“Apple’s Mac Mini is a step in the right direction for the Appliance PC and what consumers are looking for. Last month I focused on the negative aspects of Apple’s new products to make a point. And, based on the feedback I got, the point I appeared to have made is that there are an awful lot of Apple folks who really don’t like anyone who disparages their beloved products,” Rob Enderle writes for DesignTechnica.
“While there are a number of trade offs that Apple made for the Mini that I don’t think were necessary, the product is actually closer to what I think the consumer market is actually looking for in a desktop offering. No, Steve Jobs didn’t just arrive at my house with explosives, or worse, attorneys. I just think it is time I acknowledged that there are a couple things I really wish the other vendors would learn from what Apple has done,” Enderle writes.
“I am convinced it is time we also rethink the operating system. Windows was largely based on OS/2, which came out in the mid 80s, and both Linux and the MacOS X are based on UNIX which is even older. All three platforms are based on the way the world was in the 80s and both hardware technology and users have changed dramatically since then. When these OSs were new, users were still relatively technical while now the platform has to deal with a much lower understanding of the core technology as users increasingly abstract these old cores behind applications,” Enderle writes.
“Particularly when you look at the security exposures that exist today and the inability of traditional virus companies to get signature files out quickly enough and the massive problems all three platforms are having with patches I believe it is time to take a step back, lose the religion, and see if we can’t do better. In fact, I think we should probably do this about once every 20 or so years,” Enderle writes.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: What “massive problems” is Mac OS X “having with patches,” exactly? Enderle has no credibility.
I once met Enderle backstage at the CES. I followed him around for awhile while I was there doing interviews. That guy was kissing and sniffing more ass than I used to get at the pound. I mean, really, what do you expect from a guy with the name ‘Enderle’? It sounds like a new impotence drug or something. ‘Honey, I just took an Enderle! Here comes daddy!’ Seriously, people. C’mon. Enderle? Why do you even pay attention to this wingnut? I once knew a bassett hound who lied less than this guy. I mean, how far up Bill Gates’ ass can this moron get? Well, he’s done a pretty good job so far, and it’s a tight fit. No. I keed, I keed. But seriously — Enderle’s commentary is always reliable.
Reliable for me to POOP ON!!!!
Here begins the back-pedaling of Rob Enderle, when Apple breaks new sales record next quarter for the Mac mini.
Why is he called a pundit? More like pundiot, or pundidiot.
“And the massive problems all three platforms are having with patches” = Utter rubbish as we all know.
But OS X is not without its foibles either. As far as Repairing Permissions or having to stick apps in an apps folder and docs in a doc folder, I’m sorry to say that (IMHO and dispensing with all delicadeza) that’s rubbish too. OS 9 to OS X was four steps forward and one step back; Deadhorn will be six steps forward and four steps back, starting from two steps behind OS 9. Anyway, the Tiger’s time is coming.
Trust Microsoft to pick an OS name full of bullshit. Enderle is wallowing in it.
You Mr. Enderle don’t have a clue and should really stop writing about high tech especially when it comes to what Apple is doing.
Look it up. Windows 98 wasn’t based on OS/2 but Windows NT was–and thus XP too. In part.
MS and IBM worked on OS/2 together and then split.
I never mind seeing Enderle put [down] but that particular point is correct.
Also it’s Microsoft that is mainly having the problems with security because of there lack of focus on security from the begining. They got over confident and now are paying the price. Unfortunately for Microsoft the next OS isn’t going to be much of a change as Longhorn has turned into shorthorn and now has transformed into stubby. It’s only going to be an upgraded XP with a different name. No new features so why they trying to bring this to market in 2006 is beyond me except to bring in the dough from all of those suckers who think there going to get something better.
If Mr.E and others consider software versioning to be an indicator of “patches” then I guess every software package sold is simply one big patch such as Windows, 95, 98, 2000, CE, ME, XP? This logic doesn’t doesn’t appear to have sound reasoning, although fun to read.
Response from Ian Bell to my letter copied earlier in this thread:
Thank you for your concern. I am happy to hear you will not longer be
visiting us. If you would like, please send me your IP address and I will
block it from our site so you will no longer be bothered by our content.
Here is an interesting article you may want to read in your spare time:
http://salon.com/tech/letters/2005/02/01/mac/index.html?x check out the
reader response. Believe it or not, there are several websites on the
internet that are not Apple focused, in fact 95% of the population on the
net visit these “non-Apple” focused sites. It’s like opening your eyes to a
new world, a world without Apple computers and Volkswagens, Volvo’s, Saab’s,
Apple summer camps, etc. You should try it sometime.
But I will take the 95% percent compared to the 5% percent – wouldn’t you?
What you may not be aware of is how out of touch you really are with the
industry. I think it’s a good thing if you do not return.
Kind regards,
Ian Bell
Why oh why won’t anyone focus on the real issue: in the case of an earthquake incited tsunami how are you ever supposed to rely on the Mac mini as a floatation device?
Apple has once again completely ignored practical concerns in favour of aesthetics. Typical. Have a quick glance over at what Dell is doing and you’ll see a company that gets it. Big = stable = something you can hang on to for dear life in the case of a natural disaster.
Mr. Enderle is just rightly pointing out Apple’s complete lack of vision when it comes to bridging the important gap between personal computing and personal safety.
And my follow up:
Dear Mr Bell,
You said, “I am happy to hear you will not longer be visiting us.”
Did I say that? No I didn’t, you jumped to a conclusion.
You said, “Here is an interesting article you may want to read in your spare time: http://salon.com/tech/letters/2005/02/01/mac/index.html?x check out the reader response.”
Thanks for pointing it out but In the plenty of spare time I have available I read the article.
You said, “Believe it or not, there are several websites on the internet that are not Apple focused”
Yes I am well aware, in fact I cited one in my original message, http://www.groklaw.net
You said, “But I will take the 95% percent compared to the 5% percent – wouldn’t you?”
Not necessarily. I believe quality is more important than quantity however I appreciate people make decisions based on their needs and resources and also on the information available to them.
You said, “What you may not be aware of is how out of touch you really are with the industry.”
Quite possibly, but you are certainly in no position to make that judgment.
You seem to have responded with an anti-mac zeal worthy of anonymous posters on internet message boards (just like the one you mention). Just in case that is because my message comes from a .mac address let me explain. After having several ISPs change email (and other) policies in the early nineties when the internet was still relatively early in it’s development I was pleased when Apple introduced their email service. I wanted an address I could consider permanent, provided by a reliable company, a mainstay of the industry, who would be likely to be in business for a long time. As the longest surviving computer company with a focus on end users I believe I made a good decision.
I will not advise you of my IP address as I shall return to your site so I can see who is advertising thereon and forward copies of your message to them.
Regards,
I looked at the letters on Salon.com. Perfect example of how ignorant PC users are about the Mac. 99% of the gripes people had were completely unfounded. That’s OK, I really don’t want my platform of choice being soiled by their stupidity. I’d be happy if the Mac’s marketshare went up to somewhere between 10-20% but not much higher. Let the dregs stay with windows.
Gandalf,
Your firstletter was excellent. In no way could your letter be considered belligerent, confrontaional, or Mac zealous. Yet the pinhead Bell responded in the way he did. I think that speaks volumes about their collective idiocy.
Please continue on with you email campaigns
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Honestly, I could care less what people from the Windoze world do.
They can have their spyware ridden cake and eat it, if they so wish.
You can show people the truth, but they have to want to take the step into the light.
So long as Apple remains perfectly viable (and great), that is fine with me. Windoze people can do what they want.
“Perfect example of how ignorant PC users are about the Mac”
“I really don’t want my platform of choice being soiled by their stupidity.”
Oh the irony:
Take from a Salon Letter to the Editor:
“I’m a Windows user, and the most confounding thing about articles like this is how they talk about Windows users. They are describing a creature that is not me or any of the Windows users I know.
We’re not the stupid people that Apple lovers portray us as. We’ve had 20 years to be convinced that an Apple is worth having. Really, nobody coerced us into keeping our PCs. Apple just hasn’t made its case.”
You just don’t get it. Stop labeling those who choose to remain with their platform of choice as stupid. Its just that, their CHOICE; believe me, we are all aware of our alternatives….’nuff said. Don’t expect many “switchers” with that attitude.
Start from scratch and do what? Rewrite UNIX? The various incantations of unix have been kicking for 35+ years because they are still relevant today. Windows was never relevant built on top of a DOS shell, it was kludgy then, it is even more kludgy now.
How many different ways are you going to code DSZ (decrement one and skip on zero). <– extreme example at its most basic form. Until the time arrives that computers no longer deal with binary input, then you wont have (nor need) much change to the basic code blocks of UNIX.
Enderle is hedging his bets. He senses a real war with a winner being immanent, he just cannot pallet the fact that it will be Apple.
Zac
[After having several ISPs change email (and other) policies… I wanted an address I could consider permanent, provided by a reliable company, a mainstay of the industry, who would be likely to be in business for a long time.]
Seems logical, I had a similar problem starting with a rogers.wave.com to a rogers.home.com to shaw.home.com to shaw.ca. Wheeeew!
But anyway, may I suggest that in the future you (all of us MacZealots! – for that matter) email these ‘journalists’ with helpful advice from your Hotmail account.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
BTW, both letters were great. I’ve copied and pasted your ‘decisions’ comment to my iNotePad ‘Quotes’ note (with your ‘handle’ as the quoting author, of course). Cheers!
When someone points out that the state of computing is pretty sad, Mac fans like to point out how wonderful OS X is.
Well compared to the alternatives it is, but the state of computing is still very awkward and inefficient. We can do lots of wonderful and amazing things, but we still have our little windows on the screen controlled by two separate and awkward control devices.
That said, I don’t have a better way, but I won’t be one to defend all computers. They all have to be patched and fixed and upgraded. Computers are not like a kitchen table that just sits there ready to be used.
But an iPod is. We’re getting closer, but there needs to be a paradigm shift. Apple might be on the right track, but there’s a long way to go and people are going to have a hard time accepting those changes because they want to be able to do everything with every microchip.
Simplify. Computers are appliances. The mini is a good acknowledgement of this, but not an end. Where is my electronic paper? I want to remove the operating system from the data.
A camera takes pictures. A printer prints them. Don’t put movies on my music player and don’t put music on my camera and don’t put a camera in my phone and don’t put a printer in my camera.
Everything has its place. Apple seems to be the only designer that can keep things separate and stop trying to do it all with every device. No screen on the “shuffle” way to go! People love it. It plays your music, it doesn’t take pictures and it’s not a Geiger counter. It plays music. It’s a music player.
Amazing.
The mini may be a movie player. We’ll see. Put one of those Cell processors in and it’s a game console that plays movies and surfs the internet and handles your documents and searches for aliens. Uh oh, we’re doing it all again. Oh well eventually someone will get it right.
Apparently Mr. Bell never got as far as page two of the cited article, wherein an equal number of writers sing Apple’s praises eloquently and often dispose of the Pro-MS rantings on page one very neatly.
I to will be avoiding Mr. Bell, all of his enterprises, and all of his advertisers.
from the Salon missives:
“In the 15 years since I discovered CompuServe, I’ve had almost no problems with spyware or viruses, because my use of the Internet is almost always limited to “serious” sites. (Few people admit that many of their problems arise from accessing porn or other sites that are on the fringes of Internet commerce.)
— Alison Barnard”
Anyone touting this sort of stupidty as a grand retort, as Mr Bell has, needs to rethink their lines of argumentation.
And while I’m in the mood, I’d ike to address the oldest and most obsolete OS in existence, upon which every computer of any size is still dependent…BINARY. In 60+ years haven’t we outgrown the outmoded, inefficient, and rigid binary code system? Haven’t we matured enough to recognize the futility of addressing the world in black and white, on and off terms? Why can’t we have a trinary or decinary system? We’ll never progress as a species as long as we’re tied to such simple logic.
(Removing tongue from cheek) – The single salient fact about Unix is that running it is the point toward which personal computer evolution has been driving for these last 25 years. Windows is an elaborate extension of the 8 bit languages necessary for the rudimentary nature of the original personal computers, and elephant on stilts, trying to be a giraffe. Apple recognized that modern machines have evolved to the point that they can utilize Unix, and having come to that realization, they started over on their OS. Doing the same is the only thing that will save Microsoft from eventual oblivion. Longhorn is Microsoft’s signal that it is still in deep denial.
So, OS is 40 years old. And just exactly how old is the light bulb?
I hate magic words.
Let me edit my own post:
I wrote:
“Enderle is hedging his bets. He senses a real war with a winner being immanent, he just cannot pallet the fact that it will be Apple.”
What I should have wrote is:
Enderle is hedging his bets. He senses a real war with a winner being immanent, he just cannot pallet the fact that it will not be MicroSoft (without government intervention*).
*I am not a tin hatter, but we do have economies at stake here too.
Zac
further edit, change immanent to imminent