Service: Paul Thurrot

Return: Roughly Drafted

Point: Who gives a shit?



They both make valid points and they don’t have to contradict each other, even if they choose to.

The best point Paul makes: 10.1 to 10.5’s point releases have been way over exaggerated and grossly overpriced. On the flip side, if people are willing to pay for it, more power to them. Search? Been in applications since we started using the term “applications” instead of “programs” so again: who cares?! Time Machine has an innovative UI that looks really cool, but it’s only exposing features that have been in Windows for a while. It’s shadowing rather than backup, but still: who cares? The real question should be, “is the innovative Time Machine UI usable?” and we can’t know that until we try it. It’s like gaming… you can have a kick ass graphical engine but if the game play sucks, the game sucks.


The only thing that stood out from either write up and the keynote itself is why on Earth did Jobs spend all that time talking about Vista if Apple really “doesn’t care about it”? I think it would have been more impressive and effective to have just ignored the obvious rather than bringing it up all the time…

Just my take on it, mind – obviously it did something right because we’re still talking about it!

6 thoughts on “WAH!!!!11”

  1. Of course I do – ya never know when you might have to fry an egg on your lap :)

    FWIW, I’m actually typing this while on a Mac Pro (in Bellevue) – I gotta say that this tower is one fast mo’fo’.

  2. Hi Randy,

    I think you fail to understand the discussion.

    Thurrot was talking about the features demonstated by Apple. He was not reviewing a shipping product, nor did he suggest he was.

    I wrote about his dismissal of Leopard’s features as they were announced by Apple.

    I further presented in this article why his suggestion that there was ‘nothing new about Time Machine’ was wrong. There are clearly at least five things about TM that are very innovative, and bear no similarity with anything in Windows 2003 or XP.

    Vista has little to do with the current arguement, since Thurrott didn’t say TM was copying features in Vista.

    Neither Vista nor Leopard need to ship before anyone can comment on Apple or Microsoft’s anounced plans or beta/developer release previews.

    Next time you approach a subject with such arrogance, try to be aware of the issues involved, and have a point.



  3. Randy,

    I hope you’re giving your man Paul Thurrott equal time with your hard ass lectures. Just let us know how you manage to nail him. He’s a pretty slippery character and doesn’t easily let anyone counter his crap in public.

  4. “Spectacular failure” I’ve never heard Windows XP described so accurately. I couldn’t stop laughing. Although I can’t say Mac OS X is all that much better. But its fun to watch Microsoft and Apple whores slap fight over whose crappy OS sucks less. And even better when they’re fighting over whose UNRELEASED OS sucks less. It warms my soul. Come on Randy, slap him back, I’m dying here! HAHAHAHAHA!

  5. @Obed – Hush there penguin boy! I’ll deal with you later :)

    @Spittle – They’re both acting like asses… it’s not about who is right and who is wrong – they both aren’t arguing well enough to pay attention to either one of them. Which is the exact problem that Dan has.

    @Dan – First off, balls for getting in my face about having a point, because you’ve missed mine. It’s not about who copied what from who or anything much to do with Time Machine, that’s not my point. Not by a long shot.

    My point is that BOTH of you are behaving like children. It’s turned into a pissing contest between OS’s, yet again. It’s a Less Filling – Tastes Great argument and it’s complete fuckin ridiculous. With the conversion of Apple from PPC to Intel and with the release of XP VM’s, it shouldn’t be an either or conversation. It’s not about who invented it first or even whole has the most bling on their backup tool. It’s about which works better for the user and it’s TOO EARLY to know that yet, because, oh, wait, what’s this? It’s NOT released yet. Need an example of what I’m talking about? Consider the original Xbox controller. It worked, it was neat, it was spiffy and it was retooled within 6 months because the public didn’t like it. Same thing can happen with Time Machine. Or Search. Or Safari w/ RSS. If Spotlight was so perfect the first go around, why enhance it? Time will tell.

    FWIW, I’ve agreed with some of what you’ve said. Like the importance of Time Machine being a showcase for Core Animation. But I also agree with Paul because TM is using the same shadowing technology – read: methodology – that 2003 has had for years. So is it “shiny new” innovative because of a new UI or because OSX is getting shadowing for the first time? Either way Windows had a piece of that; you should at least be willing to admit that rather than poo pooing it.

    Even so, who says innovation alone is ALWAYS a GOOD thing or a GOOD product? The Edsel was innovative before it flopped. Innovated all over the road. Yippie, it sucked.

    The problem is that because you are both all “WAH!!11” in your respective posts, you DESTROY your credibility. Emo kids are rarely respected for technological matters.

    Which is how this post got here in the first place.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.