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.

Discuss this Article 81

mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 7, 2008
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.
Snakedoctor1
on Aug 7, 2008
@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. http://gamerscoreblog.com/team/archive/2008/01/18/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?????
johnpapola
on Aug 7, 2008
@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.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 7, 2008
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!"
johnpapola
on Aug 7, 2008
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.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 7, 2008
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.
Snakedoctor1
on Aug 7, 2008
"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.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 7, 2008
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?
RunTimeError
on Aug 7, 2008
Mike, you really need to settle down man. Drink some decaf and step away from the keyboard for awhile.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 7, 2008
Decaf? NEVER!
DRWAM
on Aug 7, 2008
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
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 7, 2008
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)
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 7, 2008
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.
shark47
on Aug 7, 2008
"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. :-)
Snakedoctor1
on Aug 7, 2008
@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.
DRWAM
on Aug 7, 2008
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.
mikegalos@msn.com
on Aug 7, 2008
Snake Wow. That's the most amazing case of denial I've ever seen.
johnpapola
on Aug 7, 2008
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.
shark47
on Aug 7, 2008
"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: http://blogs.zdnet.com/carroll/?p=1864 "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.
Snakedoctor1
on Aug 7, 2008
@Mike read it your self genius, straight from the horses mouth. http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2008/04/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.
Snakedoctor1
on Aug 7, 2008
shark47
on Aug 7, 2008
"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.
Dipsh t Admin
on Aug 8, 2008
"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.
johnpapola
on Aug 8, 2008
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.
gorath
on Aug 8, 2008
@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.
johnpapola
on Aug 8, 2008
@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.
gorath
on Aug 8, 2008
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.
johnpapola
on Aug 8, 2008
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.
gorath
on Aug 8, 2008
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!
johnpapola
on Aug 8, 2008
Another link for those really interested in what Apple will do with mobileme. http://chuqui.typepad.com/chuqui_30/2008/08/followup-on-mob.html Paul's "They'll never fix it" is just straight up nonsense compounded by ignorance.
anonymous
on Oct 17, 2008
[...] Snakedoctor1 made an excellent post today on their site [...]...

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use