't.

I don't think there's enough information to make any kind of definitive statement about Apple or Jobs from the outside. Undoubtedly, that's the way Steve wants it. I do, however, think there's enough to at least warrant raising an eyebrow and wondering.