Slashdot Mirror
New Apple Column on Ars Technica
Steve Cowan writes "A new Apple column by Eric Bangeman, called Mac.Ars, debuted at Ars Technica. The first edition is an insightful, unbiased take on the current state of Apple and its offerings. The author discusses Panther, the G5, consumer hardware offerings, Premiere, Microsoft Office, the 'Switch' campaign, the effects of Apple's relatively recent purchases of products like Logic and Shake, Apple's position in the server market, and lots more." What's the fun of being a Mac pundit unless you are biased?
Ars also launched an Linux.Ars column shortly after Mac.Ars -- not too shabby either.
> What's the fun of being a Mac pundit unless you are biased?
:)
What, you mean like Slashdot's bias for anything Linux or Open Source?
I dont' understand the reason for writing that article - it was a big introduction with no keynote speaker.
I got from that article that the writer:
- Intends to create a column for in depth technical review where other rumor sites fall short.
- Feels the Switch campaign didn't work out for Apple because the consumer line can't be customized
- Feels Apple's software development strategy yeilds great results but might present a probelm if Apple is the only one developing for the market
- Feels there is no market for the Xserve but there is a market for Panther Server (...though there is no market for server grade hardware?)
SO WHERE IS THE IN DEPTH TECHNICAL REVIEW? The author basically did a feature review. There was nothing new - a few opinions about consumer's desire to have faster graphics card - but no in depth anything.
I sure am glad I have apple.slashdot.org and macrumors.com to read because Ars' Apple column won't be on my list again.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
Ignoring the heavy anti-MS bias here on Slashdot, why the fuck was Daring Fireball mentioned? Looks like a cheap and perhaps biased shot to me.
i ng .htmll _script _for_bbedit_redux.html/ 2003/01/safari.html0 3/05/interface_detail s_itunes_vs_safari.htmlt /2003/01/scripting_safari _urls.html
http://daringfireball.net/2003/03/antiantialias
http://daringfireball.net/2003/07/grab_htm
http://daringfireball.net
http://daringfireball.net/20
http://daringfireball.ne
If those article gives you an idea of what you'll find there sometimes, you'll see that the stuff DF.net posts isn't just rabid OMG APPLE RULZ!!!1 kind of stuff.
It's a Mac user talking about Macs and Mac stuff. That doesn't make it biased on that basis alone.
Can we start moderating comments in story summaries? Please?
Mikey-San
Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
Daring Fireball offers well-written opinions about Apple-related topics. It would have been nice of pudge to provide a few links to supposedly biased pieces that Gruber has written, instead ignorantly pointing at the front page.
Of course, it can be difficult linking to things that don't exist...
So they follow it up with data from their server logs:And potentially, a huge chunk of that unknown value are Mac. They even state that themselves:So they begin doubting the poll results from their readers, so they check their server logs. They're then shocked to find that there really is (potentially) over 30 percent of their readers using Macs.
They then pull out their server's browser logs, which show that Safari is the second most used browser by their readers (unsurprisingly trailing Internet Explorer).
It took all this trawling though their logs, and yet they still wouldn't admit that the poll's results could be somewhat accurate. Perhaps this new section is Ars actually admitting, in a very backwards way, that many of their reader do actually use Macs. Not they they want to admit it.
Say what you will about other sites, but claiming that ArsTechnica are unbiased is a joke.
Considering their excellent articles on the G4, G4e, and now the 970. And also on the Mac OS X finder I think many people would disagree with you.
You should check who actually writes the articles and hangs out on the forums there and what they do.Many of them are engineers, there are those involved in processor design and also programmers and not small fry either. (Check out the about box in Photoshop then look for Chris Cox at ars he can tell you a thing or two about optimising stuff for altivec and the bandwidth constraints of the old PowerMacs), then take the time catch up on the Perpetual CPU thread GPUL and look at all the analysis done that when Hannibal was able to actually speak to IBM turned out to be almost spot on
Yeah the signal to noise ratio gets pretty low sometimes but it's pretty much self policing and without a moderation system too. There is no doubting that Ars tends to attract a more knowledgable person.
As for being biased Ars, like Slashdot is a hang out for technical peeps, and the old Mac OS didn't register on their radar except as perhaps a thing to make fun of. Things change, the Mac is now interesting to geeks. It may not do what we all want but you can't deny it has an attraction to pull it to pieces and see what makes it tick.
Don't blame me - this
"Ars Technica is more anti-Mac than Slashdot is."
/. reader, I have not found an anti-Mac bias here. While /. seems to be more concerned with OSS and Linux (somebody has to do it), coverage of Apple has been taken seriously. The reports of Jobs' "delivery" of Panther and the G-5's were near orgasmic. I have never been ridiculed here for my choice to use the Mac platform, and I would ask the above poster to provide examples to support his/her claim of an anti-Mac bias. Other than your suggestion of bias, I've always felt welcome at / .
As a loyal Mac user and a regular
No, you take as canon what some idiotic Mac zealot rumor site says. Macrumors, Macosrumors, Spymac, they're all uninformed and seem to say whatever they want to get more readers.
/course/ Apple is working on a 15" PowerBook G4 revision. If they could have revved it with the 12" and 17" release, I'm sure they would have.
Shit, Macosrumors was going on and on about the "G5 production progress" for at least a year before they were actually announced. Did they get TEH SCOOP? No. The G5 was obvious, but it turned out not to be soon. If Apple had called it something else, MOSR would have just said that the production name had changed at the end of the testing cycle blah blah blah.
It's all bunk. Don't get caught up in it or you'll just get disappointed like so many other Mac users. And you have. Of
If there's ONE thing I'd like to bring over from Windowsland, it's how no one gets really swept up in the rumour mill and either let down, pissed off, or both.
Mikey-San
Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
Arrogant Apple Assholes, no ability to plan based on information from Apple, over priced hardware, bad market decisions.
Dude, if you think an x86 box serves your needs better then buy one - but what the f**k does it matter who else owns Apple boxes? You don't want to buy a computer because the other people who own them strike you as Arrogant Assholes? So if you think that a Makita or DeWalt was the best woodworking tool for you - but every one you knew who owned one of those sets was an ass you buy a Craftsman instead?
If you don't like Apple's secrecy that's a valid point. Their hardware mark-ups are public information - if you think wanting to make ~25% profit on your products is too greedy then that's a valid point as well but in the end that doesn't effect the product you actually buy.
It's a tool, it's an appliance, buy what suits you needs. It's not like you give other Apple owners your email address or have to invite them to your home - and other then the secret meetings every week in the - but I've said too much already...
Lighten up - it's a computer not a religion,
=TKK
Bill Gates - Creationist?!?
What's the fun of being a Mac pundit unless you are biased?
Pudge, was that a shot, or just good-natured ribbing? Gruber writes the best-written (and yes, most opinionated) columns on Apple-related topics anywhere, on the web or in print. In other words, it's not just a diary with a few sentences about whatever came into his head on the way to work that day, nor is it hype-mongering drivel about Apple, but rather they are extremely well thought-out and tightly-written articles. Pudge, you're a smart guy (I've heard you speak and read your own blog/mail list posts), you don't need to be reminded that all news media contains bias. I'm glad that Gruber has the sack to acknowledge this, and write what he really thinks rather than tone down his writing to get syndicated on some mainstream Mac site.
I don't agree with everything Gruber says, but his feed is at the top of my NetNewswire client and I look forward to his content every week. I think a lot of people will take your comment out of context -- care to explain?
"First you gotta do the truffle shuffle."