Paul Thurrott on OS X Leopard

[Ironman273]

Everyone should read this to realize that Paul is still an MS supporter. http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Home/26B5...CCA542AC6B.html

So you dismiss Paul's article but this is not biased at all? Put both articles side by side and see which one seems more defensive and "knee-jerk".

[xxdesmus]

So you dismiss Paul's article but this is not biased at all? Put both articles side by side and see which one seems more defensive and "knee-jerk".

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing...that is pretty funny if you actually believe this guy isn't biased. If anything he is far more biased than Paul was.

Everyone should read this to realize that Paul is still an MS supporter. http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Home/26B5...CCA542AC6B.html

Hardly a worthwhile read.

To clean it up: Same s**t, different day ...his article is no different than Paul's (slightly slanted, and slightly twisting the facts).

This article is so incredibly inaccurate in it's description against Time Machine and it's "odd similarities" to Volume Shadow Copy Service.

To quote a Microsoft Whitepaper describing VSC:

""A component of the intelligent file storage technologies in Microsoft? Windows? Server 2003, Shadow Copies of Shared Folders provides an end user-accessible means to recover from accidental document deletion or inadvertent document revisions by accessing point-in-time copies of documents and folders."

Sounds pretty much exactly like Time Machine. I am sure that Apple has managed to improve it slightly since they copied Microsoft's first attempt at a system like this. All that Apple has managed to "innovate" is a pretty-face to a technology/idea that they stole directly from Microsoft. The Wikipedia page this moron links to specifically details how painfully similar VSC really is compared to Time Machine.

Yes, it's used in backups as he says, but it can also function EXACTLY like Time Machine (i.e., allow users to access previous versions of documents). It has this functionality in Windows Server 2003 and Vista will have it as well. The very Wikipedia article he cites (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Volume_Shadow_Copy_Service) mentions exactly this. Either this guy just doesn't know what he's talking about (understandable if he's a Mac guy), or he just picks and choose bits of the real fact to be a more ignorant and effective Windows basher.

[FlibbyFlobby]

I read the response article posted above on Digg earlier and to be honest it was obviously tailored for Digg's Apple section. It quickly made its way to the top, despite the fact its a complete pile of tripe.

Paul was writing about his disappoint at the hypocricy of Apple's marketing techniques at the WWDC, and his disappointment at the meagre offerings he felt Leopard would give to users. This guy just threw an online wobbly because he disagreed with someone elses opinion. :rolleyes:

Edited August 11, 2006 by ziadoz

[Ironman273]

One more thing I forgot to mention, which this article posted brings to the forefront:

The article mentions that it's not about it being new, it's about how Apple improved the usability of whatever the feature is.

THAT'S MY POINT. APPLE SAYS THAT MICROSOFT COPIES AND THEY DON'T!!! THIS ARTICLE IS SAYING THAT APPLE COPIES BUT DO IT BETTER!!!!

My original point was, if you're going to say others copy then don't stand there like you're making all these brand new inventions yourself. It's the amount of time during the keynote spend saying that MS copies them that bothered me! I don't have a problem with evolution and making programs and apps better. Just don't come off like you're the only ones inventing all this stuff and everyone is just copying you.

[PyX]

I am quite happy that this hasn't turned out into a huge debate with insults... but anyway. I have to say that I haven't really been THAT surprised by the Leopard features that were shown. Spaces rule as a user feature and I am gonna use it for sure, Time Machine isn't "lame"as thurrott said, it's a great innovation, but I am probably not gonna use it. I have less problems losing files on OS X than on Windows, so I won't use that feature, and if I understood well, I need an extra hard disk, which I am not gonna pay. It is awesome for companies only according to me. I am still waiting for the hidden features, I know it's not everything, and I will be patient until spring. Paul Thurrott exaggerates in his articles against Apple. He said 10.4 contained only 2 great innovation, the rest was bull****. Now he's saying 10.5 contains nothing cool. I mean, come on... dude, you are a Microsoft fan, don't get me wrong on that. It's obvious that you're not gonna say : OS 10.5 will be superior to Vista.

[dagamer34]

One more thing I forgot to mention, which this article posted brings to the forefront:

The article mentions that it's not about it being new, it's about how Apple improved the usability of whatever the feature is.

THAT'S MY POINT. APPLE SAYS THAT MICROSOFT COPIES AND THEY DON'T!!! THIS ARTICLE IS SAYING THAT APPLE COPIES BUT DO IT BETTER!!!!

My original point was, if you're going to say others copy then don't stand there like you're making all these brand new inventions yourself. It's the amount of time during the keynote spend saying that MS copies them that bothered me! I don't have a problem with evolution and making programs and apps better. Just don't come off like you're the only ones inventing all this stuff and everyone is just copying you.

Ditto. If Microsoft and Apple didn't want each other copying OS features, they'd get a patent. It seems so easy to get one these days.

[MonkeyClaw Veteran]

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing...that is pretty funny if you actually believe this guy isn't biased. If anything he is far more biased than Paul was.

Hardly a worthwhile read.

To clean it up: Same s**t, different day ...his article is no different than Paul's (slightly slanted, and slightly twisting the facts).

This article is so incredibly inaccurate in it's description against Time Machine and it's "odd similarities" to Volume Shadow Copy Service.

To quote a Microsoft Whitepaper describing VSC:

""A component of the intelligent file storage technologies in Microsoft? Windows? Server 2003, Shadow Copies of Shared Folders provides an end user-accessible means to recover from accidental document deletion or inadvertent document revisions by accessing point-in-time copies of documents and folders."

Sounds pretty much exactly like Time Machine. I am sure that Apple has managed to improve it slightly since they copied Microsoft's first attempt at a system like this. All that Apple has managed to "innovate" is a pretty-face to a technology/idea that they stole directly from Microsoft. The Wikipedia page this moron links to specifically details how painfully similar VSC really is compared to Time Machine.

Yes, it's used in backups as he says, but it can also function EXACTLY like Time Machine (i.e., allow users to access previous versions of documents). It has this functionality in Windows Server 2003 and Vista will have it as well. The very Wikipedia article he cites (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Volume_Shadow_Copy_Service) mentions exactly this. Either this guy just doesn't know what he's talking about (understandable if he's a Mac guy), or he just picks and choose bits of the real fact to be a more ignorant and effective Windows basher.

Thats real nice but no one ever said that Apple invented the backup feature. They just made it usable and friendly to the average user. You and me and probably the rest of the people on Neowin are the average user. So shadowcopy gets the job done. But if my grandma wanted to get her files back, she wouldn't have a clue as to what shadowcopy is especially since its only in a server os right now (remember vista isn't out yet). So what does apple do, they improve. They do not copy, they take a concept that is either broken or poorly executed, and make it so that the average user can use it. That is innovation, a new method of doing things.

When Apple points the finger at MS and says they copy features, in some instances they are dead on. Windows Calendar, Windows Mail, etc etc etc, those are not innovations, those are more like ports. They even look the same. Apple didn't copy shadowcopy, they took a well established concept that was poorly implemented for average users and consumers and built it into the core of their OS with functionality that is friendly enough that anyone can use it.

Has Apple copied other people, sure, every company is guilty of that and they have never said they are innocent of that. But what MS has done on occasion has been to take an actual feature from other OSs, slap a Windows logo on it and call it revolutionary. So Apple has every right to criticize.

I do not think its a wise thing to do though (very bad karma), I don't think its very mature or professional but they do have a right to do so. I really do not care who copies who and what not because in the end if one copies the other, it must be a pretty good feature and its only going to help the consumer.

And on the topic of Paul's article, he has some good points but well he seems to ignore anything that goes against any of this arguments. Core technologies and system wide enhancements are very important, and developers have posted pictures of some unmentioned features that add to the OS. It is more and more looking like this release is going to be a very well rounded one, and if Paul took time to research and put his biases aside, then he would be able to see that.

[illicit]

That was a pretty well written article.

[FlibbyFlobby]

Thats real nice but no one ever said that Apple invented the backup feature. They just made it usable and friendly to the average user. You and me and probably the rest of the people on Neowin are the average user. So shadowcopy gets the job done. But if my grandma wanted to get her files back, she wouldn't have a clue as to what shadowcopy is especially since its only in a server os right now (remember vista isn't out yet). So what does apple do, they improve. They do not copy, they take a concept that is either broken or poorly executed, and make it so that the average user can use it. That is innovation, a new method of doing things.

No one has tried Time Machine yet hands on. All we've seen is a demo of it. So it might not end up like that after its out of Beta. I think discussing how well implemented and usable it is should be saved for when we can get our hands on it and try it.

[C_Guy]

There is no such thing as bad publicity, is the expression, I believe.

Yes, that's true. That's exactly why Steve's speeches make me want Vista so much more than OS X. Microsoft can sell it's product without mentioning the word 'Apple' but it seems that Apple can't sell their OS without either:

-Bashing the competition (with statements that are often false), or

-Offering customers the ability to run the same software Steve spends so much time bashing (Windows / BootCamp)

How can a major selling point be "you can run Windows on a Mac! You can run Office on a Mac, too!" if you turn around and say "let me show you how inferior this competitor's product is. Don't buy OS X on our own merit buy it because it's better than Windows".

I guess when Apple says "Redmond, we have a problem" what they mean is they have an attitude problem. Grow up and decide: Is running Windows (BootCamp) a good thing (a selling point, as seen in your commercials) or is Windows something you want to continue to bash, even though you took more than a few ideas and innovations from it? Make up your mind, it can't be both at the same time.

[xxdesmus]

It's about the attitude that Apple portrays and how, although it plays into the hands of Apple fanboys, really hurts Apple by alienating them to many people that find that angle distasteful. I know, I know, "we don't care!" Well, Jobs obsviously does because his bashing is intended to drive the uninformed over to Apple with skewed information and half-truths.

I'd have to agree with you there. My parents aren't computer beginners, but they aren't also advanced power users either. We saw one of these "wonderfully informative" Mac commercials the other day (I think it was that setup one...) and you know what they said to me? "Wow, what an annoying commercial."

It really is quite true that the commercials portray Apple as smug, arrogant, and having a major superiority complex. I know I sure as heck don't want to buy into that community.

Edited August 11, 2006 by xxdesmus

[markwolfe Veteran]

Yes, that's true. That's exactly why Steve's speeches make me want Vista so much more than OS X. Microsoft can sell it's product without mentioning the word 'Apple'...

Apple is under the rather overwhelming shadow of the nearly ubiquituous Microsoft. They need to compare and contrast, instead of solely advertising in a void without reference. 99% of people in the computing world have some experience with Windows. They need to work off of that.

It really is quite true that the commercials portray Apple as smug, arrogant, and having a major superiority complex. I know I sure as heck don't want to buy into that community.

I think it would be better to base a product purchase on the acutal product, itself. But call me crazy! :p

[C_Guy]

It really is quite true that the commercials portray Apple as smug, arrogant, and having a major superiority complex. I know I sure as heck don't want to buy into that community.

Very well said. If I were basing a decision solely on the product or the technology, OS X might be on the table. But you have to consider what comes along with that. The last thing I want is to be seen as part of Apple's cult. People don't like to buy things that do not fit with who they are. Think about it: When you buy a certain brand of jeans, it says something about you. When you buy a Pepsi you are buying an image, a culture, that you identify with. A lot of marketing and selling is about image. That's why brands and logos have so much value to them. When I think of Apple I think of Steve Jobs, the "cult", their superiorit complex, their snotty attitude towards Microsoft (the hand that feeds them), and their terrible arrogance and I just don't want anything to do with it so I will never give Apple a cent of my money.

For all the ideas and progress Steve has made with Apple, he's done about as much damage to their PR and image and it will take some serious damage control to un-offend those who are put off by what Apple seems to stand for.

Edited August 11, 2006 by C_Guy

[Fourjays Veteran]

When Apple points the finger at MS and says they copy features, in some instances they are dead on. Windows Calendar, Windows Mail, etc etc etc

I wouldn't call calendar and mail applications something you can "copy". There is usually only a very few ways of doing them.

[xxdesmus]

Windows Mail is a copy? No, not even close.

Outlook Express (which is Windows Mail) has been in Windows since Windows 95 OSR-2. The look of Windows Mail has changed, but that is more along the lines of the general look of Vista.

...as for Windows Calendar...lol...yeah, I got nothing...that one is just a blatant knock off. :laugh:

[C_Guy]

I wouldn't call calendar and mail applications something you can "copy". There is usually only a very few ways of doing them.

Windows Mail (AKA Outlook Express) has been around since before OS X.

I wish Apple could deal with facts and not fantasy.

And you know what? it doens't even matter! Stop playing the blame game and start innovating. Unless it's a direct copy it's not copyright infringement. Some people will like Apple's version better, some will like Microsoft's better.

Do Pepsi and Coke spend time accusing each other of copying? No, they are too busy developing and selling product.

[MonkeyClaw Veteran]

There are certainly better ways of portraying the features and the GUI, etc. What Apple has is very usable and easy to operate but it certainly isn't the best or only way. It just doesn't seem like MS tried. But in the end it really doesn't matter, like I said, companies copying companies is only good for the consumer.

[markwolfe Veteran]

...When you buy a certain brand of jeans, it says something about you. When you buy a Pepsi you are buying an image, a culture, that you identify with. A lot of marketing and selling is about image...

I think you put far too much importance in objects to "add value" to your image. :ermm:

[spenser.d]

There are certainly better ways of portraying the features and the GUI, etc. What Apple has is very usable and easy to operate but it certainly isn't the best or only way. It just doesn't seem like MS tried. But in the end it really doesn't matter, like I said, companies copying companies is only good for the consumer.

Yeah, I dont really have a problem with copy-catting, I just have a problem with the whole arrogance thing. Same reason I don't like Sony much. Apple needs to quit bashing Microsoft. I'm not even sure they should be able to, considering the minute amount of the market they hold. But I'm not one to disagree with free speech, so Jobs can keep digging his hole deeper and deeper.

-Spenser

[Louie Mantia]

About his comment on marketshare:

Macintosh has more than a 2% stake in the computer market.

Windows has lots, yes, but take this into consideration:

The average life of a Mac is about 5-7 years.

The average life of a Windows computer is about 2-3 years.

Therefore, Windows computers are purchased more, but that doesn't mean more people are using it.

Example:

There are two people, one is a Mac user and one is a Windows user.

In 10 years, the Mac user buys 2 different computers, where the Windows user buys 3.

The user base is still 1:1, not 3:2.

// Lou

[spenser.d]

About his comment on marketshare:

The average life of a Mac is about 5-7 years.

The average life of a Windows computer is about 2-3 years.

What are you talking about? If a computer dies, you don't need to go buy Windows again.

-Spenser

[xxdesmus]

^^ um, I don't really believe that 2-3 year life span ...I know plenty of people with Windows computers that are way over 5 years old. I really doubt the average person goes out and buys a new computer that often.

[Fourjays Veteran]

^^ um, I don't really believe that 2-3 year life span ...I know plenty of people with Windows computers that are way over 5 years old. I really doubt the average person goes out and buys a new computer that often.

We are talking averages here. I read somewhere else recently as well that the average for a PC is 2-3 years.

[C_Guy]

Even if those stats were true, if a Windows user bought 2 computers over the same time period a Mac person buys one, the market share is the same as if each person only bouught one. The Windows person at any one time has just one computer so market share is not affected. Now, if the Windows user had two computers up and running at the same time then yes, market share would be a little inaccurate (But then again, some people have more than one Mac they use at the same time so it balances out)

[+.Aaron Subscriber¹]

I have lost complete faith in Paul. I say this for 2 reasons.

1. He uses the word "Whatever" so many times in that article to make it sound like it was written by a 9th grader.

2. On his mainsite, he has a few links that lead to nowhere but spyware sites and some that are dead.

Edited August 11, 2006 by AaronZ