MobileMe launch delayed ... Where's the outrage?

Nice. Awesome. Just Awesome

It's the typical Apple freak attitude that the Jobs empire can do no wrong. Hypocrites!

I got in this morning, but not now. This morning it was slow, but not as slow a Vista file copy:) My website, mail (local), gallery all work, just not the webmail. Its sort of like Xbox Live over this last Xmas, you know when all those people got new 360's and new gamesfor Xmas, and it took down Xbox Live for about 4 weeks.

You know what's even funnier.. I was listening to Macbreak Weekly this morning and hearing Leo et al. talking about some of their mac experiencing and regaling each other of stories of kernel panics and OS re-installs with OS X. I just find it hilarious that mac afficionados are so quick to bash MS/Windows yet don't really bother to look in their own back yard to note that things aren't really better.. (Just so we're clear, I love Leo's podcasts and the Twit network. They're great to listen for the 90 minutes I spend in the car each day.)

This is kind of a big deal, especially if you use the thing. I don't think it's worthy of outrage, but it's clearly a bigger deal than the Microsoft site that no one knows about and no one is using not being ready.

John, Paul said in his last sentence that this isn't a big deal. "But seriously folks. This isn't a big deal. Just like the delays in a beta Vista compatibility Web site are not a big deal." And it truly isn't If we were to complain about every web site outage and problem, we wouldn't have time to post here, let alone work or sleep. The only reason he mentioned it, is because of Ina's article posted about MS having the exact same problem. Outrage and wide reporting for the MS issue, not so much here. Paul is not saying he wants there to be outrage, he's just wondering why the double standard. Fair enough question.

I think MS was swift-boated by Ina and company. It part of the grand conspiracy brought to you by the anti MS site www.moveonnothingheretoseewithvista.com Seriously neither is a big deal, each for their own reasons. I am pretty sure no one knew about the Vista upgrade advisor, and even less cared about it. People that want to actually go to Vista on their own, all 8 of them, have went already. Millions of people that bought new PC's and dont have a geek friend to take them back to XP, well they are stuck. The rest that have a choice will never go there. The MobileMe deal, well I thought they said it would be ready on the 11th to use, in fact they sent me an email, its been posted on the .Mac site as well. Its a huge transition, and millions of people want to get to it, so while I can see why it may be getting more attention it should not unless its not working well into the 11th and not working at all. Most of its working now, including sending and receiving email from a @me.com account from Mail or Outlook (I have tested). Neither should be a big deal. MobileMe should be and will be a big deal if it does not come up on the 11th. If the Vista site never comes up, I doubt it will be missed. I mean everyone got over WinFS didn't they?

@mikegalos um it has not hurt them yet, and I would imagine until this realease 95+% of .Mac users were on a Mac. Besides I just read that IE is now down to 73% market share..... http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=0 Add to that IE will work most of it.

Well It is a BIG deal when you use .Mac for your website. I have a few friends that I warn them about using a .Mac as the main server for their website not it is down.

@dipsht, Oh I know Paul doesn't think it's a big deal. And I do think it SUCKS that .mac webmail access was offline all day (so much for me checking my personal mail at work today with my iphone fried). My question was more of a philosophical one. Ina's article is idiotic. That stands on it's own. But I do understand his point here and I agree. Apple gets a pass on things that Microsoft doesn't. No question. Apple doesn't get off scott free by any stretch, but mainstream people aren't as harsh on them overall. Then again... Microsoft has made an enormous fortune as a monopoly and theoretically should be held to a higher standard as the industry leader. At least in theory.

"I'm not sure Paul is the best person to point out "inconsistency." For example when apple stretches things in its marketing, it's always a LIE. When MS does the same, Paul simply disagrees and never uses the L word. " Actually, I remember times where he did say that. When MS said that current Windows versions were built for the internet he called it a lie because it was still based on NT which was made before the internet was around. I can't find the link, but it coulda been a podcast...

Hey Mike, Welcome to the rest of the world, maybe MS should support some f-ing standards. Your outrage is completely laughable, MS has been trying to use its market share to control the internet for the last decade. Thanks to Firefox and the fact that MS thought the browser war was over and sent their developers to develop something else, IE market share is now below 75%. As a result ALL web developers have to develop for ALL browsers. From what I understand since Firefox has been kicking IE's ass lately MS has decided to be more supportive of standards. Gee a standards based internet, what a novel concept. As for web mail being down, that simply is unforgivable. Email, for better or worse is a vital communication tool. Apple should have planned this transition and executed it better. Regards Joe Dokes

Steve75228: Then what "Apple Watchers" do this time? Last time I checked our iFriends seem very happy with what Ina Fried reported. So why so mad with Paul on the similar issue?

Apple is the most standards-driven company of the large software houses. No question. Between them, Adobe and Microsoft... it's basically no content. All Apple apps use open XML-based file formats with full schema's (iWork, Final Cut and the pro-apps, the OS itself and it's resources). QuickTime is built entirely around pushing the open h.264 and MPEG4 standards (which are in fact based on QuickTime's format to begin with). Safari is built on the open, Apple-lead webkit platform which is the MOST standards-compliant browsing engine on the market... and is in use by Adobe AIR, Google Android, Nokia's platform and others. Apple's graphics system is built on-top of Open GL. Hell, the OS's underlying core is open source. Apple's strategy has been and remains using software as a differentiator to drive a total solution product with hardware and make their money on the whole thing. So Final Cut is very open, but it only runs on Macs. If you want to get into "Apple is closed! DRM! Blah" save it. That's not Apple's fault or in their core DNA. Their core DNA is total product solutions and integration driven by great software. Sorry if that sounds like shill Apple apologetics... but I think its very accurate. Where they irk many is that their 80% solution that works so well for most people, feels very restrictive for those who aren't served. Want vorbis on your iPhone? Sorry. What DivX on your Apple TV? Gonna need to hack it. This is the price they're willing to pay for usability and more appliance-like user experience. You can't make everyone happy and trying to do so generally causes more problems than Apple's approach of strong vision-driven design.

@ Johnpapola, Taking your defense of Apple's lack of support of other standards like FLAC, Ogg, DivX etc on their products, [tounge in cheek] The fact that Microsoft owns 90% desktop marketshare and almost 80% of browser marketshare, the standard that they choose to implement [be it ActiveX, DirectX, or IE] should be the defacto standard. It is the silly Unix junkies who are foisting their separatist standards on the rest of the world. In Apple-speak, the rest of the companies are the ones breaking the defacto standard of Microsoft's "strong vision-driven design." ;) [/tongue in cheek]

Software problems bug Apple's launch of new iPhone http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080711/ap_on_hi_te/apple_iphone

Doc's got a few good points there...

RaaJ, With all due respect, you've got some logistic and linguistic problems with this post. I realize it was a half-baked "tongue in cheek" post. But, I'll rant anyway... "other standards like FLAC, Ogg, DivX" Those aren't standards. They're formats. I could come up with a new, open-sourced format tomorrow, but that wouldn't make it worth anything. I suppose you could say that DivX is the standard for video piracy. That's fair enough. My point is quite simply that Apple today is employing open standards across their entire software product line (aside from DRM) which enable zero lock-in and aren't burdened with any strategic competitive issues that may incentivize Apple to break them for other platforms. h.264 is h.264. There's nothing to hide or prevent Avid from importing your Final Cut XML project file. There's no cost or platform-lockin to using webkit. "should be the defacto standard" First of all, "should" is not the right way to put that. Maybe they DO become defacto standards... but whether they "should" be the standard is a matter of serious debate over the merit of the tech. And, of course... it hasn't played out every time. iTunes and AAC, not WMP and WMA are the defacto standard for online music distribution by virtue of marketshare. MP3 is the overall digital music standard. H.264 is emerging as the high-quality video standard with Flash as the defacto standard for video on the web. Why do you think Zune and Xbox now support h.264? As for the tongue in cheek bit... a joke, I guess. Still, do you really want one corporation to control the formats in which all of your personal work and information stored? Do you really think a competitive, innovative marketplace can function if Microsoft can literally dictate the standard? What prevents them from just wiping every profitable company off the PC map (they've done a pretty good job of laying much of the business to waste as it is)? If you do, then you and I have very deep disagreements. Honestly, I hope you're just playing devils' advocate. All that said, I'm not sure you've actually rebutted my core point, which is that Apple is the most standard-compliant large software company.

"QuickTime is built entirely around pushing the open h.264 and MPEG4 standards (which are in fact based on QuickTime's format to begin with)" 'scuze me??! That's the biggest load of bullshyte I've read all day for two reasons: a) Apple would have you believe that H.264 and MPEG-4 is their own format because they use a custom file container which they don't license out. There are numerous other container formats too such as Divx and Nero Digital, which all CONTAIN MPEG-4 streams, but they still require the respective player. They are NOT raw MPEG-4 streams though. If it were "open" and "standards-based" as you so happily like to throw around, they wouldn't use the Quicktime container format at all, and only use the MPEG video or program stream container, which is truly "open" and "standards-based". b) The second part of your statement (in paratheses) is absolutely, unequivocably 100% wrong. Quicktime isn't a format, it's a container. The codecs used previously in Quicktime were made by Sorenson. You sir, are a LIAR! "Safari is built on the open, Apple-lead webkit platform which is the MOST standards-compliant browsing engine on the market" AHAHAHAHA! You're the biggest fool I've seen write on here. In no way is Safari the most standards-compliant - Opera is. Just because Webkit is excelling, doesn't mean Apple is implementing it into Safari updates. Opera is the browser that has the highest scores in Acid3 than any other shipping product. It doesn't matter though. Corporations running IE-based websites - the REAL web standard - will still not function 100% on either browser. "Where they irk many is that their 80% solution that works so well for most people, feels very restrictive for those who aren't served." There goes your whole "open" argument down the tubes.... "Sorry if that sounds like shill Apple apologetics... but I think its very accurate." You're right. That doesn't *sound* like Apple apologetics - it just is!

@johnpapola Not going well because of crazy high overall demand, is the kind of "not going well" every business wants. In two weeks or less, they massive surge and load on their infrastructure will calm down as people get activated, download their initial fill of apps, get MobileMe tweaked to their liking and Apple adds a few more servers. Then they can tackle their next problem, how to count all that money? Welcome to the real "Live Mesh".

It looks as if the press and web are certainly making up for the 'lack of outrage' by the iPhone activation articles. My 3 buddies updated and are back on line, as are many, but only after a wait and some panic. This is just what I expected, same as last year. Either way, this should satify this site . I still like the Centro, now in 'Electric Blue'. Wae likes the HTC, so maybe for me. And now Blackberry's can use Documents-to-Go. It was easier to pick a phone when they were in big bags.

Being that Mobile Me is a part redo of .mac and most of all adding tons of new functionality to the web, it is to be expected that glitches will happen. Launching any kind of revolutionary service such as Mobile Me always has its hiccups in the wild. Notice that most of the Windows guys have not raised the red flag and have been playing it cool about it. We are used to problems on the Windows side. However, the iPhone launch was definitely mangled. Apple should have known that thousands upon thousands of people would try to activate the phone today. Preparation is always the big rule in business and Apple's lack of preparation needs to be highlighted here. Snakedoctor1 said: In two weeks or less, they massive surge and load on their infrastructure will calm down as people get activated, download their initial fill of apps, get MobileMe tweaked to their liking and Apple adds a few more servers. There is no way it should take two weeks for Apple to straighten this mess. If they had anticipated the popularity of this launch, they should have had more servers activated PRIOR to launch. This kind of bungle would have lost my business. If you look across the press spectrum from CNN and MSNBC to G4, this was not a good day for the iPhone 3G or Apple. As many say on here, perception is reality. To those who I've spoke to, their perception was that Apple and AT&T blew the launch. Yes, they'll make huge sales and it will be considered a success. However, part of good customer service is to plan for the worse and hope for the best. Trust me, the loss in having additional server costs, would have been made up for in positive press and happy customers.

"I guess "PC World" is now part of the iCabal." http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/07/macbook-pro-really-was-pc-worlds-fast... Actually, reading the guy's blog that they picked that story up from, it looks like PC World not only faked the entire thing, but they also had the balls to try to cover it up. Luckily a sharp fellow Canuck noticed it. Have a look at the story here too: http://joes-blog-canada.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!DA2B394806986D5D!250.entry http://joes-blog-canada.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!DA2B394806986D5D!271.entry

Waethorn, Regarding A. I'm not sure how "Apple would have you believe that h.264 and MPEG4 is their own format". Where are you coming up with this idea? A quick look at Apple's page regarding H.264 reveals that they make perfectly clear where H.264 comes from and where it's used. http://www.apple.com/quicktime/technologies/h264/ I don't believe that Windows Media Player can even natively read mp4 or h.264-encoded media with third party plugins. This was the point of comparison. Microsoft has alway ignored the industry standards in order to leverage their monopoly to force their formats on the market. Still, I believe that the .mp4 files you create in quicktime are readable and on other platforms and players in a standard way. And I know that QuickTime can read all of the standard formats, unlike WMP or Windows itself out of the box. That sure makes Apple's QuickTime way more open than Microsoft or Adobe... which was my point. Regarding B. It is quite clearly you who are 100% wrong, here. QuickTime is a format, just as Word is a format and .AVI is a format. The name QuickTime also refers to the media architecture and the player app that sits on top of that architecture. You're right that it's a container file format. But it is MOST CERTAINLY A FILE FORMAT. Please refer to the ISO ratification of the QuickTime File Format as the basis for the MPEG-4 standard. Microsoft submitted ASF and was turned down. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0MWK/is_n7_v12/ai_20331478 Notice the use of the term "format" regarding QuickTime by everyone involved. I just gotta love how you're calling me a "LIAR!" for referring to quicktime as a format while being 100% wrong. Again, I invite you to come down to New York and conduct yourself this way to my face. It sure is easy to attack people when you're just typing away in your basement. So, come down and call me a "LIAR!" to my face, sir. Maybe I'm ignorant on some of the semantics of the ISO and their file structures. But lying means knowing and deception and I don't accept that libelous accusation. I'd be happy to show you around New York City and all the networks, ad agencies and film and tv production companies relying on QuickTime for their entire production pipeline... you know... most of them... since Final Cut Pro has 70%+ of the ENTIRE VIDEO EDITING MARKET WORLDWIDE. So regardless of all of your nonsense, QuickTime is the defacto standard for video production. Period. Regarding Webkit... "AHAHAHAHA!  You're the biggest fool I've seen write on here.  In no way is Safari the most standards-compliant - Opera is.  Just because Webkit is excelling, doesn't mean Apple is implementing it into Safari updates." Can you even read english, sir? Seriously. Did I not clearly write that webkit itself is the most standards compliant browsing engine? Now, perhaps I'm wrong as of today and Opera has inched ahead for the moment. Even if that's true, Webkit supports more of the web standards than IE or Firefox and is AN OPEN PLATFORM... which again, was my point. Hence it's use in Android, Nokia and even Adobe's AIR. As for "Corporations running IE-based websites - the REAL web standard - will still not function 100% on either browser." Oh.. that's right. You're a partisan WinCabal shill. So whatever Microsoft does is the "REAL web standard". What about the fact that IE8 will default to the ACTUAL REAL WEB STANDARDS mode that breaks most of those sites? Why are they doing that, Waethorn? WHY? Because the corporate intranet legacy garbage is "the REAL web standard"? I don't think so. Given, IE8 will have the legacy engine to keep these sites from breaking. But I think the point is pretty damn clear. Apple is quite demonstrably the most standards-compliant of the major software houses in the business. You've rebutted nothing in that statement. I'll end on this little nugget from Jon Kannegaard, a VP Sun in 1998 when QuickTime was chosen for the ISO MPEG4 standard: ""The people from Apple are being too modest." Aside from technical issues, he said, the committee was swayed by QuickTime's success throughout the industry." Apple being modest. Now there's something. As for your pathetic, redirection on PC World's article. Why are you such a hack, sir? What does a 6 month old article about the speed of macbooks have to do with PC World's current price comparison? So it looks like a $5200 PC was able to marginally outperform a Macbook Pro at $3000. I see that you're simply trying to negate a story that doesn't fit into your worldview by smearing the legitimacy of the source. Good work. Why debate merit when you can plug your ears and smear the other side. You are the worst partisan Apple-hater I have ever seen on the internet (that's clearly smart enough to know better). @Snake & Subzero. Well... at least in the NYC area, it looks like the problem was overblown in the press and now every single store seems to be sold out. I wonder how the Rob Enderle's of the world will call this something other than a massive success. I can't wait for the Apple press release announcing 10 million iPhones sold... well in advance of December. I'll keep the crow nice and warm for you Waethorn. No sense in eating it cold.

I invite anyone else to open up a quicktime movie in quicktime pro... go to "Export" and choose "Export to MPEG-4". You'll get options to use either MPEG-4 basic, MPEG-4 Improved or H.264 as the codec and have settings that show their conformance with the standard. The resulting .mp4 file, if the dialog box says it conforms... should be a 100% conforming, cross-platform file.