Quote :

"LOL, bitter much?"

LOL, fanboy much?

and that didn't come across as bitter, it was a pretty accurate assessment of Apple.

[Edited on January 23, 2008 at 6:40 PM. Reason : ]

1/23/2008 6:40:22 PM

apple haters granted not all their products are the best out there. But from the products i've used they certainly are worth the $$$ more so than a competitors product.

I'm not a fanboy, i just like a lot of their stuff. You're just bitter like everyone else if they can't A) afford something and they really want it or B) you're on the OMG its not free/linux!

Just because you like something doesn't make you a fanboy...not everyone wants a $400 POS laptop running open source shit...

[Edited on January 23, 2008 at 6:51 PM. Reason : ...]

1/23/2008 6:49:53 PM

Quote :

"LOL, bitter much?"

no...as benz240 mentioned, i'm only pointing out what apple's average customer is like...

Quote :

"apple haters granted not all their products are the best out there. But from the products i've used they certainly are worth the $$$ more so than a competitors product."

i'm not talking about desktops or ipods or appletvs (though in terms of the desktops and ipods, i could argue that these are overpriced, as well)...macbook pros are pretty good, but i'm SPECIFICALLY talking about the air (i realize you seemed to miss this point...from what i've gathered, you do that a lot)...the air is, by far, the biggest waste of money i could imagine in a laptop...it's underpowered, underfeatured, and overpriced...yes, i realize that the ONLY two things it has going for it are its size/weight and the fact that it's an apple product and therefore is deemed stylish...but you'd be a dumbass (a likely possibility, actually) to pretend like you can't get nearly the same specs for WAY less...and that for the price they're asking, you could get something magnitudes more usable...this is an $1800 internet PC, and that's it...if you think that's a reasonable price to surf the web, then it only proves my point about apple fanboys - too much money and too little common sense (and let's not forget a confused sense of style)

Quote :

"I'm not a fanboy, i just like a lot of their stuff. You're just bitter like everyone else if they can't A) afford something and they really want it or B) you're on the OMG its not free/linux!"

if i don't fit into either of those categories, what then? aren't you the one that lives in his parents' basement (if not, my bad)? i suspect i make significantly more money than you...in fact, i suspect i have more in my savings account than you make each year...even that aside, i fail your first stipulation because i don't actually want the macbook air...i fail the second stipulation because while i do run the latest ubuntu release on my desktop for giggles, as well as mythbuntu on my HTPC, i use windows all the time (legally, no less)

Quote :

"Just because you like something doesn't make you a fanboy...not everyone wants a $400 POS laptop running open source shit..."

agreed...and i'm betting if you took a poll, the VAST majority of people posting in tech talk aren't running a $400 POS laptop with a free linux distro...so who are you referring to?

1/24/2008 9:36:41 AM

Quote :

"i'm not talking about desktops or ipods or appletvs (though in terms of the desktops and ipods, i could argue that these are overpriced, as well)...macbook pros are pretty good, but i'm SPECIFICALLY talking about the air (i realize you seemed to miss this point...from what i've gathered, you do that a lot)...the air is, by far, the biggest waste of money i could imagine in a laptop...it's underpowered, underfeatured, and overpriced...yes, i realize that the ONLY two things it has going for it are its size/weight and the fact that it's an apple product and therefore is deemed stylish...but you'd be a dumbass (a likely possibility, actually) to pretend like you can't get nearly the same specs for WAY less...and that for the price they're asking, you could get something magnitudes more usable...this is an $1800 internet PC, and that's it...if you think that's a reasonable price to surf the web, then it only proves my point about apple fanboys - too much money and too little common sense (and let's not forget a confused sense of style)"

Again, you missed the point. The AIR isn't designed for YOU. There are plenty of people out there that are looking for such a product. Weight and size are the only concerns. Why do they need to add all these useless features for people that will never use it? Simply because you want it Maybe if you traveled a little more (judging by your posting on TWW i doubt you leave the house much) you'd know the value behind super lightweight and small computing.

Name 1 feature its lacking that would be so important?

Quote :

"if i don't fit into either of those categories, what then? aren't you the one that lives in his parents' basement (if not, my bad)? i suspect i make significantly more money than you...in fact, i suspect i have more in my savings account than you make each year...even that aside, i fail your first stipulation because i don't actually want the macbook air...i fail the second stipulation because while i do run the latest ubuntu release on my desktop for giggles, as well as mythbuntu on my HTPC, i use windows all the time (legally, no less)"

HAHAHAHA...thats so funny on so many levels...

Quote :

"i suspect i make significantly more money than you"

I'm going to assume you know how much I make and therefore I can assume you make at least 6 figures or else you'd be a liar...but I highly doubt you lie.

Quote :

"agreed...and i'm betting if you took a poll, the VAST majority of people posting in tech talk aren't running a $400 POS laptop with a free linux distro...so who are you referring to?"

the VAST majority of people in tech talk complain and bitch about anything that costs money. "OMG windows sucks ballz!" "omg Mac OS X is ghey!" you do the math. And when it comes to hardware... "OMG that costs money! I could built something twice as good for 4 times less!"

[Edited on January 24, 2008 at 10:31 AM. Reason : ...]

[Edited on January 24, 2008 at 10:32 AM. Reason : .]

1/24/2008 10:30:06 AM

this got retarded quickly.

1/24/2008 10:59:11 AM

Quote :

"Again, you missed the point. The AIR isn't designed for YOU. There are plenty of people out there that are looking for such a product. Weight and size are the only concerns. Why do they need to add all these useless features for people that will never use it? Simply because you want it Maybe if you traveled a little more (judging by your posting on TWW i doubt you leave the house much) you'd know the value behind super lightweight and small computing. Name 1 feature its lacking that would be so important?"

we both agree it isn't designed for ME...i represent a portion of the population that is perfectly aware of the features and price points that are appropriate for laptops...the sort of people that are willing to spend EIGHTEEN HUNDRED DOLLAR BUCKS on a web surfing machine are one of two people, neither of which are me: 1.) have nothing else to spend their money on (different than not having money at all, but i assume you'll change this to whatever best fits your point) or 2.) are more concerned with style than functionality (or, rather, the balance between the two)

the feature that's lacking? is a reasonable price not a feature? aside from that...you seem to be confused as to what we're arguing about...the macbook air is a FINE machine if ALL you want to do is surf the web and run office apps

the problem is the price...$1800 is ridiculous for surfing and office apps...i don't suppose you'd understand that, mostly because you'd have to take your head out of jobs' ass and look around and realize you could buy TWO laptops for less than the cost of the air and have them do twice as much

sure this is targeted towards certain people - what we seem to be in argument about is how stupid these people must be...you seem to think nearly $2k is reasonable for checking email...for some reason, though, i'd rather spend $400 to do the same thing, or $1000 on a machine that's actually worth owning

1/24/2008 11:10:54 AM

i guarantee you if it was $999 we wouldn't be having this discussion about the Macbook Air

but keep in mind this was meant for business & travelers, whom typically don't buy their own laptops.

[Edited on January 24, 2008 at 11:17 AM. Reason : .]

1/24/2008 11:14:52 AM

Quote :

"i guarantee you if it was $999 we wouldn't be having this discussion about the Macbook Air"

you're absolutely right...for the features, i would still consider that a BIT high, but i would consider that in line for a product that's actually implementing new(er) technology like LED backlights (sure, they've been around for years, but this is the first mainstream consumer laptop i've seen with it available as a standard feature)

Quote :

"but keep in mind this was meant for business & travelers, whom typically don't buy their own laptops."

and i realize this, as well...i'm not saying no one will buy one...it's DAMN pretty, lightweight and small...but hell, if dell thought it was worth the time, i'm sure they would have done one already, too...the difference is the type of person that buys a mac - they're special and are MORE than willing to throw money at something that has more looks than brains...PC laptop owners care less about style (overall) and more about performance...the air is definitely higher in the former and weak in the latter

[Edited on January 24, 2008 at 11:23 AM. Reason : .]

1/24/2008 11:22:13 AM

the problem is you can't put that kind of performance into a small package... getting it that small has it's price. the two major factors I'm sure they were thinking about was

a) heat issues with performance hardware, there's no place for fans
b) poor battery life with performance hardware

they added the SSD as an option because it's really the only peformance related hardware that runs on low-power and produces low-heat

in this case i don't think it's possible to have the best of both worlds

1/24/2008 11:29:03 AM

Quote :

"this got retarded quickly"

that's golovko for you

he's not a fanboy, but he just takes every opportunity to defend what he likes and shit on what he doesn't (and people who have different opinions)

but no, not a fanboy, nothing to see here

1/24/2008 11:34:45 AM

quagmire02 so what the fuck are you bitching about exactly? The Macbook Air is not for you...move on, who the fuck cares.

^incorrect...its people shitting on products that don't even apply to their demographic. Thats trolling.

Quote :

"the feature that's lacking? is a reasonable price not a feature? aside from that...you seem to be confused as to what we're arguing about...the macbook air is a FINE machine if ALL you want to do is surf the web and run office apps"

price? really? thats your angle? Why would you be so concerned with price of a product you have no interest in acquiring....sounds to me like bitching for the sake of bitching.

I am well aware I can pick up a fairly high-end laptop with 4gb of RAM and reasonably light-weight for less than $1800...because i've already bought one for a relative a year ago. Windows machine no less. Was it as thin and lightweight as the Air? hell no. If the air was out at the time thats exactly what i would have bought for them simply because all they needed was a lightweight internet surfing, easy to travel, office app machine. paying a few hundred more would have been well worth it.

Quote :

"sure this is targeted towards certain people - what we seem to be in argument about is how stupid these people must be...you seem to think nearly $2k is reasonable for checking email...for some reason, though, i'd rather spend $400 to do the same thing, or $1000 on a machine that's actually worth owning"

$400 is too much for making phone calls. I can do that for free just by activating a new cell phone line

Quote :

"and i realize this, as well...i'm not saying no one will buy one...it's DAMN pretty, lightweight and small...but hell, if dell thought it was worth the time, i'm sure they would have done one already, too...the difference is the type of person that buys a mac - they're special and are MORE than willing to throw money at something that has more looks than brains...PC laptop owners care less about style (overall) and more about performance...the air is definitely higher in the former and weak in the latter"

thats because Dell and majority of PC laptops look like total ass. Who wants to pay $1800 for an ugly looking piece of shit dell? Its no different than buying a car...you don't buy an ugly ass car because it has certain features you look for. You buy a nice looking car that has the same features you're looking for but also might cost more.

[Edited on January 24, 2008 at 12:18 PM. Reason : .]

1/24/2008 12:10:59 PM

its another featherweight laptop, they are typically overpriced and underpowered when compared to other laptops, nothing unusual at all.

1/24/2008 12:51:43 PM

Quote :

"Why would you be so concerned with price of a product you have no interest in acquiring"

good point...as i've noted, i keep forgetting how many dumb people with money there are in the world...speaking of, when's your air scheduled to arrive? because by your logic, unless you're acquiring it yourself, you should shut the fuck up...btw, what kind of detergent are you planning on using to get the splooge off the keyboard when it arrives?

Quote :

"sounds to me like bitching for the sake of bitching."

pot? meet kettle.

Quote :

"$400 is too much for making phone calls. I can do that for free just by activating a new cell phone line"

this makes no sense...are you suggesting that cell service is free? your comparison is pointless, kid

Quote :

"thats because Dell and majority of PC laptops look like total ass. Who wants to pay $1800 for an ugly looking piece of shit dell?"

and this is my point...thank you for making it for me...to people who would buy the air, the look is worth the double-the-price premium...your car example is stupid because no one pays TWICE the price for the same car just because of LOOKS...for that double price sticker, you ALWAYS get a better engine out of the deal, too...which is very much not the case here (in fact, it's quite the opposite...you pay more money for less engine)

Quote :

"its another featherweight laptop, they are typically overpriced and underpowered when compared to other laptops, nothing unusual at all."

i know, i know...you're right...i guess the magnitude of "overpriced" and "underpowered" is what shocked me, but i forever underestimate lack of common sense of some people (in this case, specifically, those who would be daft enough to purchase a macbook air)

1/24/2008 1:16:29 PM

1/24/2008 1:42:54 PM

Quote :

"this makes no sense...are you suggesting that cell service is free? your comparison is pointless, kid"

I knew you'd have trouble understanding this, kid. Let me explain. an iPhone is $400 + cell phone contract. At the same time you can get a free phone + cell phone contract. Both do what its supposed to do...make phone calls. Now why is the iPhone $400? Oh its Apple, they just like to over price their shit for no apparent reason.

Quote :

"good point...as i've noted, i keep forgetting how many dumb people with money there are in the world...speaking of, when's your air scheduled to arrive? because by your logic, unless you're acquiring it yourself, you should shut the fuck up...btw, what kind of detergent are you planning on using to get the splooge off the keyboard when it arrives?"

because you are just here to troll and bitch so you probably missed it. I've already stated that I am not buying a Macbook Air now because it just came out. I'm waiting at least 6 months to consider buying one. I am not bitching about how over priced the product is, or how underpowered it is, or underfeatured. I know exactly what the purpose of this laptop is and it definitely accomplishes that. I can appreciate something good when I see it.

Quote :

"pot? meet kettle."

not quite. Try again. I'm not the one bitching and whining about a product i'll never buy.

Quote :

"and this is my point...thank you for making it for me...to people who would buy the air, the look is worth the double-the-price premium...your car example is stupid because no one pays TWICE the price for the same car just because of LOOKS...for that double price sticker, you ALWAYS get a better engine out of the deal, too...which is very much not the case here (in fact, it's quite the opposite...you pay more money for less engine)"

again, kid, you missed the point. Car example is perfect because you can find any car with the features you want...but other car companies like BMW, Mercedes Benz etc....take it to the next level and focus on actual design + features/luxury. While you have GM or Mitsubishi making shit boxes that are ugly as sin, have shitty features and cost half as much. All these cars accomplish the same thing...so why would anyone buy a BMW

according to your logic because they have too much money and don't know what to do with it. They're really not getting anything more for their money.

1/24/2008 1:47:14 PM

or Sony VAIO TZ150N or Toshiba Portege R500-S5002

1/24/2008 1:57:13 PM

both of those don't have the same sleek design. Also they are thicker. And another thing worth my money is not having to uninstall 1000 pre-installed sony suite software and ad's as soon as i turn on the computer for the first time.

not to mention VAIO's suck...perfect example of overpriced junk. If you want to call Apple overpriced, fine. But its not junk. Toshiba on the other hand from past experiences aren't bad.

1/24/2008 2:01:58 PM

^^^ i'm sure it's the damp air in your parents' basement, but you missed the point at each turn...when you start saying that mercedes has the same features as a GM and the only difference is the exterior, i find there's no point arguing with you

i've already stated (but perhaps the words were too large for you?) that it's not JUST about design and it's not JUST about features...maybe you consider the engine in your car to be a feature, but in this case:

dell: kia body (and price) with a v8 engine
apple: mercedes body (and price) with a 4-banger

that dell will get you were you want to go a hell of a lot faster than the apple, but you won't be as pretty...the apple will get you there after everyone else, but it'll do it in style

if all you want to do is go around the corner to the grocery store to pick up a pint of milk, sure the apple works...heaven forbid you want to go across town or bring much back with you, because the apple falls flat on its face...and you paid more for it

[Edited on January 24, 2008 at 2:12 PM. Reason : arrows]

1/24/2008 2:12:35 PM

you're treating it as if the size and weight aren't features at all in themselves.

1/24/2008 2:18:54 PM

^ no, i'm treating it as if they're aren't NEW features...because they're not...there are internet PCs that are already light and small, for far less than the air

1/24/2008 2:23:14 PM

but it's not like there's some laptop out there that has all the features and is as light and small as this for cheaper.

1/24/2008 2:26:15 PM

I'm with quagmire, not really impressed.

If these products were cheaper...but they're not. There's really no excuse for spending $2000 on a personal computer in this day and age.

1/24/2008 2:27:17 PM

and there's no point in spending 100,000 on a car. but people do it every day. just because other people have different priorities and price points than you doesn't mean the product is bad.

1/24/2008 2:29:46 PM

Quote :

"but it's not like there's some laptop out there that has all the features and is as light and small as this for cheaper."

i agree...the sony tz (which i think jobs compared the air to, but i don't know for sure) is significantly more expensive but has significantly more features...are they worth it? i don't know...there are also $400-600 internet laptops that do all the air does, but with smaller SSDs and slower processors (which, from what i'm understanding from the arguments in this thread, isn't a big deal for web surfing and office apps)

i suppose the argument is whether or not there's a perceived gap between internet pcs and high-end ultra-portables...i don't see the niche (well, i can understand if there is one, but i can't possibly imagine a group large enough to fill it as to be significant enough to warrant a brand new product)...the people who would buy the air either don't care about the money (and therefore can purchase high-end machines) or don't do enough to warrant full-blown functional laptops (and therefore can buy internet pcs that weigh even less)...i just don't see the gap (i'm not saying i'm not a part of it, because it's obvious i'm not, but i don't even SEE it, unless you start to count people who care about looks more than performance and those are always going to be apple users)

1/24/2008 2:35:59 PM

yall just shut the fuck up, everybody gets your point. there is no point to this argument

oh wait, its tww, nvm, continue

1/24/2008 3:01:14 PM

Quote :

"^^^ i'm sure it's the damp air in your parents' basement, but you missed the point at each turn...when you start saying that mercedes has the same features as a GM and the only difference is the exterior, i find there's no point arguing with you"

you have no business posting until you learn to read. I never said anything about the only difference between a GM and a Mercedes is the exterior. You fucking dense troll.

Quote :

"take it to the next level and focus on actual design + features/luxury"

translated by our neighborhood dumbass into - exact fucking same except for the exterior.

Quote :

"dell: kia body (and price) with a v8 engine apple: mercedes body (and price) with a 4-banger that dell will get you were you want to go a hell of a lot faster than the apple, but you won't be as pretty...the apple will get you there after everyone else, but it'll do it in style if all you want to do is go around the corner to the grocery store to pick up a pint of milk, sure the apple works...heaven forbid you want to go across town or bring much back with you, because the apple falls flat on its face...and you paid more for it"

not even remotely accurate unless you are comparing a Dell XPS to the Air. Sounds to me like you are talking gaming. In that case PC > Apple.


oh and...where can I find this so called basement?

[Edited on January 24, 2008 at 3:10 PM. Reason : asdf]

[Edited on January 24, 2008 at 3:11 PM. Reason : ...]

1/24/2008 3:04:29 PM

2/7/2008 12:10:51 PM

Why the hell are people still arguing about this? It's a high priced ultra-light. Get over it. No you shouldn't try to use it to play games. Yes it's disingenuous to compare it to other non-ultralight laptops when criticizing its features. No shit it's overpriced- most apple products are. What more is there to talk about besides how you've let yourselves be trolled for about 3 freaking weeks?

[Edited on February 7, 2008 at 12:29 PM. Reason : ]

2/7/2008 12:28:57 PM

hahaha no ones arguing about it...last post made was 1/24.

L2R

2/7/2008 12:30:13 PM

^ Obvious troll attempt. The last page is nothing but bickering and whining and mostly from you. Oh I'm so sorry if I included the 1 week hiatus you took before dredging this thread back up though. It's only really two weeks of troll baiting nonsense and a week of lurking.

2/7/2008 12:34:40 PM

umm...i like the macbook air. I'm actually one of those 'dumbasses' who will be getting one eventually. So my only guess is you don't read but instead chose to pull things out of your ass.

2/7/2008 7:28:16 PM

Quote :

"I'm actually one of those 'dumbasses' who will be getting one eventually."

They say the first step is admitting you have a problem. So congrats on that, I guess.

2/8/2008 3:31:21 PM

There's def. a market for these. I'm a "weird" user, because I do like to install multiple operating systems, edit weird stuff, but mostly just surf the web. I'm certainly considering one. Apple fan boy? Hardly, all I have is an Apple laptop, and an iphone. I've never really had another Apple product, I have purchased them for others though.
Ahmet -->another person who's IBM/Custom desk/laptops are being replaced by an Apple laptop, for this "non existent market" or "over priced junk".

2/8/2008 4:21:29 PM

^^^^^^^ Wow, that's really funny.
Ahmet

2/8/2008 4:22:38 PM

now that the Macbook Air has been in the wild for a couple weeks and people are starting to think rationally about it, it's starting to get a lot more love
http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/858-the-macbook-air-could-easily-be-the-only-machine
http://daringfireball.net/2008/02/macbook_air_appeal
http://scobleizer.com/2008/02/16/love-for-macbookair-grows/

there are a lot of very valid, often overlooked points here. mainly:
1) the specs really aren't that bad. Yeah, compared to high end laptops and desktops today, it's not going to win many speed or benchmark contests. But with 2 1.6GHz cores, 80GB hard drive, and 2GB RAM, this thing is still faster than almost any computer just 2-3 years ago, and IIRC, people were still using computers for the same bsic things way back in 2005 - email, browsing, word processing, photos
2) the "lack of features" again isn't a big deal to most people. 95% of people don't need a replaceable battery or firewire. Wireless is nearly ubiquitous now, so no ethernet isn't a big deal. And with nearly all software available online now, a DVD drive is often ignored anyway.

2/17/2008 12:05:19 AM

To me, it seems like a complete waste to have such nice dual core processors without any high speed interconnects. You can't rip DVDs, you can't edit videos, you can't use various different audio or video interfaces that use firewire. iMovie is practically useless, which means iDVD is also useless, and no CD ripping makes iTunes partially useless, which is 3/4 of Apples much touted iApps suite.

[Edited on February 17, 2008 at 12:16 AM. Reason : ]

2/17/2008 12:15:55 AM

Quote :

". You can't rip DVDs, you can't edit videos, you can't use various different audio or video interfaces that use firewire"

seriously, most people (i'd say easily 90% of casual computer users) don't ever do that kind of stuff

Quote :

"no CD ripping makes iTunes partially useless"

ok, i realize that some people still need to rip CDs, but really - are you still buying CDs? If not, haven't all of your CDs been ripped already? I ripped all my existing CDs years ago, and since then have just downloaded or bought everything online.

And don't you think it was kind of part of Apple's plan announcing the MBA on the same day that they announced HD movie downloads and rentals via iTunes?

2/17/2008 12:22:33 AM

Reminds me of when Apple started selling computers without a floppy drive and people said it was unacceptable to have a computer without one...
Ahmet

2/17/2008 1:24:45 AM

Haha. I remember that. Now what do we do with the 1000's of 3.5" floppies at work?

2/17/2008 1:22:02 PM

2/17/2008 8:04:54 PM

Didn't think this was worth creating a new thread:

http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/28/2339246

Apparently non-apple software suffers decent performance hits compared to similar apple software since apple makes use of numerous undocumented API's. Come on guys! If you want your OS to keep growing it has to be easy for developers to write and port for AND the software has to run as well as it possibly can. Crippling 3rd party software (gross exaggeration) is a terrible move. Hopefully this is just an oversight and they'll release these API's to developers.

2/28/2008 11:49:32 PM

reading a lot of that link tells me this:
- Apple doesn't have to document its own software for everyone else if they really don't want to
- yes, it's better to document all API's for third party development, IF you want that development to happen
- it's not always a good idea to document everything that you development, since there are a few things that aren't going to be stable, safe, etc etc

Apple isn't "crippling" anything, but they aren't holding anybody's hand to get them caught up with new API's either. One thing that I've hated about developing projects in Unreal is the huge lack of good documentation for the UT2k4 platform as compared to other SDK's. Looking from the other side of the table though, I understand not wanting to provide all that documentation.

2/29/2008 1:14:42 AM

^^ I hope you read the actual article because the Slasdhot blurb is very misleading: http://blog.vlad1.com/2008/02/28/finding-the-os-x-turbo-button/

2/29/2008 2:04:01 AM

yeah, i read ^ last night, and there's a comment on that page from a guy who works on WebKit.

the crux of the problem, as I understand it, is that WebKit puts a caps the number of frames per second a WebKit application can draw, either at 30 or 60fps, depending on the situation. Theoretically, i think this is done because human eyes can't process more than that many fps anyway, so if an application is allowed to redraw frames willy-nilly as fast as it wants, there would be no discernible difference to the human eye, but it would require a lot more CPU to keep redrawing. Whether this is true or not, i guess is up for debate.

the problem comes in because this artificial limit is not very well documented or explained. There is an Apple technote that says an application can disable this limit by adding a couple lines to the plist configuration file. When the FireFox team added this to FireFox 3, the theoretical benchmark performance increased dramatically, especially in benchmarks that just scroll a webpage up and down really fast.

Also, included in the supposedly opensource WebKit is a binary library that cannot be read, and a header file that defined about 100 WB_* functions that are not documented. The FireFox team has found an undocumented function in this file that also disables the redraw/fps limit. So that means if that function had been documented, the FF team could have simply called that function from the beginning and wouldn't have run into this ceiling, instead of altering configuration files. It also means that internal Apple products, like Safari, can call these undocumented APIs to increase their performance over non-Apple products, or it can be used to artificially inflate benchmarks that have access to the API, which may or may not have any effect on real-world performance.

2/29/2008 7:23:12 AM

^^ Yeah I did read it- and I admitted to exaggerating a bit. I guess my point was that when you're a distant second in desktop+laptop OS share you can't be making it harder for people to write software for your OS. That even goes for your competitors. Sure they didn't cripple firefox, but Apple should be encouraging people to write programs for their OS and make them as stable and fast as possible. One of OSX's biggest selling points for me has been how much faster SOME of the programs I use run in it. Maple, for some bizzarre reason, seems to run much faster in OSX than it does in XP (1.86ghz macbook with 1gb of ram vs. inspiron e1505 with 2.16 ghz core 2 duo w/2gb of RAM + some irrellevent things like video card etc.)

Anyways, if Apple wants to grow their market share it doesn't help them to artificially make their suites of software slightly faster than products people are used to and won't switch from.

2/29/2008 7:49:42 AM

the original post was updated after the slashdotting

Quote :

"Edit: Slashdot seems to have picked up on this, and in typical style, has completely misunderstood the post. To be clear, I do not think that Apple is in any way trying to purposely "cripple" non-Apple software. I also do not think that undocumented APIs give Safari any kind of "significant performance advantage" (as Firefox 3 should show!). However, as I said, the undocumented functionality could be useful for Firefox and other apps to implement things in an simpler (and potentially more efficient) manner. I don't think this is malicious, it's just an unfortunate cutting of corners that is way too easy for a company that's not fully open to do."

2/29/2008 8:32:56 AM

Didn't Microsoft get sued regarding something like this?

2/29/2008 8:49:58 AM

Nah, this looks like more of an oversight and sloppyness on apple's part than maliciousness. Microsoft's suits have dealt with deliberate anti-competitive behavior while this seems to be more of an honest kind of fuck up.

[Edited on February 29, 2008 at 8:52 AM. Reason : ]

2/29/2008 8:51:58 AM

2/29/2008 9:35:04 AM

it really depends on what their intention was.

It's clear that all software companies and projects have and must have internal APIs that are not available to the public, for any number of reasons.

Any maliciousness would come in if they use the internal API to artificially slow down external apps or artificially speed up internal apps. For example, say there is private internal API function that disables an artificial graphics performance ceiling, similar to the one the FF guys found. The ceiling put in place limits the frames per second sent to the screen, with the intent that humans can only process a certain number of frames per second anyway, so anything above a number (like 60) is simply wasted processor time. So the limit is in place to free up CPU time for other processing tasks and theoretically there should be no impact on the user because he wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 60fps and 150fps anyway.
Some maliciousness could come in if Apple secretively disabled the limiter when they do benchmarks for their own programs, like Safari. So one of the benchmarks is somehow related to the fps the program generates. If Safari disables the ceiling, they can really crank up the framerate and blow the top off the benchmark, but if another prgram like FireFox is not allowed to disable the ceiling, their benchmarks will be limited by a relatively undocumented feature.

in this particular case, i think the framerate-drawing limit is not supposed to have an effect on real-world performance and would mostly show up in benchmark and automated testing performance, but the FF guys says disabling it does have a real-world impact.
Also, even though disabling this feature is available in an internal API, Apple also gives a way to disable it in the application configuration plist, so if they give a reasonable workaround, i'm not sure there is much room to complain about it being hidden or non-accessible.

2/29/2008 9:37:28 AM