 |
| |
|
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:28
|
|
It's true, it's true, I read it on The Register!
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/31065.html
quote:
On the iSync fiasco that didn't have to happen
By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco
Posted: 05/06/2003 at 21:31 GMT
Steve Jobs should pause for thought before carrying out one of the ritual executions that follow a public humiliation. The fiasco over the release of the iSync software update - which lost real data central to users' lives - could have been easily avoided.
iSync brought 20 new devices under the umbrella, from several different handset manufacturers. Bluetooth has always been dogged with compatibility issues, and this was a disaster waiting to happen. But it didn't have to be this way, had Apple abandoned its traditional secrecy policy a smidgen, and undergone a real beta program with real users. This need not even have been a public beta. However the most catastrophic bugs could have found within hours.
For example, Rendezvous needs to a punch a hole through the OS X Firewall. So does the new iSync update. Ideally iSync would have opened port 3004 itself, just like all the other software that needs to get through the firewall. But the word didn't get out: it simply wasn't documented.
Apple chose to create a marketing event, a 'big bang' instead. The iSync release led the Apple website on Tuesday, with a smart graphic of raining phones. Then our troubles began.
A reader, Richard Phillips, says this attitude is endemic.
"Apple do seem to be releasing stuff that should really still be in beta at the moment," he writes. "Take a look at the Apple site discussion groups regarding the new iPod (which I have) it's so bug prone it's next to useless.
"And this time it's not just Apple users asking for the Lilly to be gilted, there seems to be a whole raft of problems with it - most of which should never have got past the QA stage."
We understand - and we hope it's not true - that Apple failed to contact the handset vendors for technical data which would have guaranteed better interoperability. To some extent, everyone does Bluetooth their own way, hence the need for plug-fests.
Instead of a plug-fest, we got a bug-fest.
While Apple's secrecy is understandable in advance of the introduction of major new products, it's unforgivable for potentially catastrophic software releases.
We must ask Apple to stop experimenting on humans as live guinea pigs, and allow the QA guys to introduce a form of vivisection we know in the software business as a "Beta Program".
Apple's leadership in Bluetooth is impressive, especially compared to the horrific user experience of Bluetooth on Windows. Let's hope it learns the lessons and gets back on track. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Cruddy
|
|
If you scratched the Apple from the headline, ie software quality in decline as a whole, I would agree with it.
It seems we're paying more for less every day. No wonder people download warez. Is it the cause, or the effect? Any answer is just speculation, but I'm very cynical about "new breakthroughs", "wondrous new software capabilities" when companies won't beta test and pay peanuts.
Makes me think I'll go the shareware route when I've got code to offer (don't hold your breath - that's years away).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
optimus2861
|
|
Halifax, NS
Nov 2000
time: 01:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
TheRegister is an anti-MS tabloid of an online site (really). |
That's rather simplistic. Of the headlines on their front page today, I only see four that have anything to do with Microsoft: one about a Windows Server 2003 discount offer, one about XBox production costs, one about the first WinServer 2003 patch, and finally one about the MS/Sendo mobile phone boondoggle.
They're against MS, yes, but they're skeptical of just about everything they cover; they've been picking on Google for a while now (about the prevalance of blogs in their search results, and their new Google News service), they haven't been impressed with iTunes, they're always against RIAA/MPAA (who isn't?), and are profoundly distrustful of the UK government's moves on such things as ID cards and security.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gatekeeper
Apple has never had a huge part of the computer market share, but what it does have is generally quite loyal. I wonder if MS could survive (much less prosper) on less than 10 percent of the computer market? |
MS could survive with 0% of the computer market. They've got enough resources to do whatever they want, hell they'd even make a good investment company with MS Capital.
quote:
Furthermore, Apple, to my knowledge, is still sitting on a huge pile of monetary reserves, so they sure as heck *don't* have less to spend on their products. The last I heard, Apple had slightly more than $1 billion in reserves. Anyone have updated numbers on that? |
Current assets:
Apple: $5,468,000,000
MS: $54,672,000,000
Net tangible assets:
Apple: $4,025,000,000
MS: $54,925,000,000
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28.
Apolyton Time is 00:28. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-06-2003 08:24
. Don't know why... just does.... ok, move along 
.
)
.
|