Mac site makes all out attack on... Apple

theinquirer.net ^

[chance33_98]

Link to the above mentioned article.

[Paul Atreides]

Get ready for the incoming Mac Missiles.

[Glenn]

Anyone can say anything on the Internet. Doesn't make it so.

[chance33_98]

snippet
Some people would rather live in total darkness than hear the truth, read the truth, or live by the truth. Nothing wrong with that, I suppose, for some people it’s easier to believe what they want instead of facing up to much of the world’s injustices, horrible realities, or otherwise face up to things they just don’t want to deal with. This is one of those things, so if you love the Mac, adore Steve Jobs, and hate Bill Gates; this is the wrong column for you. In fact, this might be the wrong Mac website to visit ever again. Reading past this point proves you are a glutton for punishment. Once again, The Hamster Dance website might be more to your liking.

[chance33_98]

Ping - good article at the link!

[SamAdams76]

After reading this lengthy diatribe in full, I get the general impression that the author is a bit "frustrated" with Steve Jobs and Apple.

Any confirmation from those that use the iTunes service that the AAC files "suck"? I've only dealt with MP3 and WMA files myself (I prefer MP3 at 160kbps).

Author was right about one thing anyway. Jobs made a mistake rolling the iTunes service out to Mac users only. Jobs evidently thought he'd thumb his nose at PC users by giving his Apple crowd the service months before the PC world. But all this does is give Microsoft a huge window of opportunity to do what Microsoft does best: Steal Apple's idea and make it better. Will they ever learn?

[agitator]

Apple should do itself a favor, quit lingering, and just die. It isn't competition for M$ so there's no value there and Mac's incompetent business users who pretend to be interoperable in a world dominated by PC's are simply a pain in the butt. Betamax is dead.

[SolitaryMan]

Good article, I wondered how Mac users could say that Apples Machines were faster than PC's? To have any chance of getting close to a new Intel Machine, the Apple has to be a $3500 dual CPU machine. They do have a nice OS, but too few apps.

[chance33_98]

After reading this lengthy diatribe in full, I get the general impression that the author is a bit "frustrated" with Steve Jobs and Apple.

Can't say I blame him. I handled unix & windows servers now but a way back, when I lived in CA, I handled fixing macs for a newspaper. They had as many problems as PC, and they are certainly hackable. My X girlfriend was a mac user, when I moved in with my PC she fell in love with it and tossed the mac. She still uses one at work, but never again at home she says. Article was right about one thing, you either love em or hate em, not too many people in the middle (although I am somewhat, if it works for you and you're happy then screw what everyone else thinks).

[Paul Atreides]

In the words of Charleton Heston, from my cold dead hands!

[HAL9000]

Any confirmation from those that use the iTunes service that the AAC files "suck"?

The AAC format reportedly gives better sound quality than MP3s encoded at equivalent bit rates. Also, Apple is creating the AAC files from the original master tapes, not ripping compact discs as MP3s are typically done.

Author was right about one thing anyway. Jobs made a mistake rolling the iTunes service out to Mac users only.

The five major record companies are the reason for the delay, not Apple. They want to see how this "experiment" works on the Mac before giving Apple the go-ahead to sell to Windows users.

[ThinkPlease]

Count me in as a possible Mac convert. I'm getting a Mac powerbook from work in a few weeks. I'm looking forward to the challenge of working with a new OS.

[GOP Jedi]

Author was right about one thing anyway. Jobs made a mistake rolling the iTunes service out to Mac users only. Jobs evidently thought he'd thumb his nose at PC users by giving his Apple crowd the service months before the PC world.

Jobs isn't my most favorite person in the world, but I don't imagine this was a primary motive. Music industry leaders have been quite forthcoming in stating that they would not have approved a music service rollout serving the PC world, that they see the Mac-only service as an experiment they can withdraw from with minimal fuss if they don't like the way it's shaping up. In short, Jobs produced the only service the industry would permit him.

Now, as obnoxious as he can be, he is also brilliant, and I suspect he is planning a much more ambitious project once the camel's nose is in the tent. Albums as we know them (the few good songs you want bundled with a bunch you don't) may be passing. Signing talent at records labels may be passing. Record and radio execs as arbiters of musical excellence may be passing. Is Jobs the sole architect of such a movement? No, but he's put a major piece of the puzzle in place. iTunes (and other services that follow) needs time to grow and mature until it gains sufficient power and influence to begin creating hits on its own. Then we'll see.

At one time people bought inexpensive 45s and thus rewarded talent directly (45 sales determined success). We may be coming to a place where we can once again experience and purchase music we like without the middlemen. I for one am hopeful a lot of out-of-print material--too expensive to press and market anew--will once again enter the marketplace as downloadable files.

As for this guy's website, he's been in a slow meltdown for a couple of months now, and to say the shine is off the Apple for this lad would be an understatement...

[Frapster]

I have been a graphic designer for over 14 years. I got my start on the Mac and eventually switched over to the PC. I do not know what I'm missing by being on the PC but I've found that the speed differences either way, with today's technology, is negligible. How much is time is really saved when the difference in speed is often measured in hudredths of a second.

I personally don't care if my PC is faster or your Mac is faster. My work turns out beautiful and my clients love it. They certainly don't care what tool I'm using.

[Midwestguy]

O'course, I realize that sound quality is very subjective but, thus far, both my wife and I have been extremely impressed with the sound quality of the AAC files that we have downloaded from Apple's music store. Both of us think that AAC sounds "fuller" than MP3. The downloaded songs have a bitrate of 128kbps, but you can set iTunes to encode AAC up to 320kbps (o'course at that bitrate you might as well just import as AIFF or just play it from the cd).

We also have to give kudos to Apple's implementation of the music service. Much to the credit card's despair, they have made it almost too easy to buy songs! With 45+ downloads so far I can definitely see it getting to be a habit. (Especially with new songs added every Tuesday).

[Astronaut]

The author of the article is pissed because he broke his new PowerBook screen, and wanted Apple to fix it for free. When they told him no, he launched into his tirade about AAC encoding, etc... Its all bull. He's having a tantrum because he broke his $3000 PowerBook and expected the company he bought it from to replace it! His negligence is his fault, not Apple's. Its all on his website.

As to AAC encoding, I've purchased 20 or so songs from the iTunes Music Store and burned them to a CD. They sound amazing to me. You couldn't pay me enough to give up OS X - the most beautiful and most functional operating system on the market. Anyone who values their time and wants an exceptional user experience should shun Windows and switch to the Macintosh.

[Incorrigible]

[SamAdams76]

At one time people bought inexpensive 45s and thus rewarded talent directly (45 sales determined success). We may be coming to a place where we can once again experience and purchase music we like without the middlemen. I for one am hopeful a lot of out-of-print material--too expensive to press and market anew--will once again enter the marketplace as downloadable files.

I sure hope you are right. There are tons of old "45s" that you just can't find anymore. I believe there is a huge untapped market for singles that people remember from their youth that they would love to have again. But they just don't want to buy a $15 album to get it, that is, if the album is even available anymore.

For example, I would gladly pay $1 for the song "Timothy" from The Buoys (an obscure hit from 1972) because it is a song I remember listening to as a youth. But no way am I buying the entire album.

I believe The Beatles started the whole thing with albums. Once they became popular, everybody was putting out albums and it became standard practice for record companies to hold back some of the best songs from being singles so that more people would buy the more expensive album. I believe Led Zeppelin purposely released only their "worst" songs as singles. Although in Zeppelin's case, their albums are definitely worth buying.

[Maxfield]

Macs? You mean MAACs? As in SAABs? As in SNAABs? Actually Macs are fine, or at least fine as PCs, which is to say they both can be tiresome, but nowhere near as tiresome as Mackies as in Moonies as in Mac enthusiasts. Someway, somehow it all goes back to Bauhaus, someway, somehow, it all goes back to some elitist esthetic that has the nutty idea it's of by and for the people but really revolves around an Aryan hoity-toityness deeper and more witless than all the world's royalty. Or at least, that's the opinion of a true man of the people.

[glorgau]

The Powerbooks are probaly the best portables around. i can't see a reason for buying either the XServe or the G4 Desktop.
BTW, I'm sending this from a 400mhz G4 desktop. I bought it with a zip drive I haven't used in a year, and a modem that has never been used. :-)