Otaku, Cedric's weblog

It's Macworld not MacWorld. A Mac bigot would know that. ;-)

E.

Couldn't disagree more. While Vista will beat 10.5 (Leopard) to market by several months, Apple has done a much better job of keeping the updates and features coming. If you're just looking at market share numbers, yes, OS X could certainly be considered an "also ran" as you say, but based on customer satisfaction... I don't think you'd see the same result.

XP was released on Oct 25th 2001. OS X 10.1 beat XP to market by a full month and while Microsoft has managed 2 service packs since then, OS X has seen major updates 3 times: 10.2>10.3>10.4 all of which included fixes and new features. Your argument seems to be that just because 10.5 wasn't presented at the keynote, Apple has stopped development, closed up shop, and headed home for the rest of the year.

I use Windows at work, and I think it's OK, but I wouldn't want to use it at home in my spare time. Also, I'm still on Windows 2000 at work. XP was a crime against humanity and every time I see my IT guy anywhere near my computer with an XP disk, I threaten him with a screwdriver. Windows 2000 was the pinnacle of Windows stability and simplicity and it's all been downhill from there.

Apple has stated in the past that they are moving away from announcing everything at MacWorld and moving to more spread out announcements. This is to remove some of the pressure from the "big events" where it's all-or-nothing to impress. Now that this has happened and you don't see any hardware updates at a MacWorld... people are suddenly implying Apple has "surrendered" to Microsoft... laughable, really.

I heard this same comment elsewhere, usually from non-Mac users: "isn't Macworld fu**ed up not showing anything related directly to Macs?"

I don't think so. 2006 was filled with Mac releases, because of the transition to Intel. Macbook Pro, Macbook, iMac, Mac Pro, Xserve. What else do you want? Let those products stabilize before launching the next big thing. No one said Apple has to launch a breakthrough Mac every single year (even though Apple always surprises us, who know what WWDC 2007 will deliver).

But just about now, everybody wanted, even DEMANDED an iPhone. Apple delivered. Everybody cheered. What's wrong? They worked more than 2 years on the dawmned thing, let they rejoice! Those engineers, designers and programmers deserve at least 2 hours to show the world their master piece!

The Daring Fireball blog wasn't all wrong ... the iLife and iWork were updated (if the Amazon slip up was to be believed), as was 802.11n. And nothing did involve the stock options scandal, too :-)

Still, you're right -- this is the start of Apple, the consumer electronics company.

Do you realize that the iPhone runs Mac OS X?

"I have no doubt on their ability to maintain their condescending and superior attitude toward everyone else no matter what."

Ain't that the truth ;-)

I see no difference between you writing "No matter how good Mac OS is, it's still a bit behind Windows" and Mac zealots "condescending and superior attitude toward everyone else no matter what"... I'm afraid you are the same animals.

As a Mac user, let me say:

Macworld was a total disappointment. It have no interest in Apple's DRM infested media distribution. I have no interest in a ridiculously expensive media player/PDA pretending to be a phone.

I wanted upgraded Macs and an upgraded OS. I got neither.

Anyone who sees this as some sort of new direction for Apple never really understood the company. Apple has always been a hardware company. Software has always been nothing more than a supporting business for them.

As for bursts of acceleration vs. steady pace – errm, yeah, that’s why Mac OS X has seen a new release roughly every 15 months for the past six years that Vista was vapourware that kept losing features. Ahem.

I realise this makes me sound like a Mac zealot, but in fact my opinion of Apple is divided. My opinion of Microsoft, on the other hand, is not…

Hmm... it runs OS X, Safari, widgets, iTunes, Quicktime....

Sure looks like a Mac to me.

As for "DRM", how's that "PlaysForSure" content working on the Zune? Heh.

Though wasn't this an event to counter CES? Give it a month or two and I'm sure you'll see new Macs, perhaps with Leopard.

Why does a programmer say that OS X is behind Windows? That's IMHO the dumbest thing you ever wrote on your blog.

I Billyboy had to pay me 1 Dollar for every hour I invested to work around Microsoft problems I'd be the richest man of the world.

Vista looks good but is the same Windows with some additional features that should have been available five years ago.

Wow. This blog entry comes across as nothing more than a veiled attempt to belittle another great Macworld event that surpassed most people's expectations wants and desires IMHO. Mac OS X has blown far and away anything and everything that XP has attempted to push into the mouth of the computer illiterate masses. The entire user experience on a Mac is rock solid, easily interfaced with, highly customizable in an "anyone-can-do-it" kinda way that quite frankly it seems that the entire Lornhorn/Vista development team has been envious of for the past 5+ years that there new (or newish) operating system has been slowing plodding along.

The iPhone isn't "revolutionary" and/or quite as spectacular as Jobs purported but then again it isn't a POS either. This is a brand spanking new handheld PDA/phone/iPod device that looks like it is going to be head and shoulders above anything else in the market today.

Another thing. Apple changed it's entire, I'll say that again, ENTIRE, line of computer systems over to the "Mac" naming system last year. The iBook become the Macbook, the Powerbook became the Macbook Pro, the PowerMac became the Mac Pro and so on and so forth. How can you say that they are moving away from the Mac computer??? Just because they finally become Apple, Inc.??? I've got big news for you then, Apple has been trying to change their name to simply Apple since before the iPod but couldn't due to legal restrictions and a now defunct legal battle with the Beatles and their Apple music company.

The thing that I love about Apple is that no matter what it is it seems that they really take an honest interest and joy in their creations. This is no more apparent than in every single keynote that Jobs gives. It's in his enthusiasm, his happiness, his eagerness, his childlike excitability in all of the final projects that roll out of Cupertino once or twice a year. Sure you'll say this guy is nothing more than a glorified salesman but I disagree to the n'th degree. He is a visionary in the tech field and I thank you know who that somebody out there seems to really care and understand what the consumer wants. I'll take Jobs and his black turtle knit with jeans over a sweaty lumbering and screaming Ballmer any day of the week.

Call me an Apple fan boy or whatever you want. Fact is Apple, Inc. kicks butt and will hopefully continue to do so for many many many Macworlds to come:)

ps. sorry for the rant but i now feel a whole bunch better:-P

You work for Google? I didn't realize they hired Windoze fanbois! And to think I have considered working for them even - sheesh!

Windows superior to a *nix operating system - best of all the ever stable and usable OSX - said by a programmer? Are you allowed to call yourself a programmer after making such an ill-informed, heretical statement?

Windoze is Budweiser, OSX is Stella Artois. I don't mind being in the smaller, more discerning group which grows in size as market awareness grows, while conversely Windoze market share shrinks as consumer awareness grows.

You are just jealous cause you realize you really would prefer Stella - (read Macs/Apples) and that you should have been drinking it all along!

An honest question: where would Google be today had they started with Windows servers? I mean, price-wise and performance-wise. Oh, I'm sure Sergey and Larry also profited from the fact that, for such a specific application, that they had access to all the sourcecode.

I mean, Windows is so great, so stable, so easy to use and, last but not least, so secure... Why where these two first Google developers not using Windows?

What about you go tell them directly that Google would be a better place if all the Un*x servers and all the Un*x laptops (and hence the Mac ones) were replaced by Windows?

Because that's a point you raise in several of your blog postings: Windows > MacOS X > Linux.

I mean, someone at Google needs a clue apparently, please go tell them that Windows is the answer.

How is it to work at Google and yet to be suffering from the same illness as that Joel-on-software guy? Basically: knowing only one OS and refusing to *learn* (not *try* but *learn*) how to correctly use the others.

So either you prove us that Windows > MacOS X > Linux or you accept the following *fact*: Windows is better *in your opinion*, because it's the OS you know best.

And that's where your fanboism comes in: you take your opinion for a fact.

Yet it wasn't the OS Sergey and Larry knew best...

I'd add "thankfully for Google..." but then I'd be a fanboy right?

On an unrelated sidenote, being the computer-enthusiast in my family/friend circle, I often have calls about "computers not working anymore" (since many years). Since MacOS X came out I simply procede like that:

"hmmm OK, your computer has problems... Is it running any Microsoft programs at all, like Office or Windows?"

(answer being usually "uh!? yes!")

Then I go on: "You see, the problem you have *is* Microsoft producing mediocre software. Next time buy a Mac, you'll have less problems".

And you know what? Some people did it. I made people switch. Not just one or two. And now the ones who already switched aren't calling me anymore. And this is exactly what I'm telling to the ones still calling me for Windows-related problems.

But wait, now that I read your post I'll remember your formula: Windows > MacOS X > Linux.

Wow, I consider myself not a fanboy to M$, but I didn't realize there were so many apple and mac fanboys out here. I agree with Cedric, give credit to what is due. Any moron who says Windows 2000 was better than XP has no right to compare Windows to apple OS.

Try running your fantastic apple hardware with the $10 webcam or other inexpensive hardware available out there. Then lets see which OS wins, Mac or Windows. Just by tightly closing Hardware support to some selective devices and charging an arm and leg for your peripherals is the only way you can make a robust OS, then I would pick Windows anyday over a MAC.