Even Macworld is noticing Apple's lies

^ + 1 I doubt Apple would be dumb enough to intentionally hold back some movie release just to piss Paul off !!! It costs them of course and tarnishes their image. It's undoubtly something beyond their control like big majors who are more than happy now to have a big leverage on Apple and make them pay for being the leader in music business and dictating their law. Cf mp3 DRM/pricing accorded to Amazon vs. iTunes. Ditto Movie business now... But what I like about Steve is that he won't back down in the interest of the customer and prefer to offer less content rather than bow to the will of the big majors.

Paul is clearly not a bad person or a crazy. If you listen to the Windows Weekly podcast, you find his tone about Apple to markedly different and his tone with Microsoft to often be quite harsh and sarcastic. Which is why I find his writing to be so unusual. I try to write with the same tone as I speak: passion and verbosity. Paul, on the other hand, seems to use this blog and sometimes his Apple reviews, as a place to vent his frustrations and personal hang-ups with Apple users and Steve Jobs. I'd just like to see Paul allow his intelligence to prevail over his emotions when it comes to Apple. Why do I care about it? Because I like reading Paul's stuff, I love the Mac platform and Apple approach to products and I'm a huge geek.

"What, like not offer user replaceable batteries in the MBA, iPhone and iPods? And charge higher than normal prices to replace said batteries?" Non-replaceable batteries have two advantages in a small device - allows a smaller physical form and the device is more durable (the battery door on my Nokia was always coming off) And where's your proof they charge higher prices? And there are cheaper third-party options usually (just like RAM). "Not allow OS X to be installed on non-Apple hardware?" This is done to provide a better customer experience (better integration, fewer problems and what problems exist are easier to fix because of fewer hardware configurations). Look, you can prefer open hardware, but there are downsides to it and it's nice there is a choice in the market. That's good for consumers. "Not have expandable memory in their iPods and iPhone?" I do think Apple does this one primarily to force people to upgrade. However, as in the case of removable batteries, adding this feature would increase bulk some and create something else to fail. Sealed memory is trouble-free. "Offering DRM laden music for years that can only be used in Apple products?" If you remember, Zune adopted the same approach Why? Because interoperable DRM (Playsforsure) was a nightmare - it never worked. Also, the record companies forced DRM on Apple. They never wanted it and are trying to get it removed.

To say that not allowing OSX on non apple hardware is promoting user experience and choice is as laughable as it can get.. I think why apple does it is to force consumers buy apple hardware if they want OSX. Maybe they fear that everyone will buy OSX and install it on their PCs otherwise.. In what way this allows choice, beats me! ;-)

More than half of the features of Leopard did not make it into the final version. Did Apple pony up and say anything about it? No. Microsoft was open about their problems and changes to Vista. Look at the comments about the iTunes movie rentals and closed captioning? Again, the silent treatment and spin from Apple. It seems pretty clear that Jobs bashes and spins at Microsoft about everything to Apple's advantage. Microsoft doesn't waste their time with such smear tactics. They promote their agenda without stupid commercials that insults half their consumer base. Even with their campaign against Linux, they told the truth. Thats why Linux doesn't account for much of the PC market. Microsoft is no angel, but its much further away from the devil than Apple is. At least we get functionality over form with PC's and Microsoft. Apple's Macbook Air is perfect example of their flawed and no justification thinking.Not enough ports, no ethernet ports, and a rediculous price point. Most of their machines lack the versatility I get with a much cheaper PC. While Apple does a better job these days, its still lacks the professional touch of being as honest. The idea that a PC was bulletproof to viruses and malware was total baloney from Apple. They have more critical fixes than Vista. At least Microsoft has been proactive at fixing these things in a timely manner. Apple just spins it that nothing is wrong with their machines.

Gee this has to be the longest thread on this blog ever !!!! Paul must be proud !!! Subzero: Your post has to be the most ridicule one of all on this thread !! laughable ! As John said only one thing is missing from Leopard, and still it was never advertised... "Microsoft is no angel, but its much further away from the devil than Apple is" laughable again... Who has the more trials and fines on their back from the 2 ??? The only thing Apple did wrong was to lock the iTunes users on iPods... They even face a lawsuit in Europe for that. They deserve it. But I'm glad that now Amazon has changed the game for music download over here. The critical fixes thing you point has a good reason, and for the same reason linux has more vulnerabilities. They both have open-source kernel. So anybody can put its nose under the hood and find some flaws. It's much harder on Vista. And what counts anyway is not the number of flaws found, because there always are in softs, it's the time spent to fix them. You have to give kudos to MS for making a much more secure OS with Vista but it's still no equivalent still.

Subzero is clearly a know-nothing Apple basher. You know, the people that Paul claims don't exist. He bashes with generalizations and lies, while not backing anything up and then changing the subject. Typical.

I'd be the first one to buy and install OSX on my PC were apple to allow such a combination, just the way Windows can be installed on a mac. I love OSX, but I love my pc more. And I am sure there will be many many like me who have the same opinions. But to buy a new laptop just for OSX, no way! So I stand by my statement that in effect Apple is stifling user choice by locking OSX to apple hardware only.. This is one area in which MS has done good.. Again, since Apple lacks an extensive beta program like MS does, this effectively ensures that whatever new features apple might have proposed and missed in the final version will never be known. Those who say that there was just one feature that failed to make it to the final version of OSX must be the developers of OSX themselves, are you??

kanwa... Regarding feature delivery, the facts are the facts. Apple doesn't demo stuff unless it's gonna be in the product. You call that an excuse, I call that a virtue. MS's early demos are more often intended to scare competitors out of doing something than they are to inform developers. "Well, looks like MS is moving into [insert category], I guess we'll wait for that". "Longhorn's" early demos were done with Macromedia director from what I understand. What's the point? To scare competitors. I would love to see OSX widely licensed as it's clearly superior to Windows in so many ways. Maybe as Apple's revenue continues to diversify there will come a point where they can re-approach licensing. However, the reality of the PC market is that it is often a horrible world of finger-pointing and zero accountability thanks to the decoupling of the hardware and software. "Expandability" has long been a benefit of the PC market, yet doing any kind of modification to a PC instantly renders that change the sole cause of any problems when talking to PC support. Typical HP/DELL support call: "Oh, you upgraded your video card? That's why your DVD-burner is no longer recognized by Easy CD creator. Try calling Roxio or ATI or Microsoft, or frankly anyone but us." Personal example: I bought the digital download of vista for bootcamp directly from microsoft.com (or what appeared to microsoft.com). They offered and "upgrade" and a "full version". I bought the full version, since I didn't have windows. The download was a .exe that required windows be installed. It didn't even create an install disc. How the hell could you sell a "full version" that implicitly requires a previous version by design? So I call MS. They told me that "Digital River" handles the store and it's their problem! Called digital river. They said they only sell the bits, and know nothing about how they work or what they are and that I should call MS. Called MS again. They INSISTED that digital river had the answer. I respectfully let the MS support person know that this was the reason I switched to the mac. Called Digital River. They became frustrated because this was apparently a problem they'd heard alot and were tired of MS blaming them. Digital River gave me a refund. That was 4 hours of my life I'll never get back. An MS support manager called me to follow up. I informed him of the situation and that I thought the download would be a disc image (given that Vista has onerous copy protection built into the core of the OS). He had never heard of such a thing and claimed that digital software retail was "very new". I informed him that I'd been buying mac software as disc images for over 5 years and that they're a simple drag and drop installation from any drive. He was intrigued. So even in the FRIGGIN PURCHASE OF VISTA ITSELF, the PC world points fingers.