The article doesn't say anything about Microsoft footing the bill for the perpetual technical support and maintenance that all this shit is going to need. And unless they make it some kind of magnet school for just the kids actually interested in learning (and who are somewhat less destructive), that equipment won't last three months. I have seen firsthand what the fucking animals in the standard high schools do to the things my tax dollars pay for, and it ain't pretty.
If Microsoft doesn't handle support and maintenance, then it just won't get done after the news cameras leave. The Philadelphia School District can barely make ends meet as it is without needing a platoon of MCSEs on the payroll for this boondoggle.
Okay, I'm not going to be lazy. I went to Dell.com and configured a 2.4ghz Dual Xeon with Windows XP, 512mb RAM, a DVD drive and a modem. This is roughly the same configuration offered by the G5.
When the spider notices the box is secure again, it re-enables connectivity.
Just wondering, how long does that take to happen? Does your server have a "Hey, I've applied these, scan me and re-enable me" button on the page they see when you redirect the connection on an unsecure machine?
From the article: In a technique called a "distributed denial of service attack," vandals exploit security flaws to plant programs, called "Trojan arses," on thousands of Internet-connected computers. They then order the Trojan arse programs to spew useless data at a targeted machine.
The mental image of a bunch of Greek soldiers pouring from the sphincter of a huge, wooden butt is just too funny for words.
Nextel seems instance, because it is "quick enough" that you don't notice that it isn't.
Am I the only person who has ever had two Nextels in the same room, to measure how instantaneous it is?
I can tell you, it is no more than a second-- the delay provides the exact echo effect you need to do a perfect imitation of Gehrig's "Farewell to Baseball" speech ("...today, I consider myself the luckiest man...").:-)
Yes. It runs a great deal of my house-- and if I wanted to, I could tie the speech recognition stuff in and voice-control the lights and such, but I didn't want to mess with wiring a mic into every room in the house, or have to remember to put on a lavalier mic every time I walk in the door. I instead opted for a couple closeout 3Com Audreys strategically positioned in my house, and wrote a comprehensive web interface.
I use this to talk to the X10 modules, and this to embed AppleScript right into HTML, so it is executed when a client request is made and the results are embedded in the web page.
I have pages that practically write themselves that allow me to turn lights on and off with a single click of a button on a web page (or a tap of a finger on Audrey's touchscreen), and the buttons change state so I know the on/off status of a given light or appliance at a glance-- all thanks to AppleScript.
Most recently I put in an X10-friendly thermostat. In a couple days I got the web interface written. It's 98% done and still being polished, but here is a semi-functional demo version. When the page loads, that's actually the temperature in my house and what the thermostat is set to. Visitors to this page can see the state of the system, and you can adjust the setpoint but not commit the adjustment to the system. The fully-functional stuff is in a passworded directory.:-)
The big lie I always hear about Applescript is that: "Applescript doesn't need lots of documentation, it's self-documenting, english-like, and always current"
IME, AppleScript's documentation is pretty good. The scripting dictionary built into scriptable apps usually explains things clearly enough-- sometimes if I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around how to extract a specific field from a record, I'll just open up a second window and fool around with a little code until I get it figured out.
Of course, because AppleScript exposes your data model for all of your competitors, you'll make things like exporting data out of your proprietary file format a trivial operation if you stuck with standard suites or even if you exposed all of your functionality via AppleScript.
Uh, this is not a Microsoft product we're talking about here. The whole idea of AppleScript is to *facilitate* easy interapplication communication, not to turn applications into Roach Motels for your data (i.e. it goes in, but you can't get it out).
I know how Microsoft's tactics have become accepted in today's world, but the ideal goal of a software company is to make your products so good that customers will *willingly* stick with them-- not to dream up ways to lock the customers' data up so they have to keep using your shit ad infinitum or face an extremely painful migration away from it.
Why would you ever think the virus to operating system ratio was directly proportional?
I don't, but the parent poster I was replying to seemed to think it was. I merely pointed out that even though the Mac has a 5% marketshare, only a tiny fraction of the viruses known to exist directly affect Macs. You'd think that out of the sheer numbers of anti-Apple zealots out there, at least a few would have been motivated to pick up a cheap used Mac and figure out how to code a virus for it, to damage the machines of "those smug Macheads."
and even you admit that outlook warns/asks the user now.
Yes, NOW. But how many older versions that DON'T are still being used by people who don't venture into the preferences after the initial setup? Probably millions. And if an update to Outlook Express switched that preference, people who don't patch are still allowing e-mailed executable code to have nearly unfettered access to the system.
So why are these simple microsoft worms still so rampant?
Because the vast majority of people don't update their software, and don't patch their systems. There are numerous examples of this. There was a patch out for Blaster in mid July, but weeks later Microsoft had to take out full-page ads in newspapers, imploring people to run Windows Update-- and STILL Blaster was a huge problem because of the volume of unpatched machines owned by clueless people. SQL Slammer exploited a hole that was patched months before Slammer appeared-- but I still see plenty of access attempts on 1434 in my firewall logs. Patches to fix Code Red and Nimda vulnerabilites have been our for YEARS, but I still find access attempts from infected IIS servers in my firewall logs.
Microsoft's shiny new focus on security won't begin to pay off until all that insecure shit they distributed for years is no longer in use-- and I can tell you from experience that it's going to be a while, because a few of my company's clients are still happily running Windows 95.
Most of them are just targeting a popular email client, reading its address book, and sending itself as an attachment to a bunch of those addresses along with a witty message. That's ALL.
That's right. And the Mac e-mail clients WARN you about opening suspect files, and ASK you if you really want to let this AppleScript e-mail such and such a file to everyone in your address book. Because of that dialog box, there goes a big chunk of the virus' communicability. If you think Mac viruses would ever be anywhere near as numerous as Windows viruses, you're in some serious denial.
The Windows e-mail worms are so rampant because until very recently Outlook and Outlook Express would just execute the VBScript by default without warning/asking the user. Their recently changing the default in newer versions to not do that won't help much, because the older versions will remain in use for years to come. I don't know who the dumb shits were at Microsoft who thought the less secure option was the smart default setting, but they ought to be drawn and quartered.
And if 90% of the users used Apples, 90% of the virus would target Apples.
Bullshit. There are about 50 Mac-specific viruses, as opposed to over 70,000 Windows viruses. Apple has ~5% marketshare, and a slightly larger installed base, yet it is targeted by only ~.07% of the known viruses. Of those 50 Mac viruses, most are either extinct or so old that they wouldn't function on versions of the Mac OS more recent than 7.6. I've been using Macs and making a living supporting them for 12 years, and I've seen exactly 2 viruses-- both non-malicious. If there's a Mac OS X-specific virus out there yet, I haven't heard of it.
No virus or worm will ever have its way with a Mac the way Windows worms rape Windows PCs, period. All unnecessary services and ports are off by default, and if any suspect code tries any funny business, the user gets a dialog asking "Should I run this?"-- not a green light to do whatever it wants from the OS.
If Microsoft went away tomorrow and Apple took 100% of the market, there would still be nobody writing successful Mac viruses, because the gaping security holes just aren't there to be exploited. Since OS X 10.2 came out, Apple's security update frequency is enviable-- less than once per month.
the real problem is users who are so stupid and lazy they shouldn't be allowed near a computer.
No, the real problem is Microsoft, using marketing to make a complex system that requires careful maintenance appear simple and practically zero-maintenance-- and then selling that system to people who are incapable of and/or have no interest in carefully maintaining it once the truth comes out.
Oh, and let's not forget their "open kimono" security model-- unnecessary ports open to the internet by default, and swiss-cheese apps that until recently would allow arbitrary code stuck practically anywhere to be executed without warning the user by default.
Blaming the clueless users here is like blaming the tenants when their apartment building collapses one night while they're all sleeping.
What Microsoft is doing is tantamount to false advertising, which is something companies get sued for all the time. William H. Macy's voice only tells me how great Microsoft's stuff is, it never says anything about how if Microsoft's stuff blows up and costs me business, it's tough shit on me for believing that it wouldn't just because Microsoft said so.
I haven't seen any Red Hat commercials making any claims that are soon disproven by some script kiddie with too much time on his hands.
~Philly
PS- Spare me the "smarmy dick" attitude in future replies.
Hey, rocket surgeon, do you want Linux developers to be sued when a bug causes problems?
Last I checked, Linux developers didn't spend hundreds of millions of dollars on marketing campaigns to tell people about how this sort of thing isn't supposed to happen with their software.
Linux developers should not have the same level of liability as Microsoft-- assuming it's open source, you can (and in critical applications, probably should) examine the code before putting it into use. You just gotta take Microsoft's word for it that their code is okay.
...when you have to rely on the nation of ignorant meatheads running $299 Windows PCs to be aware of them and make sure they're installed.
Microsoft took out full-page ads in several major newspapers on Tuesday, imploring the great unwashed masses to run Windows Update to get the Blaster patch. So obviously, even they know that the mere existence of the patch is not enough.
Well, rampant worms and other exploits of ridiculous security holes may be having their merry way with computer systems worldwide, and the traffic those generate may be slowing down the internet, but THANK GOD the Microsoft brain trust is making sure that their IM software is water-fucking-tight! Bravo, minions of Bill, bravo!
I'm no MS fan, but maybe they are accually paying more attention to their program security as they promised.
If I had any faith in Microsoft and their "greater attention to security," it would be shaken by the fact that the best way they seem to have found to make their products more secure is by discontinuing them.:-)
I quote: "Virtual PC for Mac version 6.1 currently will not run on the new G5 machines."
~Philly
Re:It's Not That Complicated
on
G5s Start Shipping
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Why do you think they still produce 3.5" 5400 RPM drives? Why do you think software driven modems became a success?
Because hardware companies are cheap.
Why do you think people assume LCDs have a better display?
I didn't know people assumed LCDs have a better display. The reason most people I know buy LCDs is to get a larger physical screen size without having to sacrifice desk surface area for a hulking CRT.
Remember, we're talking about people that buy a computer because it's cute, inexpensive, and named after fruit that matches the color.
Erm, no. We're talking about the professional market here. They knew the G5 was coming for the last year, just not exactly when. And I can tell you that every one of my clients, professionals one and all, were waiting for exactly what I said: the next generation of Macs beyond the G4, and OS X-native QuarkXPress. If you had read the articles in the Mac press since 10.2 was released, you'ld know that that was by far the predominant stance.
I was waiting to replace my primary home machine as well, nursing along a 6 year-old Power Mac-- finally last year I couldn't wait any longer and picked up a used G4 that had the horsepower to run OS X, because I needed to get familiar with it so I could effectively support it when the time comes. In January, the G4 goes bye-bye and I get a dual G5, which is what I was waiting for all along. I just hope Apple manages to catch up with demand by then.
I would tend to believe the numbers, no matter how large.
Many people have been in a holding pattern, using old machines running OS 9 for two reasons:
1) They would need a new machine to really make the most of OS X, and they wanted to wait until the successor to the G4 was available.
2) They didn't want to make the move to OS X until a native QuarkXPress was available for it.
Both of those conditions have now been fulfilled. Apple will not be able to crank out these things fast enough (even moreso than usual) to meet all the pent-up demand.
I bet once the numbers are in, we'll find out that this was Apple's best quarter in a few years, maybe even since the return of Jobs.
I am very happy to tell you you're crazy. Not only will Apple survive, they will flourish-- and a great deal of that will be BECAUSE of Microsoft. It's already starting.
On the consumer side, people are getting really sick of all these security holes, viruses, worms, spyware, etc. They don't want to have to be bothered with maintaining their machines, and still don't-- a fact made most obvious by my firewall logs which STILL to this day show frequent Code Red and Nimda probes, not to mention SQL-slammer. Media outlets are starting to mention in their news reports that the worm/virus-of-the-week "doesn't affect Macs and Linux" or "only affects Windows." More people will start to pick up on that the more it happens. Mac OS X has generated really good buzz since 10.2 was released, and that's only going to improve with Panther. The GHz Gap nonsense is finally being put to sleep, thanks to the G5. The piss-poor marketing of Macs by large PC retail places is being addressed by Apple stationing Apple-paid representatives there. The Apple Stores are aiding in the visibility of the Mac platform and driving quite a bit of first-time sales.
On the business side of things, Microsoft is getting really bad with the nickel-and-diming of everyone for everything. They were forced into it because Windows has achieved market saturation-- their only recourse to keep profits going up is to charge ever more for the same shit, and to adopt subscription models wherever possible. They are pissing companies off with their upgrade-or-pay-anyway licensing schemes and associated costs, and with the fact that "the most secure Windows ever!" that Microsoft sold them is not really that secure after all. Companies are also not pleased with the Windows lock-in-- where once enough Microsoft shit is in your company, the only way to not have problems is to make ALL your systems Windows PCs. Apple takes pains to adopt open standards to interoperate with everything, while Microsoft works harder and harder at proprietarizing as much as possible so only their stuff will work 100% properly (in theory, anyway) with their stuff.
These things are building up on the business and consumer level, and will eventually reach a critical mass. People as a whole will be pushed too far by Microsoft one day, and they will finally say "enough!" and seek out and purchase non-Microsoft alternatives, even if it means paying a little more and/or having to learn some new things.
Slashdot Mirror
The article doesn't say anything about Microsoft footing the bill for the perpetual technical support and maintenance that all this shit is going to need. And unless they make it some kind of magnet school for just the kids actually interested in learning (and who are somewhat less destructive), that equipment won't last three months. I have seen firsthand what the fucking animals in the standard high schools do to the things my tax dollars pay for, and it ain't pretty.
If Microsoft doesn't handle support and maintenance, then it just won't get done after the news cameras leave. The Philadelphia School District can barely make ends meet as it is without needing a platoon of MCSEs on the payroll for this boondoggle.
~Philly
Sure, eBay will bow to them. I remember a while back eBay torpedoed the auctions of a guy who was selling CDs of his own band's original music for nebulous copyright issues. They also would not listen to him no matter how many times he tried to straighten the matter out.
~Philly
Okay, I'm not going to be lazy. I went to Dell.com and configured a 2.4ghz Dual Xeon with Windows XP, 512mb RAM, a DVD drive and a modem. This is roughly the same configuration offered by the G5.
Great, except Apple's real-world app tests show the dual G5 spanking Dell's dual 3.06GHz Xeon rig, which when comparably configured (at the time, though it probably hasn't gotten much cheaper since) cost $3772. So how is your dual 2.4GHz Xeon going to be "about the same performance" when the faster dual 3.06 Xeon isn't?
~Philly
When the spider notices the box is secure again, it re-enables connectivity.
Just wondering, how long does that take to happen? Does your server have a "Hey, I've applied these, scan me and re-enable me" button on the page they see when you redirect the connection on an unsecure machine?
~Philly
Erm, no-- I was referring to this post.
I pulled up the original article, and it looks like the karmawhore who posted the text may have had a little fun with it.
From the article: In a technique called a "distributed denial of service attack," vandals exploit security flaws to plant programs, called "Trojan arses," on thousands of Internet-connected computers. They then order the Trojan arse programs to spew useless data at a targeted machine.
The mental image of a bunch of Greek soldiers pouring from the sphincter of a huge, wooden butt is just too funny for words.
~Philly
Nextel seems instance, because it is "quick enough" that you don't notice that it isn't.
:-)
Am I the only person who has ever had two Nextels in the same room, to measure how instantaneous it is?
I can tell you, it is no more than a second-- the delay provides the exact echo effect you need to do a perfect imitation of Gehrig's "Farewell to Baseball" speech ("...today, I consider myself the luckiest man...").
~Philly
Really, is it that useful?
:-)
Yes. It runs a great deal of my house-- and if I wanted to, I could tie the speech recognition stuff in and voice-control the lights and such, but I didn't want to mess with wiring a mic into every room in the house, or have to remember to put on a lavalier mic every time I walk in the door. I instead opted for a couple closeout 3Com Audreys strategically positioned in my house, and wrote a comprehensive web interface.
I use this to talk to the X10 modules, and this to embed AppleScript right into HTML, so it is executed when a client request is made and the results are embedded in the web page.
I have pages that practically write themselves that allow me to turn lights on and off with a single click of a button on a web page (or a tap of a finger on Audrey's touchscreen), and the buttons change state so I know the on/off status of a given light or appliance at a glance-- all thanks to AppleScript.
Most recently I put in an X10-friendly thermostat. In a couple days I got the web interface written. It's 98% done and still being polished, but here is a semi-functional demo version. When the page loads, that's actually the temperature in my house and what the thermostat is set to. Visitors to this page can see the state of the system, and you can adjust the setpoint but not commit the adjustment to the system. The fully-functional stuff is in a passworded directory.
~Philly
The big lie I always hear about Applescript is that: "Applescript doesn't need lots of documentation, it's self-documenting, english-like, and always current"
IME, AppleScript's documentation is pretty good. The scripting dictionary built into scriptable apps usually explains things clearly enough-- sometimes if I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around how to extract a specific field from a record, I'll just open up a second window and fool around with a little code until I get it figured out.
Of course, because AppleScript exposes your data model for all of your competitors, you'll make things like exporting data out of your proprietary file format a trivial operation if you stuck with standard suites or even if you exposed all of your functionality via AppleScript.
Uh, this is not a Microsoft product we're talking about here. The whole idea of AppleScript is to *facilitate* easy interapplication communication, not to turn applications into Roach Motels for your data (i.e. it goes in, but you can't get it out).
I know how Microsoft's tactics have become accepted in today's world, but the ideal goal of a software company is to make your products so good that customers will *willingly* stick with them-- not to dream up ways to lock the customers' data up so they have to keep using your shit ad infinitum or face an extremely painful migration away from it.
~Philly
Why would you ever think the virus to operating system ratio was directly proportional?
I don't, but the parent poster I was replying to seemed to think it was. I merely pointed out that even though the Mac has a 5% marketshare, only a tiny fraction of the viruses known to exist directly affect Macs. You'd think that out of the sheer numbers of anti-Apple zealots out there, at least a few would have been motivated to pick up a cheap used Mac and figure out how to code a virus for it, to damage the machines of "those smug Macheads."
~Philly
and even you admit that outlook warns/asks the user now.
Yes, NOW. But how many older versions that DON'T are still being used by people who don't venture into the preferences after the initial setup? Probably millions. And if an update to Outlook Express switched that preference, people who don't patch are still allowing e-mailed executable code to have nearly unfettered access to the system.
So why are these simple microsoft worms still so rampant?
Because the vast majority of people don't update their software, and don't patch their systems. There are numerous examples of this. There was a patch out for Blaster in mid July, but weeks later Microsoft had to take out full-page ads in newspapers, imploring people to run Windows Update-- and STILL Blaster was a huge problem because of the volume of unpatched machines owned by clueless people. SQL Slammer exploited a hole that was patched months before Slammer appeared-- but I still see plenty of access attempts on 1434 in my firewall logs. Patches to fix Code Red and Nimda vulnerabilites have been our for YEARS, but I still find access attempts from infected IIS servers in my firewall logs.
Microsoft's shiny new focus on security won't begin to pay off until all that insecure shit they distributed for years is no longer in use-- and I can tell you from experience that it's going to be a while, because a few of my company's clients are still happily running Windows 95.
~Philly
Most of them are just targeting a popular email client, reading its address book, and sending itself as an attachment to a bunch of those addresses along with a witty message. That's ALL.
That's right. And the Mac e-mail clients WARN you about opening suspect files, and ASK you if you really want to let this AppleScript e-mail such and such a file to everyone in your address book. Because of that dialog box, there goes a big chunk of the virus' communicability. If you think Mac viruses would ever be anywhere near as numerous as Windows viruses, you're in some serious denial.
The Windows e-mail worms are so rampant because until very recently Outlook and Outlook Express would just execute the VBScript by default without warning/asking the user. Their recently changing the default in newer versions to not do that won't help much, because the older versions will remain in use for years to come. I don't know who the dumb shits were at Microsoft who thought the less secure option was the smart default setting, but they ought to be drawn and quartered.
~Philly
And if 90% of the users used Apples, 90% of the virus would target Apples.
Bullshit. There are about 50 Mac-specific viruses, as opposed to over 70,000 Windows viruses. Apple has ~5% marketshare, and a slightly larger installed base, yet it is targeted by only ~.07% of the known viruses. Of those 50 Mac viruses, most are either extinct or so old that they wouldn't function on versions of the Mac OS more recent than 7.6. I've been using Macs and making a living supporting them for 12 years, and I've seen exactly 2 viruses-- both non-malicious. If there's a Mac OS X-specific virus out there yet, I haven't heard of it.
No virus or worm will ever have its way with a Mac the way Windows worms rape Windows PCs, period. All unnecessary services and ports are off by default, and if any suspect code tries any funny business, the user gets a dialog asking "Should I run this?"-- not a green light to do whatever it wants from the OS.
If Microsoft went away tomorrow and Apple took 100% of the market, there would still be nobody writing successful Mac viruses, because the gaping security holes just aren't there to be exploited. Since OS X 10.2 came out, Apple's security update frequency is enviable-- less than once per month.
~Philly
the real problem is users who are so stupid and lazy they shouldn't be allowed near a computer.
No, the real problem is Microsoft, using marketing to make a complex system that requires careful maintenance appear simple and practically zero-maintenance-- and then selling that system to people who are incapable of and/or have no interest in carefully maintaining it once the truth comes out.
Oh, and let's not forget their "open kimono" security model-- unnecessary ports open to the internet by default, and swiss-cheese apps that until recently would allow arbitrary code stuck practically anywhere to be executed without warning the user by default.
Blaming the clueless users here is like blaming the tenants when their apartment building collapses one night while they're all sleeping.
~Philly
What Microsoft is doing is tantamount to false advertising, which is something companies get sued for all the time. William H. Macy's voice only tells me how great Microsoft's stuff is, it never says anything about how if Microsoft's stuff blows up and costs me business, it's tough shit on me for believing that it wouldn't just because Microsoft said so.
I haven't seen any Red Hat commercials making any claims that are soon disproven by some script kiddie with too much time on his hands.
~Philly
PS- Spare me the "smarmy dick" attitude in future replies.
Hey, rocket surgeon, do you want Linux developers to be sued when a bug causes problems?
Last I checked, Linux developers didn't spend hundreds of millions of dollars on marketing campaigns to tell people about how this sort of thing isn't supposed to happen with their software.
Linux developers should not have the same level of liability as Microsoft-- assuming it's open source, you can (and in critical applications, probably should) examine the code before putting it into use. You just gotta take Microsoft's word for it that their code is okay.
~Philly
...when you have to rely on the nation of ignorant meatheads running $299 Windows PCs to be aware of them and make sure they're installed.
Microsoft took out full-page ads in several major newspapers on Tuesday, imploring the great unwashed masses to run Windows Update to get the Blaster patch. So obviously, even they know that the mere existence of the patch is not enough.
~Philly
Well, rampant worms and other exploits of ridiculous security holes may be having their merry way with computer systems worldwide, and the traffic those generate may be slowing down the internet, but THANK GOD the Microsoft brain trust is making sure that their IM software is water-fucking-tight! Bravo, minions of Bill, bravo!
/me stands up to applaud.
~Philly
I swear recently reading somewhere that Power Pete had been purchased, updated, renamed, and was being distributed again.
[wait a few minutes to simulate the time it took me to do some Googling]
Ah, here you go. It has been renamed "Mighty Mike," and is now $15 shareware.
~Philly
I'm no MS fan, but maybe they are accually paying more attention to their program security as they promised.
:-)
If I had any faith in Microsoft and their "greater attention to security," it would be shaken by the fact that the best way they seem to have found to make their products more secure is by discontinuing them.
~Philly
Why do you say it doesn't work? Why wouldn't it?
Because Microsoft says it won't.
I quote: "Virtual PC for Mac version 6.1 currently will not run on the new G5 machines."
~Philly
Why do you think they still produce 3.5" 5400 RPM drives? Why do you think software driven modems became a success?
Because hardware companies are cheap.
Why do you think people assume LCDs have a better display?
I didn't know people assumed LCDs have a better display. The reason most people I know buy LCDs is to get a larger physical screen size without having to sacrifice desk surface area for a hulking CRT.
Remember, we're talking about people that buy a computer because it's cute, inexpensive, and named after fruit that matches the color.
Erm, no. We're talking about the professional market here. They knew the G5 was coming for the last year, just not exactly when. And I can tell you that every one of my clients, professionals one and all, were waiting for exactly what I said: the next generation of Macs beyond the G4, and OS X-native QuarkXPress. If you had read the articles in the Mac press since 10.2 was released, you'ld know that that was by far the predominant stance.
I was waiting to replace my primary home machine as well, nursing along a 6 year-old Power Mac-- finally last year I couldn't wait any longer and picked up a used G4 that had the horsepower to run OS X, because I needed to get familiar with it so I could effectively support it when the time comes. In January, the G4 goes bye-bye and I get a dual G5, which is what I was waiting for all along. I just hope Apple manages to catch up with demand by then.
~Philly
I would tend to believe the numbers, no matter how large.
Many people have been in a holding pattern, using old machines running OS 9 for two reasons:
1) They would need a new machine to really make the most of OS X, and they wanted to wait until the successor to the G4 was available.
2) They didn't want to make the move to OS X until a native QuarkXPress was available for it.
Both of those conditions have now been fulfilled. Apple will not be able to crank out these things fast enough (even moreso than usual) to meet all the pent-up demand.
I bet once the numbers are in, we'll find out that this was Apple's best quarter in a few years, maybe even since the return of Jobs.
~Philly
I am very happy to tell you you're crazy. Not only will Apple survive, they will flourish-- and a great deal of that will be BECAUSE of Microsoft. It's already starting.
On the consumer side, people are getting really sick of all these security holes, viruses, worms, spyware, etc. They don't want to have to be bothered with maintaining their machines, and still don't-- a fact made most obvious by my firewall logs which STILL to this day show frequent Code Red and Nimda probes, not to mention SQL-slammer. Media outlets are starting to mention in their news reports that the worm/virus-of-the-week "doesn't affect Macs and Linux" or "only affects Windows." More people will start to pick up on that the more it happens. Mac OS X has generated really good buzz since 10.2 was released, and that's only going to improve with Panther. The GHz Gap nonsense is finally being put to sleep, thanks to the G5. The piss-poor marketing of Macs by large PC retail places is being addressed by Apple stationing Apple-paid representatives there. The Apple Stores are aiding in the visibility of the Mac platform and driving quite a bit of first-time sales.
On the business side of things, Microsoft is getting really bad with the nickel-and-diming of everyone for everything. They were forced into it because Windows has achieved market saturation-- their only recourse to keep profits going up is to charge ever more for the same shit, and to adopt subscription models wherever possible. They are pissing companies off with their upgrade-or-pay-anyway licensing schemes and associated costs, and with the fact that "the most secure Windows ever!" that Microsoft sold them is not really that secure after all. Companies are also not pleased with the Windows lock-in-- where once enough Microsoft shit is in your company, the only way to not have problems is to make ALL your systems Windows PCs. Apple takes pains to adopt open standards to interoperate with everything, while Microsoft works harder and harder at proprietarizing as much as possible so only their stuff will work 100% properly (in theory, anyway) with their stuff.
These things are building up on the business and consumer level, and will eventually reach a critical mass. People as a whole will be pushed too far by Microsoft one day, and they will finally say "enough!" and seek out and purchase non-Microsoft alternatives, even if it means paying a little more and/or having to learn some new things.
~Philly