WinInfo Daily News   |   Windows IT Pro
in

This Blog

Syndication

SuperSite Blog

Jobs: MobileMe ‘not up to Apple's standards’

Well, I’m happy for that admission. But let’s be serious: MobileMe is a quagmire on the PC. I’ve written a ton of stuff about this service, stuff that hasn’t been published yet mostly because it goes on and on and on, and there are so many complaints it reads like a tirade, which honestly isn’t what I’m shooting for. But while I suspect Apple will clean up MobileMe eventually, I have to say, given past experiences with the iPhone sync stuff on the PC, they’re never really going to get this right. They just aren’t, not on the PC. Anyway...

Apple CEO Steve Jobs conceded in an e-mail to Apple employees that the company had made numerous mistakes during the launch of its MobileMe Internet service, saying that the service “was simply not up to Apple's standards” and that it "clearly needed more time and testing." The memo also indicates that Jobs has now transferred responsibility for the service to a different Apple executive.

the MobileMe team will now report to Eddy Cue, who has led the iTunes team for the past several years. In fact, Cue will now head up all of Apple’s Internet services including iTunes, the App Store and MobileMe. Reporting directly to Jobs, Cue’s new title is Vice President, Internet Services.

MobileMe's launch was fraught with problems, including large initial downtime, an extended e-mail outage including lost messages, the inability to contact the service to sync, corruption of data, time delays in syncing the computer to MobileMe, and more. In the aftermath, Apple set up a status page on the MobileMe Web site.

The “launch of MobileMe was not our finest hour,” reads Jobs' e-mail.

That’s for sure. Here’s the full email:

Team,

The launch of MobileMe was not our finest hour.  There are several things we could have done better:

– MobileMe was simply not up to Apple's standards – it clearly needed more time and testing.

– Rather than launch MobileMe as a monolithic service, we could have launched over-the-air syncing with iPhone to begin with, followed by the web applications one by one – Mail first, followed 30 days later (if things went well with Mail) by Calendar, then 30 days later by Contacts.

– It was a mistake to launch MobileMe at the same time as iPhone 3G, iPhone 2.0 software and the App Store.  We all had more than enough to do, and MobileMe could have been delayed without consequence.

We are taking many steps to learn from this experience so that we can grow MobileMe into a service that our customers will love.  One step that I can share with you today is that the MobileMe team will now report to Eddy Cue, who will lead all of our internet services – iTunes, the App Store and, starting today, MobileMe.  Eddy's new title will be Vice President, Internet Services and he will now report directly to me.

The MobileMe launch clearly demonstrates that we have more to learn about Internet services.  And learn we will.  The vision of MobileMe is both exciting and ambitious, and we will press on to make it a service we are all proud of by the end of this year.

Steve

Thanks to Rick M. for the link.

I’ll have at least part of my MobileMe review up today, BTW. I think I’m going to cut out the stuff about getting it to work with popular email and PIM services and publish that separately. It’s just getting too long.

Comments

 

Snakedoctor1 said:

mikegalos@msn.com  said:

Wow. almost 10 minutes so far and nobody from the iCabal has commented on how Paul's negative comments on Windows Mobile are somehow an unfair attack on Apple.

:)

August 6, 2008 6:36 AM
 

cgdams said:

Hmmm, Mike,

you seem to wait for those attacks. Me, i'd love to see fewer of 'em, they are terribly point- and fruitless, and in those last weeks the heat sure seems to have cooled down a bit, given Apples failed MobileMe launch. At least that's what i saw.

When the attacks come, okay, beat 'em, but if the don't, why not leave it that way instead of asking for them?

August 6, 2008 8:16 AM
 

RobertC said:

Well, the lying CEO himself has finally admitted a mistake. About bloody time.

August 6, 2008 8:25 AM
 

Jonathan Hensley | The Blog » Aurora, ISP transmission caps, Jobs on MobileMe said:

Pingback from  Jonathan Hensley | The Blog    » Aurora, ISP transmission caps, Jobs on MobileMe

August 6, 2008 8:25 AM
 

Dipsh t Admin said:

@cgdams, that wasn't Mike who said that in this thread, but rather it was snake.

August 6, 2008 8:32 AM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Cool. Apparently, I can take the day off and people will post for me.

Now, about that fence that needs to be whitewashed...

August 6, 2008 9:08 AM
 

DRWAM said:

Mike, roses look great next to white fences. It may be a little late to plant in your area this year, but next spring, PM me if you really want some rosarian wisdom, as some species are better than others in re-blooming, shade and disease tolerance. Also, do yourself a favor a take one regular strength aspirin daily. Don't take any NSAIDS for a few hours as it negates the anti-platelet effect of the aspirin, which is what we need for cardiac protection. I take two each morning and nhave been for several years, and I'm a little younger than you.

August 6, 2008 9:33 AM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

DRWAM

Thanks. Actually, we've got the roses blooming nicely this year. (This is Seattle and with a climate so close to England's roses tend to do well as do Rhodis - visit the Rose Garden in Portland some Spring).

And, actually, I do take aspirin every night. I choose then because I take an NSAID in the morning as an anti-inflamatory.

Oh, and requisite on-topic entry...

It'll be interesting to see how many people who, until today, said "MobileMe is working just fine and, aside from a few teething pains that are getting too much unfair press, is a great product" will change their tune and admit the emperor has no clothes now that the emperor himself has announced that he's a nudist.

August 6, 2008 9:43 AM
 

cgdams said:

Oh right, sorry Mike,

my bad. And concerning snake as the real source, well yeah, i'm not that surprised...

August 6, 2008 9:47 AM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

RobertC

Jobs admits mistakes all the time. You're probably confused because his usual way of admitting a mistake is to announce the fix a year later as a "New Feature" of the "New Version" at a keynote after spending the first year calling that same mistake a feature of the previous version.

August 6, 2008 9:48 AM
 

Waethorn said:

"You're probably confused because his usual way of admitting a mistake is to announce the fix a year later as a "New Feature" of the "New Version" at a keynote after spending the first year calling that same mistake a feature of the previous version."

....and prefixing the word "Snow" to the name of it, thereby justifying the expense to the customer.

August 6, 2008 10:14 AM
 

Mum said:

Way to go. Microsoft should take note and admit that there's been a bit more wrong with Vista than marketing. So far they've only admitted that "a few were disappointed" with it because their "printers didn't work" (probably a problem with the printer) and "games felt sluggish" (drink less coffee).

August 6, 2008 10:21 AM
 

RobertC said:

Mike

"You're probably confused because his usual way of admitting a mistake is to announce the fix a year later as a "New Feature" of the "New Version" at a keynote after spending the first year calling that same mistake a feature of the previous version."

Too true. Does everyone recall the thunderous applause Jobs received when he announced the iPhone 3G had a "flush" headphone port. Only at Jobs keynote will a headphone port, whose non-standard first iteration was a blatant money grab, elicit such an applause. Unfortunately, I do not have the capacity to suspend my disbelief to the level of the iCabal.

August 6, 2008 10:35 AM
 

cesjr said:

"and there are so many complaints it reads like a tirade, which honestly isn’t what I’m shooting for"

Ha, ha, ha, ha.  Yeah sure, oh boy. ha, ha, ha

Now, is ANYONE surprised that the first "in depth"  Paul "winShill" Thurrott review of the recent iPhone related releases  is of Mobileme - as opposed to say the huge, impressive success of 3d party apps and the App Store?  We've got radio silence from Paul on the app store.  Hmmm.

"they’re never really going to get this right. They just aren’t, not on the PC."

Really, should anyone with half a brain rely on a Paul Thurrott prediction when it comes to apple?  Let's look at some of Paul's hit parade of bad predictions on matters apple:

"BuyMusic.com kicks iTunes Music Store butt, takes names

So BuyMusic.com is live. Like the excellent iTunes Music Store, it offers digital singles and album for download.  . . . In other words, iTMS, excellent though it is, is now officially toast. Apple should have supported Windows from Day One. Now, it's too late.

www.internet-nexus.com/2003_07_20_archive.htm

"But even with these licensing issues, it's clear that Buymusic.com is going to stomp all over the iTunes Music Store. WMA is the right technology, Windows is the right platform, and Buymusic.com supports a much wider range of PCs and devices than does Apple. And there is just no way for Apple to adequately address that problem."

www.internet-nexus.com/2003_07_27_archive.htm

From 2004, before the huge takeoff of mac sales:

"How will Apple grow?

Geek.com: "I've been pondering Apple's future growth after Apple became debt-free on February 16.  . . . Looking at Apple's CPU sales--around 700,000 to 800,000 units a quarter, or just over three million units for the year--Apple won't gain much ground."

Paul: "Umm..... they won't gain any ground, actually. If these numbers are true, they will continue to lose ground, as the company has done every year since Steve Jobs took over. Given the best-case for Apple (800,000 units a quarter, or 3.2 million units for the year), Apple will sell just 1.7 percent of all computers in 2004, compared to 1.88 percent for 2003. But that's the best case. It will certainly be lower. "

Geek.com: "I'd like to see it take its old 'Think Different' slogan to heart and aggressively move forward to break from the debated 3% marketshare of computers."

Paul: "There's no debate (indeed, Apple executives are still using the bogus 5 percent figure). Apple's market share is 1.88 percent today, and as your own math showed you, it will be 1.7 percent or lower in 2004. Why is this so hard for Mac advocates to understand? The Mac market is ending."

www.internet-nexus.com/2004_02_29_archive.htm

Paul also predicted the original iPod mini would fail (wrong), and more recently, that the Macbook air would be a failure (wrong again).

Paul, as is almost always the case, can't see the big picture.  As he gets caught up in his windows fanboy feel-good pile-on on Mobileme, he just can't see straight.

What he can't see is that the iPhone (and iPod line) now have a ready way for windows users to enter contacts, calendar events and handle email -- on the desktop (in a browser) -- that syncs instantly with the device.  This is a huge selling point for the device.  No complicated syncing with a desktop application.  No multiple parties involved - the whole package (phone and cloud service) come from one company.

Name a single other smartphone or media player that has that?

It's troublesome to enter all your contacts and calendar events on the phone -  you want to be able to use a keyboard and have a big screen.  Now that's available.  And no other cellphone maker, cell carrier has anything remotely comparable that is feasible and available to individual users (as opposed to the enterprise).

August 6, 2008 10:56 AM
 

RobertC said:

Cesjr get out off your high horse. Nobody cares. Times change, opinions change.

For the record, in 2003 the ITMS was barely known and it was arguably at the nascent stage of the iPod's popularity.

Furthermore, all that syncing nonsense you mentioned about the iPhone is all well and good - if it works! You still can't accept that it had massive problems, even though iGod himself, the Steve iLiar Jobs, has admitted it was not up to Apple standards. Goodness me, cesjr, your arrogance is insufferable.

August 6, 2008 11:17 AM
 

RobertC said:

I might also add that the market share of Apple computers to which Paul was referring was indicative of, at that time, a long term trend of declining market share.

The rising popularity and brand-awareness of Apple as a result of the iPod was what turned that trend around, but otherwise Paul was right on the money.

But, your pedantic history lesson of posts made 5 years ago indicates the utter desperation of your argument. It doesn't show that Paul is any more of a shill than Walt Mossberg or David Pogue or other tech evangelists. All those posts indicate is that times change. What a revelation!

Give yourself an uppercut. Really.

August 6, 2008 11:25 AM
 

cesjr said:

"For the record, in 2003 the ITMS was barely known and it was arguably at the nascent stage of the iPod's popularity."

Which illustrates perfectly why one shouldn't make broad (I'd even say arrogant) predictions.

"all that syncing nonsense you mentioned about the iPhone is all well and good - if it works!"

So because it didn't work 100 percent in the first few weeks, means it will never work?  It's working for me right now (and I had problems as well in the beginning).

Right now, nobody else making or selling a cell phone have even started something like Mobileme.  How close are they to having a working solution.  Answer - about a million miles farther away than apple.

August 6, 2008 11:30 AM
 

Snakedoctor1 said:

Dam those failed predictions are funny as hell.  Paul sure has his panties in a knot over Apple.  I bet the love the attention he gives them.

August 6, 2008 11:34 AM
 

Dipsh t Admin said:

"We've got radio silence from Paul on the app store.  Hmmm."

Really?  Where are you reading.  From something Paul posted on July 19:

Speaking of iPhone 2.0 "they've added such a rich range of new functionality that it's hard to even know where to start"

Speaking of the app store "If you're looking for the one big differentiator between the iPhone of 2007 and the iPhone of today, think Before App Store and After App Store."

You're right, that does sound pretty silent to me, and it's pretty clear he thinks the app store is a minor improvement.  </sarcasm>

In all seriousness, Paul usually does lengthy multi-part reviews, so I expect to see more detail about this later.  Let's give Paul some credit here.  Unlike Mossy and Pogue, Paul actually uses the product for a while before posting a review, otherwise you have to backtrack like they did with the apparent MobileMe disaster.

August 6, 2008 1:15 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Dipsh

Frankly, considering that Leo Laporte's been saying that installing over the air from the AppStore has repeatedly corrupted his new iPhone (he thinks do to failed partial downloads) and that installing via iTunes was the only way to be safe, I'd suspect that any review without some serious investingation would be nothing but a reworked press release. And Paul's reviews are not that in any case.

August 6, 2008 1:45 PM
 

Snakedoctor1 said:

So I just read your Part 1 MobileMe review Paul.  Seriously brother you call your self a Windows User?  Do you know how to use outlook? There are so many technical holes in that master piece of yours its sad.

First hole....

"You can also access your MobileMe email via any standard email application but not, alas, your contacts. You must have a Mac running Mac OS X to access contacts, calendar, or the photos via a native application. And if you do have a Mac, you gain access to various Mac-only MobileMe services, some of which are pretty compelling."

Umm sorry wrong.  So I have contacts in Outlook, I sync them with MobileMe via the control panel applet....done.  Same for Calendar.  Or I have a Mac and I sync my address book/calendar to mobileMe, then sync them to Outlook on PC.  It works.  So YES YOU CAN get access to your calendar/contact on a PC via Outlook or a web browser, and YOU DONT NEED a Mac.  You are right about the photo stuff there is no native app on the PC side, but then again they never advertised it either.

Second hole....

"so if you're thinking about migrating from, say, Outlook or Google Calendar, you'll need to manually recreate your entire calendar."

Wrong again.  I have Outlook setup with Google Calendar, either via a ical subscription or better yet the free Syncing tool provided by google.  All of my Google calendar info is in Outlook or a .PST file to be exact.  So I create a profile for MobileMe in Outlook.  I then import the .PST file, email, contacts, calendar that has the gmail infor.  I then sync Outlook with mobileme.........migrations complete.  All done use natieve outlook tools or free tools provided by Google, or mobileme.  In fact now that the Live calendar sync tool is here you could do the same with Live Calendar is you wanted to migrate, NO MANUAL INPUT.  I know its Rocket Science and only a Windows Guru would understand how to use the import feature of Outlook.

Third hole.....

"You can only import contacts one at a time using the Web interface, which is the only interface made available to Windows users."

Wrong again, see Microsoft solution for hole #2.

I hope you dont write any Outlook/Exchange tech articles.

Apple totally botched the launch.  My .mac account was down for about 4 hours one day, could not send email from it when I tested.  It was slow the first few days when I tested mobileme.  Jobs confessed they screwed up, which is HUGE for that guy.

Now three weeks later its running faster than .Mac ever did.  I have read that .Mac was maintained at Apple's HQ, and that this service is now run by a hosting company at many locations.

This service, which was 100% Mac until 3 weeks ago opened up a few of the features for the PC.  After the initial bad launch they have delieverd on what the advertised, nothing more, nothing less.  They never said you could use anything but Outlook, or that there was integration with what photo tool on Windows????  (there is no real standard like on OS X).  I saw this for Mac users that had to also use a PC and wanted some limited access while using a PC.  They delivered that.  The delivery was botched for sure.

August 6, 2008 1:57 PM
 

DRWAM said:

Dipsh, Mossy definitely uses the hardware that he evaluates, but to a 99 yr old guy, even a push button land line telephone is miraculous. Yeh, I know that I should respect my elders, but you can't keep a good joker from poking fun forever.

August 6, 2008 2:05 PM
 

cesjr said:

""We've got radio silence from Paul on the app store.  Hmmm."

Really?  Where are you reading.  From something Paul posted on July 19 . . .:"

Fair enough, I stand corrected.  Not total radio silence.

However, Paul launches with the Mobileme "in depth" review.  In other words, Paul sets himself up for a huge blast-fest directed at apple.  

As opposed to a similarly in depth review on the 3rd party apps.  I don't think anyone should be surprised much or wonder why.

August 6, 2008 2:38 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

DRWAM

Hmmm. I know that Mossberg is 8 years older than Steve Jobs. Does that mean Jobs is 91?

August 6, 2008 3:02 PM
 

tayme said:

Hey, Snake...you do realize that Paul was corrected on that Control Panel thing don't you? It caused another sh1tstorm on the site about Apple distributing a service hidden in another product. I can't remember the exact specifics, but that control panel thing was pretty unknown by most, if I remember right.

--tayme

August 6, 2008 3:11 PM
 

DRWAM said:

No, he just looks it. My wrists are thicker than his biceps and probably his skinny neck. He oughta eat some meat. It definitely won't kill him. Or at least a big piece of Apple pie:) Did you ever see Bill G eat? He likes some hamburger joint. That's my kinda food. At least I know that he would eat at my barbeque, where as I could never cook for Jobs.

August 6, 2008 3:15 PM
 

Snakedoctor1 said:

Yeah I know he did, but then he drops it out again today on his main page in part one of his review.

He makes the same mistakes in part 2 as well.

"Beyond changing how Outlook works, you could of course also try the export and import route, exporting your contacts using your current service and then importing them with the Web-based interface for MobileMe contacts. Sadly, this is a monotonous affair, as MobileMe Contacts only supports importing vCards, and then only via its Web interface, which means you have to import individual contacts one at a time."

He is dead wrong.  If anyone is going to know how to do this, it should be the owner of the Winsupersite.  Its simple, if you had outlook running with gmail, yahoo, hotmail or whatever, your calendar and contact data is in a .PST file on your PC...as of your last download/sync.  When you setup mobileme with Outlook it creates a new .PST file.  You can from outlook go to File...Import...from a .pst file.  This will import calender data into your calendar, contact data in to your contacts.  Then it will just sync with mobile me and all of that data will be "in the cloud" if you have a iPhone it comes down to it.

The moaning he goes on about mobile me not supporting other Windows calendars is hilarious.  Before Vista, there was no Windows Calendar....none, zip, zero.  So from Windows 3.0 to XP you had to use something else.  Outlook is by far the most popular calender program on Windows.  Office is probably the more pirated software on the planet, so having Office on a PC for the 15 pure Windows users that want to use MobileMe should not be a problem.  I mean if he were to write an app to would support Windows calendars, his #1 priority would be Outlook.   I know from supporting Exchange so long, the first question 99.9% of users that buy smartphones ask is "can I sync my Outlook with this".   Its not "can I sync my mozilla Sunbird calendar with this".

www.winNOTSOsupersite.com  There are some great books on Outlook that cover the basics of importing and exporting.

August 6, 2008 3:34 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

DRWAM

Well, I've been to a few parties with BillG and run into him once in a while around town but I don't tend to watch him eat. (Actually, that sounds more than a little creepy)

I know he did a vegetarian thing for a while in the late 80s as a self-discipline test and stopped after he proved to himself that he could.

I wonder which burger joint he likes. I know that back when Microsoft was in one building back in the mid-80s, the drive-in burger place next door was a default button on the company speed dial and the "burgermaster structure" in the Windows 1.0 multitasker was named after it.

And, hey, you could cook barbecue for Steve Jobs, he just wouldn't eat it...

August 6, 2008 3:42 PM
 

Dipsh t Admin said:

DRWAM, it seems like we share the same taste in food.  If I'm correct as to where you live, I hope you've been over to White House Subs in AC or some Route 40 rib joints on the way.

And I know that Mossy uses the hardware, but he really doesn't use it for a long time before he writes his review.

August 6, 2008 3:45 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Snake

"Before Vista, there was no Windows Calendar"

You do realize that this is a pretty silly argument? Let's add another data point for comparison...

"Before Vista, there was no Apple iPhone"

Does that mean Apple would be justified in ignoring the iPhone?

There are a LOT more copies of Vista Calendar out there than iPhones and Vista's been out longer.

August 6, 2008 3:49 PM
 

shark47 said:

"And, hey, you could cook barbecue for Steve Jobs, he just wouldn't eat it..."

Is he vegetarian too?

August 6, 2008 4:03 PM
 

DRWAM said:

yep on all above.

Jobs did an interview several years back. The theme was that he despite all of his accomplishments, he was still the same guy [small town?]. Ballmer did an interview for CNET and I was impressed ith his polished demeaner. When they tried to bait him into saying something bad about the competition, he remained dignified and simply said that the said companies made good products, then stated what MS had to offer. He really came accross as a gentlemen. He did the same in either Austria or Germany when some butthead threw eggs at him...and missed! ballmer laughed it off [after ducking] and said 'something like at least it was civil complaint', or something like that. the crowd laughed with him.

August 6, 2008 4:03 PM
 

Snakedoctor1 said:

Mike, your attempt at argument is silly.  Since Vista makes up what 10% of all Windows users...if that, so 10% of Windows users have a native Calendar.

Apple said they were going to support Outlook, the most widely used calendar application in the Windows world, by a huge factor.  Probably the most widely used electronic calendar on all computers period.  There are WAY more copies Offfice/Oulook than there probably ever will be of Vista.  When I used Vista, I did not even think about using its calendar over Outlook for even a nano second.

Would it have been nice for them to support Vista Calendar?  Sure, and they just might down the road, maybe even Sunbird after that.  However by choosing to support Outlook first they have checked off probably 80% of calendar usage on a Windows.

August 6, 2008 4:05 PM
 

shark47 said:

I actually have to agree with snake on this. I don't think Vista Calendar is popular enough for Apple to support it. However, I don't understand the logic behind their weird message when IE users try to login. That's just another example of Apple's arrogance (also demonstrated in its ads). Hey, but its customers like it, so all is well, right? (At least until this hubris comes to bite them back in the ***.)

August 6, 2008 4:31 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Snake

There are more Windows Vista users than there are Mac users but there's a MobileMe Mac client

There are more Windows Vista users than there are iPhone users but there's a MobileMe iPhone client

Seeing how Outlook isn't bundled in Office Home and Student which makes up a lot of the "Consumer" audience that MobileMe targets (It is supposed to be  "Exchange for the rest of us" not "Exchange for people who already have Exchange") that's a big audience they told to pound sand.

And, after all, your argument was that Windows Calendar had only been out since Vista. That's clearly not the problem, is it?

Really, I think we all know that Apple's support of the majority of their iPod and iPhone users (the ones that use Windows) is 2nd rate at best.

This is just another way of Apple saying if you want our stuff you'd better buy only our stuff and giving their usual token support for 95%+ of the world.

Not a great plan for a company that more and more makes their living off selling consumer electronics accessories for Windows.

August 6, 2008 4:33 PM
 

DRWAM said:

Mike, what's the cost of each, MoMe vs Office with Outlook?

August 6, 2008 6:30 PM
 

Snakedoctor1 said:

Mike you win.  Your logic KungFu is better than mine.  Maybe I should move to Seatle work for MS so I can twist this stuff like can???

So I guess for those people that

A. Use Vista

B. Cant afford Outlook, and use that fabulous Vista calendar.

C. Can afford a subscription to MobileMe

D. Can afford an iPhone (dont know what this has to do with MobileMe sycing with other than Outlook on windows but hey you brought it in here...somehow)

well they should just quit using MobileMe and be a true American and go on the Internet, write a blog and complain!  All 3 of them that fit that list.

.Mac was a 100% Mac only product until 3 weeks ago.  Now its a 99.9% Mac only product or use by Macs only.  The change to MobileMe went very badly for a few weeks, Apple apologized, gave everyone a free month of service, and now that service is running better than .Mac ever did.  They also promised some features for PC users, outligned those features to include syncing with Outlook...not Vista calendar, or any other calendar and have delivered that.  If Paul does not like that then there are other options some of them more expensive....

join.msn.com/.../overview, and it only works on a Windows PC, maybe even Vista....maybe.

But hey your KungFu is better than mine, and..........UNIX is the cause of all internet SPAM, or so a Microsoft employee once told me.

Peace!!!

August 6, 2008 6:48 PM
 

subzerohitman721 said:

Steve Jobs "It was a mistake to launch MobileMe at the same time as iPhone 3G, iPhone 2.0 software and the App Store.  We all had more than enough to do, and MobileMe could have been delayed without consequence."

Can we say, DUH! This was obvious to anyone that launching that many products and services at the same time was foolish. In my mind, I have to ask what the hell is going on in the mind of Steve Jobs? This was an tranwreck and perhaps someone was asleep at the helm?

They should have launched the App Store first as they did. Then perhaps 30 days later, launch the iPhone 3G and iPhone 2.0 software. As for Mobile Me, its probably needs another year of real beta testing to iron out the kinks.

August 6, 2008 9:44 PM
 

Dipsh t Admin said:

sub, you can't have the App Store without the 2.0 software, and it would be stupid to launch that before the 3G release, so you really have to release all three of those at the same time.  However, in retrospect, the MobileMe launch was a bad decision.

If this was MS, they would have just delayed it.  They are often maligned for that, but I don't think anyone could argue that delaying the release would have been the right choice for Apple.

August 6, 2008 11:10 PM
 

lotsamystuff said:

"....and prefixing the word "Snow" to the name of it, thereby justifying the expense to the customer."

Do you know something about pricing of the as-yet-unnanounced-or-introduced OS that the rest of us don't?

August 7, 2008 8:11 AM
 

shark47 said:

"Do you know something about pricing of the as-yet-unnanounced-or-introduced OS that the rest of us don't?"

Do you really have to respond to every comment from Wae (and vice-versa)?

August 7, 2008 9:21 AM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

DRWAM

Mobile Me is $100/year for 20GB or $150 for a "Family Pack" that adds 4 secondary accounts that have email and 5GB storage each. Extra storage is $50/year for each 20GB.

(rounded to avoid all the silly 9s)

Outlook 2007 itself is about $90 street price

Office Standard 2007 (the cheapest version of the suite that includes Outlook) is about $190 for an upgrade and $320 for full package. (again, street prices)

August 7, 2008 12:38 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Snake

"Mike you win."

No. Fact won. But thanks either way.

" Your logic KungFu is better than mine."

Not Kung Fu, just logic.

" Maybe I should move to Seatle work for MS so I can twist this stuff like can???"

I'd advise applying first before moving. MS will pay moving expenses if you get the job.

August 7, 2008 12:41 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Lotsa,

Let's look at history. (I'm rounding to the dollar and skipping the silly $xx9 pricing)

Cost to upgrade System 9 to OS X 10.0 - $130

Cost to upgrade OS X 10.0 to OS X 10.1 - $0

Cost to upgrade OS X 10.1 to OS X 10.2 - $130

Cost to upgrade OS X 10.2 to OS X 10.3 - $130

Cost to upgrade OS X 10.3 to OS X 10.4 - $130

Cost to upgrade OS X 10.4 to OS X 10.5 - $130

There is a pattern here.

Either we'll see:

Cost to upgrade OS X 10.5 to OS X 10.6 - $130

or Apple will be saying that 10.5 was as much of a disaster as 10.0 was and offer free upgrades as an apology to users who bought it.

Now, the latter isn't impossible but I think we'd all agree that it's pretty seriously unlikely since while 10.5 has some problems, it's certainly not another 10.0.

August 7, 2008 12:50 PM
 

johnpapola said:

"But while I suspect Apple will clean up MobileMe eventually, I have to say, given past experiences with the iPhone sync stuff on the PC, they’re never really going to get this right"

Hmmm... this seems like a pretty unreasonable claim to me.  iTunes has 100% cross-platform parity.  It's also one of the largest and most successful hybrid cloud services... and it's their biggest effort in the space.

MobileMe is now under the supervision of the team that runs iTunes.  Now that can add up to "they're NEVER get it right" is beyond me and beyond all reasonable, objective discussion.  It's just trying to be controversial.

For anyone interested in reading about ACTUAL REALITY regarding where Apple's headed and what the re-org means... read this:

chuqui.typepad.com/.../mobileme-proble.html

Paul doesn't have the slightest clue what he's talking about.  ZERO.  He gives MS teams the benefit of the doubt because he knows the people.  He should recognize his deficiency here and temper his proclamations accordingly.

August 7, 2008 2:11 PM
 

johnpapola said:

@Mike,

"Either we'll see:

Cost to upgrade OS X 10.5 to OS X 10.6 - $130

or Apple will be saying that 10.5 was as much of a disaster as 10.0 was and offer free upgrades as an apology to users who bought it."

Honestly, sir, what's the matter with you?  Why is every thread an indictment of all things Apple?  And obviously, according to your logic here, Windows XP SP2 is proof that Windows XP was "a disaster" and SP3 I suppose is an indictment that SP2 "is a disaster".

Or... an honest and reasonable person would simply say that software is a long, ever-evolution march of progress that's limited by time, power and resources.  New version are improvements on old version.  But the judgement of any particular version of software is in how well it delivers what it set out to do.  Leopard delivers.  Vista delivers.  Snow Leopard will be even better. Windows 7 will be even better.

Your rhetoric is just hackery.  Sorry.

August 7, 2008 2:15 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

John,

That was directed at lotsa for chastising a poster for daring to suggest that Apple would charge for the upgrade from 10.5 to 10.6 when history shows that they likely will and will charge about $130 for it. Perhaps you should understand the context of messages directed toward other people before juming into the middle with no sense of what was said.

I notice you didn't criticize that attack, though.

August 7, 2008 2:33 PM
 

Snakedoctor1 said:

www.macworld.com/.../googleapps.html

Where is the outrage!!!! :)

August 7, 2008 2:35 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Snake

Actually, it's gotten a lot of coverage. Five things are mitigating the outrage.

1) They were only down for 15 hours total

2) Most of that 15 hours was in the middle of the night for their largest audience

3) They hadn't just brought huge attention to themselves. (Attention brought goes both ways)

4) GMail still isn't a critical mail system for most people using it.

5) Google is almost as immune to criticism as Apple and is still (despite it tarnishing this past year) a media darling. This last likely due to press realizing that calling somebody "The New Microsoft" is a lot sexier copy than reporting on "The Actual Microsoft".

That a company that's pushing hard for a pure cloud and that has invested billions in server farms and geodistribution is, however, a big deal.

It IS interesting that while GoogleApps and GMail had problems, their only successful product (text advertising and its related search services) ran fine. It could just be their investment in back end really has only gone to what brings in money.

August 7, 2008 2:50 PM
 

johnpapola said:

@Mike,

Didn't see that.  If Apple doesn't have a reasonable amount of new user features, I think charging $130 for it will be hard to swallow for most people.

I was, perhaps incorrectly, assuming that you were raising that classic canard that Apple's paid releases are the equivolent of Windows service packs.  The snow leopard release seems to be a pretty unique situation in that they are explicitly targeting major underpinnings changes.  These changes do coincide with major hardware shifts between multiprocessor expansion and now the upcoming larabee platform... so it's something that needs to happen.  But it's not any indication of mistakes or shortcomings of Leopard, the way 10.1 was truly crucial for even some basic functionality and usable speed over  10.0.

But you did qualify that 10.5 is no 10.0 so that's alright.  My bad I guess.

@Snake...

great link.  I have strong doubts we'll see outrage from mr. thurrott on that one.

August 7, 2008 2:58 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

John,

Seeing how 10.0 was so bad that Apple Software couldn't convince Apple Hardware so ship it as the default OS on their computers really says a lot about how dreadful that release actually was and what it takes for Apple to offer a point release as a free upgrade.

August 7, 2008 3:19 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

John,

Seeing that Paul is one of GMail's biggest advocates, I'd be surprised if the 15 hour outage doesn't get some mention.

Of course, since it occurred between 6PM and 9AM in Ireland (If I've got my time zones right), he might not have seen it.

August 7, 2008 3:23 PM
 

Snakedoctor1 said:

@johnpapola $130 is nothing I will pay it, or pay for the family pack with out a thought.  If it were free that would be nice.  Leopard has been problem free for me on the two Macs in my house.  Of course I have intel Macs and I wiped the drive on both of them to install it.  Also I checked my software to make sure it was compatible with the Leopard before running it.  

If Vista had been written to support both PowerPC and Intel CPU's and Vista R2 was coming out that ripped out the PowerPC code, which in turn made it lighter and just overall more efficient then Mike an Weehorn would drooling all over it and professing like it was the coming of the next savior.  They would be complaining that the could not pre-order yet.  They would have a site setup for it, and camp out in front of Bestbuy the night before, like good little Micronots.  On a

Serious note, if I used Vista and they were did what I just said they did, dropped the Power PC code made it leaner, I would buy it with out a doubt, especially if it was only $130.

@Mike yeah I know Google has outages, and they hide behind the "beta" status.  I have had gmail for at least 2 years or more and they have had many short term outages.  Just as many as .Mac/MobileMe if not more.  They never say anything about it.  The difference between Google and MobileMe is.....

"More than 500,000 businesses and universities with about 10 million active users have signed up for the free and fee-based versions of Google Apps."

MobileMe is a consumer product, and not some company is depending upon it.

What I find ironic in all of Paul's MobileMe bashing is that MS has had huge outages and he does not say much if anything about them.  I mean I have a free Arcade game called "Undertow" or whatever that I got from MS in February, because Xbox Live was down for 3 weeks...and I mean down hard from December 25 into late Jan.  

gamerscoreblog.com/.../UndertowFreeofCharge.aspx

The whole live system was down and that is what really crashed Xbox Live, but my MSN messenger lost connectivity daily during that time, and I finally stopped using my hotmail account then because is was so flakey.

Maybe Apple should have ported  Undertow as a iPhone/iTouch game and given it out on the app store for free instead of the free month of service:)

Maybe Paul really likes Undertow?????

August 7, 2008 3:36 PM
 

johnpapola said:

@Snake,

Oh I'll happily pay $199 for a family pack to make all 4 of my macs run faster.  Especially my 8-core mac pro.  We pay for ram upgrades.  What makes a performance tuning OS upgrade based on new software technology any different?  Only someone that devalues software would say it's worth nothing.

But I do think the average consumer won't be as receptive to a release that lacks major new features.

August 7, 2008 4:02 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

John,

Actually when XBox Live had their outages it did NOT take down the entire Live system. I was happily using quite a few Live services and had no problems. Maybe you had a regional problem but it was not system wide.

As for the If Vista had supported PowerPC and Intel and Microsoft dropped one and that made it lighter... stuff

The Windows NT family has supported:

Intel x86

DEC Alpha 32-bit (and 64-bit at RC when DEC killed the platform)

MIPS R3000 and R4000

PowerPC PReP and CHRP platforms (From IBM, Apple and Motorola)

National Semiconductor (and later Intergraph) Clipper

SUN SPARC

Intel/HP Itanium

AMD/Intel x64.

None of these made the platform heavier since Microsoft didn't include all versions on the same CD set.

When Microsoft dropped support for any of those chipsets (always when the hardware companies killed their programs) everyone I knew took it as a loss for flexibility in the industry.

Remember that Microsoft is often criticized lately for maintaining too much backward compatibility. Killing off support for a core platform that was sold only 2-3 years earlier is pretty seriously unthinkable in the Microsoft culture.

Frankly, if I bought a PowerMac G5 in mid 2006, I'd be seriously pissed and certainly not thinking "Gee, how great of Apple to 'lighten the platform'. I can't wait to go out and replace my computer and all my software!"

August 7, 2008 4:02 PM
 

johnpapola said:

Oh... and I can imagine the next generation of Apple's pro-apps being targeted for Snow Leopard and it's combination of multi-thread power, GPU-engine good stuff and new QuickTime architecture.  But we're way off topic here.

August 7, 2008 4:03 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

John,

and I can imagine a Mac tablet and a new 12" MacBook and a Mac mainstream tower and lots of other items that Mac pundits were absolutely certain would be out at the next WWDC or the next MacWorld.

Of course, it would be less fun if Apple actually told the rest of the industry what their roadmap was but hurting Steve Jobs' keynotes at only the benefit of helping all Apple's partners is a cost they're not willing to take.

August 7, 2008 4:13 PM
 

Snakedoctor1 said:

"Of course, it would be less fun if Apple actually told the rest of the industry what their roadmap was but hurting Steve Jobs' keynotes at only the benefit of helping all Apple's partners is a cost they're not willing to take."

You see Mike its these kinds of lame @$$ comments that hurts your street cred brother.

Obviously is has not hurt Apple the way they hold things back.  There is something to be said for "mystique".  It drives the press/hype which in turn gives Apple products this allure, real or not, that drives sales.  

I mean when was the last time Microsoft did that.  Besides tech-ed, there is no "buzz" about Microsoft or its product launches...none.  I went to the launch of 2008 server, in Chicago and it was a bore fest.   I remember back in the day it used to be so much fun to go to MS events, the Exchange conventions were great back in 98/99 time frame.  Man I am getting old.

Joe User, sees MS as Ford, and Apple as BMW.  Real or not this is the general impression you get.  Take for example the Macbook Air commercials with the guy pulling it out of the envelope, to that tune by Yael Naim, its a catchy tune with the visual of that slim notebook.  It works even though much of its BS.  MS just does not have ANYTHING like that.  Instead MS would rather bore you with a long list of features.

August 7, 2008 5:13 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Snake

Tell that to Adobe who is SERIOUSLY pissed that they weren't given advance notice on the API deletions that were "announced" at the last minute.

It's all well and good to maximize your hype but that costs you partners who often need a year's warning or more to update their products.

Think of it more as Microsoft is Ford and Apple is a kit car maker. No company would actually risk having any dependancies on Apple.

Can you imagine any company that buys cars saying, "We'll buy 1,000 of your cars for our fleet next year. We don't need to know what it'll be. Just surprise us and give us whatever you feel like rolling out"

That's not how BMW does business (or Ford). That's not even up to a used Yugo.

Really, how many $100M sales lost is feeding Steve's ego worth to them? One? Twenty?

How many years of not having enough market share to get the big apps written for your platform is worth feeding Steve's ego worth to you?

August 7, 2008 5:38 PM
 

RunTimeError said:

Mike, you really need to settle down man. Drink some decaf and step away from the keyboard for awhile.

August 7, 2008 5:43 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Decaf? NEVER!

August 7, 2008 5:52 PM
 

DRWAM said:

Mike, I second the ban on decaf! Don't buy Kona from Gevallia either as it sucks.

Any way, I was getting confused about Exchange vs MoME instead of  Outlook vs MoME. My apologies for making you work my mistake. Our group chair [although we are equal partners] was looking at my iPhone as it's use with Exchange. I works great and the screen is large. he has Verizon [but I have a feeling that I'm payin g for that account, if you know what I mean. Does any one know of an Exchange compatible phone with a large screen like the iPhone, especially from Verizon? (but I'm sure he would switch to ATT in a minute. and that I will pay for that as well:) I just want to give him options. My buddies BB Curve is not giving him the calender sync, and IT did not help him. I told him to call RIM. You see, I love the guy like an uncle, but I have a hard time picturing him whipping out his iPhone at multimillion dollar negotiation.

Thanks,

Doc

August 7, 2008 6:10 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

DRWAM

Not a problem. A little extra research means a little extra knowledge.

As for Exchange pricing, that depends on a LOT of factors like:

Are you using your own server vs a hosting company?

How many users?

Do Small Business Server or Essential Business Server make more sense than just Exchange? (similar to buying Word vs buying Office)

August 7, 2008 6:25 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Snake

Or to put it more simply why you have to keep your partners in the loop as to your future plans years ahead even if it hurts your dog and pony show, Apple's secrecy cost them parity with Windows Vista in the Photoshop world - an area where Apple used to dominate.

To quote Adobe's FAQ on why Photoshop CS4 will be offered in 32-bit and 64-bit on Windows but only 32-bit on OS X:

Q: At Photoshop World, Adobe announced the release of Adobe Photoshop Lightroom® 2.0 beta with support for native 64-bit processing. What are Adobe’s plans for 64-bit native support in Photoshop itself?

A: Adobe plans to get 64-bit versions of Photoshop software released to customers as soon as possible. Photoshop for Microsoft® Windows® will run 64-bit-native with the next version release. We’ll need additional time to complete our Macintosh® 64-bit version, which is now planned for a future release. This additional time is a result of a change to Apple’s platform strategy, which now requires a migration from Carbon technology to Cocoa technology in order for an application to run 64-bit native.

Q: Why didn’t Adobe move to Cocoa previously so they’d be ready for this?

A: Until June 2007, Apple planned to enable Carbon-based applications to run 64-bit native. Moving to Cocoa is a significant task, so we chose to focus engineering resources on user-visible features rather than switching to Cocoa. Now that Apple has shifted their strategy to make Cocoa a requirement for 64-bit support we have adjusted our plans accordingly.

August 7, 2008 6:37 PM
 

shark47 said:

"Mike, I second the ban on decaf! Don't buy Kona from Gevallia either as it sucks."

Not that anyone was asking, but I like Kenyan AA. :-)

August 7, 2008 6:49 PM
 

Snakedoctor1 said:

@Mike, and then reality hits your logic smack in the face.  The 64bit version on Windows only for a year at most, will amount to nothing in terms of users switching.

If CS4 was 100X better than CS3, and 100X faster on 64bit than 32bit, and the OS X version was practically unusable then maybe your point would be somewhat valid.

However in reality, the move to CS4 by Windows and OS X users will be slow.  CS3 works great on both platforms.  CS4 is better and probably 50% will upgrade "over time".  In that "over time" period Adobe will release a 64bit version for OSX and that 10% advantage that the Windows version had over OS X, used by 10% of photoshop power users will be negated.

To think that a Mac photoshop user will drop their entire platform and move to Vista for a average of a 10% speed bump in one app is.........well stupid at best.

Another consideration that you did not think about with your Microsoft thinking cap on is the fact that a 64bit or 32bit version will run on Leopard.  Point being that a Windows user will have to reload their entire OS to gain the benefits of 64bit CS4 if they are running 32 bit Windows like 98% of windows users are.   A windows users now running 32bit CS3 can upgrade to CS4 32bit and not reload their OS and all of their apps, and for an average photo shop user it would not be worth the OS reload for one feature.

So I am sure Adobe is irked, but they will happily make the move.  Especially with MS trying to JAM silverlight down everyone's throat.

August 7, 2008 7:21 PM
 

DRWAM said:

Thanks Mike, forget about that question as I was just thinking wrong. We have an Exchange server, but I confused Outlook to an Exchange server. Right now, I'am just wondering what phone would be best for our group leader who's 71 yrs young, and has an old Moto Q, but the darn screen is so small that he likes the iPhone screen size and the size of the phone. Like me, he's only interested in using all of Exchange's functions.

August 7, 2008 8:16 PM
 

mikegalos@msn.com said:

Snake

Wow. That's the most amazing case of denial I've ever seen.

August 7, 2008 8:27 PM
 

Jonathan Hensley | The Blog » Quick Links for Aug 7th said:

Pingback from  Jonathan Hensley | The Blog    &raquo; Quick Links for Aug 7th

August 7, 2008 8:35 PM
 

johnpapola said:

I can't help but deliver a long one here....

@Mike,

Apple's current pro-apps are all very well multi-threaded and GPU-accelerated.  Apple has already announced that snow leopard will be focused on multithreading, GPU-powered computing and a new QuickTime engine, which are base of these apps.  It's more than mac pundit prognosticating to expect the pro-apps to get a snow-leopard powered boost.  It's certainly not the same things as wishing for any and every product variation despite the small or shrinking nature of said market (tablets, consumer PC mini-towers, etc).  A tiny sub-notebook would be cool though.

You're a hardcore Microsoft lover.  I get that.  That's fine.  I gather you may actually live in Remond.  Wonderful.  So you're just so engulfed in the roadmap mindset. But just because it's bible truth in Redmond doesn't mean it's bible truth period.  One man's "roadmap" is another man's undelivered promises and vaporware.  

If anything, Vista's launch demonstrates how pointless Microsoft's roadmaps really are for a large portion of the market.  It sure didn't seem to help hardware or software devs to be ready on day one of the launch.  And many of the most touted features during the roadmap stage were either dropped (winfs), largely ignored (readyboost) or apparently DOA and not worth the hype (support for hybrid drives/robson).  Devs still seem to be largely ignoring WPF almost two years later.  

So I'd rather not know whats coming and then, when it's announced with fanfare to everyone, it actually ships in the state it's been demonstrated.  The Microsoft roadmaps are a demand of the enterprise that frankly just sucks.  Roadmaps ultimate serve one purpose: to tip off your competitors or, for Microsoft, to chill the market by telling customers to wait for the MS solution instead of going with already available solutions.  

Notice how Windows 7 isn't getting tons of deep tech discussion from Redmond?  They may be coming around to the Apple approach.  Demonstrate what you know you can ship.

As for adobe... Apple did pull the rug out from under them.  That sucks.  And mac users will be missing out on one generation of 64bit creative suite apps.  But it's at least half their fault for not adopting Cocoa despite years and years of being pushed to do so by Apple.  Of course, Microsoft pulled the rug out from under all the Mira hardware partners... and the playsforsure partners (at least in terms of destroying that market through bifucation with Zune).  Sometimes, you change course and partners get burned.  It happens.  

Apple may have had every intention of finishing 64bit carbon and then decided that they would rather take the bullet now than carry along two dev environments into the 64bit era.  They may have felt that this was the only way to get Adobe off their ass.  And guess what?  It worked.  Adobe is moving all their apps to Cocoa now. They were going to stick with carbon and now they're moving to cocoa.  Depreciating carbon frees Apple's team to continue refining and improving cocoa without regard for carbon parity or legacy.  The 64bit transition is a natural place to change this.  Notice that Lightroom is cocoa and 64bit on the mac.  That's the future for adobe apps and it's a longterm gain for the mac platform.

You view this all as some Steve ego thing, but that's just weird personal/micro-softie bias.  Apple is not nearly as ideological as you guys like to claim.  It just helps support your worldview to repeat it.  The hype factor is real and worth hundreds of million in free publicity.  It's the kind of publicity Microsoft would love to harness in their effort to salvage the Vista brand name.  

"How many years of not having enough market share to get the big apps written for your platform is worth feeding Steve's ego worth to you?"

What big apps are missing for the markets Apple targets?  Do consumers care about AutoCAD?  Nope. I've switched over 30 people to the mac and not one has lamented a lack of software.

And since you've been so hot on Adobe here... might I remind you that they just ported Premiere Pro, Soundbooth, Encore DVD, and audition to the Mac for the first time. There were Windows-only apps prior.  The mac third party market is GROWING, no matter how many times you close your eyes, plug your ears and declare the opposite.  I don't think you have any idea what going on in Mac development.

Why would developers stick through the transition to OSX and then again through the transition to Intel?  Because for those that develop on the Mac, including Microsoft and Adobe, it's simply a market too profitable and important to ignore.

I'm sorry Mike, but your analysis of the mac platform just sounds like a Microsoft-shill that is utterly ignorant of the market.  You paint a picture of a dwindling developer community and that is just so obviously and demonstrably wrong.  I think you're wishing Apple away in order to be proven right and feel like you win.  That's a real shame and it's not rational.

August 7, 2008 9:17 PM
 

shark47 said:

"You're a hardcore Microsoft lover."

"Devs still seem to be largely ignoring WPF almost two years later."

And once again I refer you to The Tipping Point.

"Notice how Windows 7 isn't getting tons of deep tech discussion from Redmond?  They may be coming around to the Apple approach.  Demonstrate what you know you can ship."

Oooooh. Like the secret features in Leopard? Apple got away with that, frankly. Of course, Mossy and co. were too busy worshipping Steve Jobs to notice.

Microsoft wants people to focus on Vista, by the way. That's one of the reasons they're quiet about Windows 7. And Microsoft cannot afford to get too Apple like. Keeping partners in the dark may work for Apple, but it will definitely not work with Windows.

"Apple is not nearly as ideological as you guys like to claim."

It's actually worse? Really. Die hard fanatics ignore flaws. And that's not just restricted to technology. Consider this: both McCain's and Obama's supporters refuse to believe that their candidate actually flip flops.

"The mac third party market is GROWING, no matter how many times you close your eyes, plug your ears and declare the opposite.  I don't think you have any idea what going on in Mac development."

It is growing. By the way, here's an interesting article: blogs.zdnet.com/carroll

"I think you're wishing Apple away in order to be proven right and feel like you win.  That's a real shame and it's not rational."

I don't know what the argument is about anyway. Apple is a highly successful company that's good at what it does. And the arrogance is just a part of the culture at Apple. It's one of the things that makes the company popular among the younger generation.

August 7, 2008 9:56 PM
 

Snakedoctor1 said:

@Mike read it your self genius, straight from the horses mouth.

blogs.adobe.com/.../photoshop_lr_64.html

"In our testing, when an app isn't using a large data set (one that would otherwise require memory swapping), the speedup due to running in 64-bit mode is around 8-12%."

"when processing very large files on a suitably equipped machine, Photoshop x64 realizes some big performance gains. (For example, opening a 3.75 gigapixel image on a 4-core machine with 32GB RAM is about 10x faster.)"

So far I have never seen anyone use more than 8gig in a workstation class PC.  I am sure they are out there pushing 12 maybe 16gigs of RAM, but 32gig...yeah that like .01% of Photoshop users.  

Like I said before, NOT ONE Mac/Photoshop user will switch to Vista 64 to just to get one feature out of C4, just one, because they get the rest 32bit version.  Hell C3,native Intel, has not been out long on OS X, most photoshop users wont upgrade for a year or two, Photoshop is not cheap.

But hey brother I will be around so I will eat some crow if we see mass defection to Vista for Mac/Photoshop users.  Now until that happens I suggest you put down the crack pipe, and join the rest of us outside in the real world.

August 7, 2008 10:11 PM
 

Snakedoctor1 said:

August 7, 2008 10:21 PM
 

shark47 said:

"Most Windows applications—from both major software companies and minor ones alike—are ugly, poorly-thought-out, clunky pieces of crap. While there are a few artisan developers for Windows, most Windows devs just don't care. "

To some extent it is true. Apple has a smaller and a very rabid user base. Most people who develop applications for Apple are definitely excited about it. Same with Linux. I don't know about the quality of the applications on either platform, though.

August 7, 2008 10:37 PM
 

Dipsh t Admin said:

"Most Windows applications—from both major software companies and minor ones alike—are ugly, poorly-thought-out, clunky pieces of crap. While there are a few artisan developers for Windows, most Windows devs just don't care. "

Who said that?  Was that in one of the linked articles?  I know there are some out there like that, but most is not the operative word.  I will say that most of the poorly designed apps come from smaller software houses making very specific software where it isn't about the interface, but rather about the functionality.  If anyone has actually used ADI Time, well, it doesn't get much worse than that interface.  However, typical consumer marketed software is fine.

August 8, 2008 7:40 AM
 

johnpapola said:

On third party software,

I think the big thing that differentiates Mac third party SW from Windows is that Apple's first party apps provide leadership that the Mac community follows.  I've read that Interface Builder does a lot to help facilitate this UI continuity in ways that the Windows dev tools do not (though that may be wrong).  But clearly, Mac apps feel more uniform, and uniformly good as a result.  They also seem to rapidly adopt Apple's latest themes and UI technologies like core animation.  Other things like the pervasive and consistent function of drag-and-drop also strengthens the mac software experience.

Consistency begets discoverability.

The sheer divergence of look and feel among Microsoft's own applications even within the built-in Vista apps makes for no clear place for a Windows developer to start.  Hence the joke of Paul's "Firefox needs to look more native" rants in prior threads.  There barely is a "native" look.

Still, when I was a windows user, I generally preferred Microsoft's apps just because they felt more "native".  So many third party solutions on Windows roll in hideous and extraneous chrome and themes.  

A classic example of the two worlds was Easy CD Creator on Windows vs. Toast on the Mac.  The latter was modeled after two stacked Windows Explorer windows and was generally a terrible interface.  Toast, from the same company, was simply awesome.  it assumed you'd use the finder as the source and drag and drop into the apps as a destination, whereas Easy CD creator needlessly reproduced file browsing that the OS already had.  Why would the same dev has such a terrible Windows app and a great mac app for doing the same basic thing?

The other issue is, believe it or not, the benefits of having a one-button mouse as a target.  This forces mac apps to keep crucial features out of being exclusively context-menu driven.  That is a terrible mistake in many windows apps, which require right clicking to discover key functionality.  On the mac, context menus feel more like a shortcut for powerusers and less like crucial UI elements... and that's a good thing.

Office 2007 is actually some of the nicest UI problem solving I've seen in many ways, so Apple certainly doesn't have a monopoly on good interface (obviously).

As I hope you can see, this isn't a rant against Windows.  Just a collection of observations.

August 8, 2008 10:52 AM
 

gorath said:

@johnpopola

i find your your comments regarding the implementation of one button mice and hidden UI features interesting.

It is a very good point, and one which had never crossed my mind before.

The only thing I'd say against it is that for the most part (at least), Windows apps tend to only offer menu items on the right click, to save on moving the mouse, so I don't think it's as bad as you make out.

But still, an interesting take on it.

August 8, 2008 1:41 PM
 

johnpapola said:

@Gorath,

Thanks.  This has actually always been one of the defining philosophies behind the one-button mouse approach.  One button wasn't about being aimed at the stupid.  It was about promoting UI discoverability.  It's a bit paternalistic, but the end results do seem to prove it as effective.

Sure, good Windows apps should have discoverability front and center regardless.  And obviously great Windows apps do exist.  But sometimes putting up some barriers force you to act.  In my business, we call these "creative challenges".  It's usually a pejorative for bad compromises in the concept that we are expected to fix in execution.  But in this case, one-button mice are a "creative challenge" that promotes better app design.

August 8, 2008 3:03 PM
 

gorath said:

Johnpapola...

I definitely see the reasoning behind it. I guess I've been using these things so long it's hard to remember being a first time user!

However, I also can't deny the advantages of multi-button mice, especially when having to perform similar, repetitive tasks.

For example, when editing audio, I always have a right click option to do a quick gain change, or similar. Thes things shouldn't be overlooked either.

Of course, even a mac has right-click context menus these days on most apps, if you just plug in a multi-button mouse - but that shouldn't negate a better app design at it's core, as you say.

August 8, 2008 6:39 PM
 

johnpapola said:

Oh, I couldn't like without two buttons and a scroll wheel.  And Microsoft has always made the best mice.

But now you know the real answer to that long-running mac criticism of "one button mouse".  It's great to see another reasonable user on this site.  I'm happy that you guys appear to outnumber the hardcore zealots.

August 8, 2008 7:03 PM
 

gorath said:

Two buttons and a scrollwheel? is that it?

I can't live without a mouse that resembles a hedgehog, with more buttons than I have fingers and toes, a dedicated hardware controller, a jog wheel, a fader expansion, a keyboard with about 400 million customizable "hot-keys" etc etc etc haha!

Oh and a touchscreen!

just kidding!

August 8, 2008 7:20 PM
 

johnpapola said:

Another link for those really interested in what Apple will do with mobileme.

chuqui.typepad.com/.../followup-on-mob.html

Paul's "They'll never fix it" is just straight up nonsense compounded by ignorance.

August 8, 2008 10:02 PM
 

Macbook Air Problem ♦ Apple MacBook and MacBook Pro News said:

[...] Snakedoctor1 made an excellent post today on their site [...]...

October 17, 2008 3:19 PM
Acceptable Use Policy

About pthurrott

Paul Thurrott is the guy behind the SuperSite for Windows. Way behind. :)
Windows IT Pro |  Subscribe |  Register |  FAQ for Windows |  Media Kit |  WinInfo News |  Europe Edition |  About Us |  Contact Us/Customer Service |  Affiliates/Licensing
SQL Server Magazine |  Office & SharePoint Pro |  WinDevPro |  asp.netPRO |  IT Library |  Technology Resource Directory |  ITTV |  IT Job Hound

© 2010 Penton Media, Inc.     Terms of Use | Privacy Statement | Reprints and Licensing