Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Mozilla CEO says Apple's Safari auto-update 'wrong'
news.com — lot of people appear to be bent out of shape about Apple using its auto-update service to distribute the Safari Web browser on Windows. The CEO of Mozilla, which makes the rival Firefox browser, calls it bad business.
Konstantino- 2066 diggs
- digg it
- getisboy, on 03/22/2008, -73/+11they should have this, but instead of installing safari it should install firefox and remove IE
- ChillEnt, on 03/22/2008, -20/+2maybe for Safari 4
- MAGZine, on 04/22/2008, -0/+47If Safari "auto-updates" itself, I'll "auto-update" it right off of my computer. Problem solved.
- jemka, on 03/22/2008, -0/+7Problem solved if Apple didn't push Safari to users that don't have it installed first place.
- jemka, on 03/22/2008, -0/+19The point that's being made is similar to many people who want updates for one piece of software, i.e quicktime, which get packaged with another software, i.e. iTues. Personally, I don't use iTunes, nor do I even have it installed, but Apple feels that if I need quicktime updates, I also need iTunes. "Quicktime Updates + iTunes"
That's like when cops pull you over and ask you, were you driving the speed limit and do you have any drugs in your car? No? No you weren't driving the speed limit. Umm Yes... Oh yes you do have drugs?
That's what we call a loaded question, and I call this a loaded download. I'm an apple fan. Great work guys, and I"m sorry your efforts in excellent programming and engineering haven't yielded more recognition and use, but please don't start to use these so called rootkit and malware tactics. If I want your software, I'll download it, thanks.- Giga, on 03/25/2008, -1/+0Are you comparing cops checking for drugs when they pull you over to Safari being pushed onto users with other updates? One of them should happen, one should not. I'll let you guess which is which.
- TimDigg, on 03/22/2008, -2/+18WHOA I just clicked Auto-update
I thought that it meant, it would update if you ALREADY HAD safari
This is trying to pass safari along to people who don't even have it...
yea thats WRONG
- Hortnon, on 03/22/2008, -23/+433Wait, is this kind of thing news to people? Apple has been pulling this kind of crap for years. For a while, you had to install iTunes if you were installing QuickTime, for example.
- IceDog, on 03/22/2008, -11/+65True but that was part of the install, not installing when you where only UPDATING your iTunes (for example). I think this would be considered low even for MS..not sure they've never done it.
- TimDigg, on 03/22/2008, -22/+4http://www.tech2.com/media/images/img_1703_ie7-on- ...
Yup they have....High Priority my ass....- mrsteveman1, on 03/22/2008, -1/+27That's different, IE7 replaces IE6, which is horribly insecure and worthless. That makes it high priority.
Safari on Windows replaces nothing, as nothing was ever installed.- grimward, on 03/22/2008, -6/+4Even if I love the new windows Vista, i still think microsoft is up ***** creek on that one, they really shouldn't be pushing it out when it was so unstable as it initially was. The custom is to ask your user if he wants that upgrade or not if it's a major version upgrade, MS messed up on that one royally.
- 4pple5auce, on 03/22/2008, -5/+10Was it Vista that was unstable or were you just mad because no one wrote drivers or software for it until recently? That's not MS's fault... they just make an OS. Are they supposed to be responsible for the thousands of companies that write software and drivers for it?
- grimward, on 03/22/2008, -2/+5I meant when microsoft pushed out internet explorer 7 over previous versions, I should have made that distinction a bit more clear, sorry about that. As for vista, I've been a happy convert for quite a while now, sure it has it's annoyances (like when it tries to think for you) but on the whole, i've only found a few legacy programs failing to work on it.
- mrsteveman1, on 03/22/2008, -1/+27That's different, IE7 replaces IE6, which is horribly insecure and worthless. That makes it high priority.
- TimDigg, on 03/22/2008, -22/+4http://www.tech2.com/media/images/img_1703_ie7-on- ...
- xmodem2, on 03/22/2008, -19/+37I don't think its ever been true that you HAD to install itunes to get quicktime. I know for a long time apple distributed the standalone quicktime installer from a separate page that was well hidden and was linked from somewhere. Easiest way to get to it was to google "Quicktime standalone"
- mindspaceindia, on 03/22/2008, -3/+32I think the more obvious search for a layman qould be 'Quicktime' and not 'Quicktime standalone'.
and THAT'S why it's 'bad business' - geoken, on 03/22/2008, -1/+15Actually, I think the more obvious thing would be to click the link to apple.com/quicktime which was usually somewhere in the immidiate vicinity of a quicktime embeded movie. That link would of course bring you to the afformentioned page where quicktime and iTunes were bundled into the same installer.
- mindspaceindia, on 03/22/2008, -3/+32I think the more obvious search for a layman qould be 'Quicktime' and not 'Quicktime standalone'.
- theeEqualizer, on 03/22/2008, -26/+6Not quite the whole story. iTunes actually uses Quicktime's codecs for functionality. So that's why its required.
Having said that, the real question is why did they have to write iTunes to be dependent on ANY other software for its codecs. That seems to be the not-so-innocent part. Obviously, no accident.- vdog, on 03/22/2008, -11/+9It's the other way around- you wanted Quicktime, you got iTunes. But it's pretty much moot, now that there's also Quicktime Alternative and VLC.
- theeEqualizer, on 03/22/2008, -2/+5Sorry... very tired, almost time to go home. I see my mistake. I'm used to people bitching about the current situation of needing to install quicktimes for iTunes. My bad.
btw, I love VLC. Nice and streamlined. No cumbersome crap to load.
- theeEqualizer, on 03/22/2008, -2/+5Sorry... very tired, almost time to go home. I see my mistake. I'm used to people bitching about the current situation of needing to install quicktimes for iTunes. My bad.
- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -2/+7Because iTunes originates from the Mac and QuickTime is a fundamental framework (read: code library) used to display multimedia content. You know it on Windows as just a media player but on the Mac it is much more and is used throughout many applications without the appearance of the QuickTime Player application, which is basically just a wrapper application. It should be feasible for Apple to ship iTunes for Windows with the necessary QuickTime components packaged up but I expect this was probably the easiest way of doing it since QuickTime for WIndows has existed for many years before iTunes for Windows.
- vdog, on 03/22/2008, -11/+9It's the other way around- you wanted Quicktime, you got iTunes. But it's pretty much moot, now that there's also Quicktime Alternative and VLC.
- kazamx, on 03/22/2008, -12/+25Amorok 2 is coming. iTunes, your days are numbered.
- mizike, on 03/22/2008, -2/+15call me a cynic, but I don't see Amorok taking over iTunes place as #2 music seller in the U.S.
- Malnilion, on 03/22/2008, -3/+12Call me an *****, but the program's spelled Amarok. And no, I agree, it won't ever eclipse iTunes in music sales. I don't understand why people would buy lossy music anyway.
- sjmulder, on 03/22/2008, -5/+5Like on CD?
- Malnilion, on 03/22/2008, -3/+12Call me an *****, but the program's spelled Amarok. And no, I agree, it won't ever eclipse iTunes in music sales. I don't understand why people would buy lossy music anyway.
- mizike, on 03/22/2008, -2/+15call me a cynic, but I don't see Amorok taking over iTunes place as #2 music seller in the U.S.
- ChrisLondon, on 03/22/2008, -19/+10You don't HAVE to install anything. If you don't know how to operate a checkbox you shouldn't be allowed on the net anyway.
- Hortnon, on 03/22/2008, -2/+11I'm not talking about now. You literally were required to install both for a while a couple years ago, there was no other option. Then the option was there and it was hidden. Now you get the checkbox you're talking about. The process has changed, if you can grasp that concept...
- yabos, on 03/22/2008, -18/+5There's a link on the download page
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/
It's so hard for you to select the radio button that says:
QuickTime 7.4.1 for Windows XP
or Vista
Instead of the one that says:
QuickTime 7.4.1 with iTunes
for Windows XP or Vista- merreborn, on 03/22/2008, -1/+14It wasn't always like that.
See for yourself:
http://web.archive.org/web/20060101071013/http://w ...
You'll see that as of Jan 1st, 2006, the *only* software apple had on that page was the itunes bundle.- yabos, on 03/23/2008, -0/+1There was always a link to Quicktime only, and wow, 2 YEARS ago it was not as visible as before. I'm talking about NOW because this guy is still complaining TODAY about how you have to install iTunes when you install Quicktime which is BS.
- merreborn, on 03/22/2008, -1/+14It wasn't always like that.
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 03/22/2008, -2/+38> "For a while, you had to install iTunes if you were installing QuickTime, for example."
Others have clarified what was actually going on, but I do remember that. The Apple Software Update utility is also *extremely* poor practice. If you install it when you install QuickTime, every time there's a QuickTime update, it *always* tries to get you to install iTunes (The "QuickTime + iTunes" option is always checked by default; even if you uncheck it, it checked on the next update).
Apple really doesn't get as much flak as they deserve. It's a shame. - prisoner24601, on 03/22/2008, -1/+12It's just like how every Java update tries to send you the Google toolbar hoping you won't notice it's the default option. It's really shady how these software companies now seem to design their installs with a bunch of completely useless "next" buttons you *have* to click to install (license agreement, install location, advanced options or basic, etc.) and, no matter how much they whine that they are important for legal or technical reasons, you know they aren't. They are only there so that unsophisticated users get "click fatigue" and just approve *any* dialog in the install since they don't know what it means anyway. Then they get the Google Toolbar gumming up the works because they were nagged to update Java, or Safari because iTunes whined about an update, etc. And the software company can (very disingenuously) say: "well these users CHOOSE to have it installed, and they had the option not to..."
It's pathetic. Later people are wondering why their Windows installation has 70 process running visible in Task Manager even after a reboot and *before* launching a single application. - digitalarcanum, on 03/22/2008, -7/+8This is reason one I never install Apple software. They presume the user wants to be in the iWorld and doesn't just want quicktime installed to have the codec to view that god damn link to a .mov trailer someone sent you five minutes ago.
The mozilla CEO is right, this is really bad business practice. So IE is included with Windows (insert version here). What's your point? OSX includes Safari itunes, sound editing, photo editing, etc installed by default, just like windows has default programs installed, but just because PCs and windows won the majority of the home computer marketshare, everyone is crying foul that MS includes even the most basic of things with their OS: a web browser and a media player (remember the antitrust lawsuit the EU has on microsoft over their media player?) among other things. if you go to windows update, when you go to update windows media player, make you run through an installer and install Live messenger as well, do they?
and as for adding *****-ware to messenger applications as someone else mentioned (such as resetting the homepage on IE, or adding a toolbar to your web browser, every major messenger program does that now which is why I don't install any of them: I use pidgin. ***** you all.
So bottom line, if you want to tell Apple to ***** off, this is the best way to do so:
http://www.free-codecs.com/download/QuickTime_Alte ... - instantrunoff, on 03/22/2008, -1/+5Their Bonjour for Windows installer does something similar: it installs Apple Software Update even if you deselect it during installation.
- Jaliyl, on 03/22/2008, -3/+2What the hell is Bonjour anyway, I found it on my PC last month and deleted it assuming it was malware.
- misterjangles, on 03/22/2008, -0/+3http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/bonjour.htm ...
- Jaliyl, on 03/22/2008, -3/+2What the hell is Bonjour anyway, I found it on my PC last month and deleted it assuming it was malware.
- fugazied, on 03/22/2008, -0/+5Agree for sure. I am a pretty big Apple fan, however I own PCs as well, running Win XP and Quicktime integration with itunes is a POS.
- igob8a, on 03/23/2008, -1/+1"Use of this software is subject to the original Software License Agreement(s) that accompanied the software being updated."
WHAT ORIGINAL SOFTWARE?! - dysonlu, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1and the fact that you have to provide your credit card number just to create an iTunes account. I don't remember ever having to do that with any other websites. Thank God I found a way around that after a little googling.
- IceDog, on 03/22/2008, -11/+65True but that was part of the install, not installing when you where only UPDATING your iTunes (for example). I think this would be considered low even for MS..not sure they've never done it.
- DiggLive, on 03/22/2008, -26/+164With the Windows Live Installer, you can uncheck items for Messenger/Mail/etc and it would never offer to install a new application like Photo Gallery or Toolbar when updating.
http://get.live.com/WL/config_all
I'm glad there's a lot of opposition to Apple's behavior on the web. For others, get out of the Reality Distortion Field.- sexybobo, on 03/22/2008, -19/+6Lol Microsoft needs to work on supporting their own software. I have XP64 and when i go to that page i get an error message stating
"If you are using Windows XP x64 or Windows Server 2003/2008, your operating system is not supported. Please try our Web products at http://home.live.com."- banmaster, on 03/22/2008, -8/+19Your fault for using a VERY niche OS. Amazingly, it even has less market penetration than OSX.
- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -1/+12I'd use XP x64 in a heartbeat if it had better driver support.
- gritta, on 03/22/2008, -0/+5No it's not, Microsoft has specifically disabled support for these operating systems when infact they are actually supported by the software, see my other comment.
- sexybobo, on 03/22/2008, -4/+2Actually banmaster i would tend to think it was Microsofts fault. They sell an operating system then don't bother righting software for it.
- nmnnotmyname, on 03/22/2008, -1/+2I want to use XP64 also, Is it not MS's fault for not supporting it?
- MrViklund, on 03/22/2008, -2/+2So. It is his own fault for using a Microsoft product?
I will remember that...
- skoles, on 03/22/2008, -2/+3For a while every time you disabled Messenger from loading in the toolbar and update would just put it back.
- gritta, on 03/22/2008, -3/+2http://mess.be/ check the links on the left, you can download the ACTUAL installer, as opposed to the "downloader-installer" that microsoft ***** out on their website.
- nmnnotmyname, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1I'm bookmarking that for when I install XP again.
- jabberwolf, on 03/23/2008, -0/+2WOW they actually POINT you to a location where applications ARE supported ?!!? WHOLLY ***** ! That must be really confusing to you!
- banmaster, on 03/22/2008, -8/+19Your fault for using a VERY niche OS. Amazingly, it even has less market penetration than OSX.
- FeelThePain, on 03/22/2008, -23/+17"I'm glad there's a lot of opposition to Apple's behavior on the web. For others, get out of the Reality Distortion Field."
That's not enough. There needs to be complete opposition to Apple, period. The world would be better off if they went bankrupt.- Avian00, on 03/22/2008, -1/+17"That's not enough. There needs to be complete opposition to Apple, period. The world would be better off if they went bankrupt."
Really? Not meaning to sound like a jerk, but I'm curious what your reasons are for such an opinion.- Sonof8Bits, on 03/22/2008, -1/+9Agreed. I love my Apple, but i'm not gonna flame about how bad i think windows is. So what's your point FeelThePain? I don't use Linux (well not daily) but i don't think it should disappear from the face of the earth...
Apple did something stupid, and it's good the interwebs are picking up on it!
- Sonof8Bits, on 03/22/2008, -1/+9Agreed. I love my Apple, but i'm not gonna flame about how bad i think windows is. So what's your point FeelThePain? I don't use Linux (well not daily) but i don't think it should disappear from the face of the earth...
- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -0/+27Again, I'm a Windows user, but I had to digg that down for stupidity.
Less competition is never the answer. - kazamx, on 03/22/2008, -0/+12My guess is they are scared. Firefox 3 is coming soon, that thing is going to have HUGE hype attached. They are trying to get people to switch to safari before they see all the Firefox goodness.
- nmnnotmyname, on 03/22/2008, -1/+1That's what Microsoft wants. Lets go kill Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman while we're at it.
- Avian00, on 03/22/2008, -1/+17"That's not enough. There needs to be complete opposition to Apple, period. The world would be better off if they went bankrupt."
- MisterThePlague, on 03/22/2008, -19/+7With the Apple installer, you can uncheck any items (including Safari) that you don't want. You seem fine with all those items being checked be default on the page you linked to, but you're pissed at one item being checked by default on the Apple installer? Hypocritical, but expected from someone who uses the Windows logo as their personal icon on digg.
- freibooter, on 03/22/2008, -0/+18Yes, you can ... but the updater will check them AGAIN every single time. Fore me this has been an issue the other way around for a long time. I did want Safari on my Windows machine in order to test websites on it and I chose to use the updater to keep it current, but the auto-updater kept offering me iTunes instead. You can uncheck it, but with every minor update to iTunes it will offer it again and again and again ... this is done on purpose and even if the iTunes crowd passes on Safari 3.1 ... it will be bothered again to install it every single time either QuickTime or iTunes or Safari is updated, the auto-updater will popup and offer you EVERYTHING checked by default!
- sholt, on 03/22/2008, -11/+1Tools -> Ignore this Update
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 03/22/2008, -0/+15> "Tools -> Ignore this Update"
It automatically asks if you want to ignore the updates you unchecked... but it doesn't stick! Because Apple is being sneaky. Note how it says "this update", not "this software". If you uncheck iTunes and ignore "this update", the next update for iTunes still pops up.
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 03/22/2008, -0/+15> "Tools -> Ignore this Update"
- sholt, on 03/22/2008, -11/+1Tools -> Ignore this Update
- enri, on 03/22/2008, -0/+13As freibooter pointed out, the Apple updater re-checks those software updates every time it comes up hoping you will miss it one day.
I thought Apple was suppose to be better than Microsoft.- sholt, on 03/22/2008, -9/+1Updates can be ignored, see above.
Click that, and those updates will never bother you again.- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -0/+9And next time there's a minor update, it'll be active and checked again, see above.
- kidcodea, on 03/22/2008, -0/+8it never was, its just packaged as if it was.
- sholt, on 03/22/2008, -9/+1Updates can be ignored, see above.
- nmnnotmyname, on 03/22/2008, -0/+3Fail.
Try again.
- freibooter, on 03/22/2008, -0/+18Yes, you can ... but the updater will check them AGAIN every single time. Fore me this has been an issue the other way around for a long time. I did want Safari on my Windows machine in order to test websites on it and I chose to use the updater to keep it current, but the auto-updater kept offering me iTunes instead. You can uncheck it, but with every minor update to iTunes it will offer it again and again and again ... this is done on purpose and even if the iTunes crowd passes on Safari 3.1 ... it will be bothered again to install it every single time either QuickTime or iTunes or Safari is updated, the auto-updater will popup and offer you EVERYTHING checked by default!
- modsuperstar, on 03/22/2008, -7/+7I don't see how this is much different then other programs I've installed lately where in messenger Microsoft tries to change the search default in IE, or when I installed Picasa and google was trying to change the search default in IE and install a toolbar. It's all underhanded stuff that preys on user ignorance and the willingness the average user has to just check yes to everything they're downloading to just get through the process.
- Netrilix, on 03/22/2008, -0/+10While I agree that those examples suck, they're not quite the same. You're talking about the initial install of those programs. We're talking about a piece of UPDATE software trying to add new programs by default, instead of just doing its job of UPDATING the software you already have.
- Azselendor, on 03/22/2008, -1/+18If microsoft pulled this crap, Bill Gates would be dragged before congress to hear charges of anti-competitive behavior.
If you look at the behavior of apple, in terms of how they run things, they are very much anti-competitive and they weren't a niche business, they'd be busted up.- omaryak, on 03/22/2008, -6/+3Microsoft already pulled this crap by integrating IE with Windows a decade ago.
- karolisonline, on 03/22/2008, -0/+4yes? so You mean there is no safari in mac os or kopete (or what so ever, because I use unix for better purpose than desktop) in linux?
microsoft was charhed, because IE was part of explorer which is part of OS, so You couldn't uninstall ie leaving os functions untouched. - Ravatar, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1Which was a massive design failure in hindsight.
- karolisonline, on 03/22/2008, -0/+4yes? so You mean there is no safari in mac os or kopete (or what so ever, because I use unix for better purpose than desktop) in linux?
- nmnnotmyname, on 03/22/2008, -1/+2Microsoft has, and Anti-trust acted upon it.
Apple no longer holds much ground - Its not like this BS is going to make everyone Safari users. They will probably complain to Apple if it defaults the browser automatically and stuff. - jabberwolf, on 03/23/2008, -0/+1having a monopoly is not against the law. Anti trust practices are. Apple has been pulling this ***** for the longest time as well as selling their OS seperately which madates that you MUST buy their hardware in order to use it. When is the state department going to do something about it?
- omaryak, on 03/22/2008, -6/+3Microsoft already pulled this crap by integrating IE with Windows a decade ago.
- amishjim, on 03/22/2008, -10/+2Try to uninstall Messenger or Explorer. . . . .
- Branden, on 03/22/2008, -1/+151. I don't have a messenger to uninstall.
2. Windows Update has never asked me to install Windows Live Messenger.
3. Do you mean Internet Explorer? Windows is pretty worthless without Explorer.- Jeffler, on 03/22/2008, -1/+134. Uninstalling messenger is easy as hell.
- nmnnotmyname, on 03/22/2008, -1/+1The explorer integration is complete and uber BS. Honestly, Internet Explorer or even its components having to be installed is BS that Microsoft wanted. They need to separate the file manager component from the internet component at least. I think they did in Vista. Complete surprise...
However, Messenger is annoying, but rather easy to uninstall. Windows Update did used to ask you to install Live, btw.- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -1/+1IE calls are used all the time by things like software installers and the like.
Sure, I guess everyone writing software could include their own HTML renderer when writing software for Windows, but it's a heck of a lot easier (and appears more uniformly) by using the built-in renderer built into the OS. There's a lot more that uses the IE engine than just IE.- nmnnotmyname, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1I know. I've developed software with it. But it didn't take me long to realize that was a bad thing to do...
I still don't want it in there. I will use the Mozilla ActiveX alternative w/ the patcher, gladly, and just not use software that doesn't work without IE. Yeah, that's a lot of software. But it won't stop me from wanting IE of my computer for the sake of having IE off my computer. I know, Its a bit whiny, But its one of my pet peeves. Honestly, I would still prefer Linux, but that's because it's great for C++ development.
- nmnnotmyname, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1I know. I've developed software with it. But it didn't take me long to realize that was a bad thing to do...
- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -1/+1IE calls are used all the time by things like software installers and the like.
- Branden, on 03/22/2008, -1/+151. I don't have a messenger to uninstall.
- EruLabs, on 03/22/2008, -6/+7And just imagine if you could use an operating system that told you not only every single 'package' dependency, but also every binary dependency as well. Ah - It would be SO cool if we could use an Operating system that let us actually look under the hood - at the code itself.
Wait. Oh yeah. Linux- nmnnotmyname, on 03/22/2008, -0/+3I'm thinking kind of neutral about this. It is one of my favorite things about Linux, but the presentation was a bit... how do you say... Douchy.
- herbstblatt, on 03/22/2008, -1/+6I agree with you. Microsoft would never "offer" new apps too obviously. They make decisions more convenient for users.
- sexybobo, on 03/22/2008, -19/+6Lol Microsoft needs to work on supporting their own software. I have XP64 and when i go to that page i get an error message stating
- Ahweb, on 03/22/2008, -25/+62Oh no, the apple I know would never do that.. *irony*
- Rotzooi, on 03/22/2008, -3/+28Love how you're being dugg down by Apple fanboys.
- Rotzooi, on 03/22/2008, -3/+28Love how you're being dugg down by Apple fanboys.
- Hellman109, on 03/22/2008, -22/+285Umm you guys never realised when getting a hard on over steve jobs that he creates monopolies faster then MS these days?
Apple is the master of 'walled gardens'.- joncarr, on 03/22/2008, -21/+6Nothing at all like 'Plays for Sure.' ...oh wait, maybe I mean Zune Marketplace.
- zwaldowski, on 03/22/2008, -2/+4Two separate things. PlaysForSure was a fantastic meter in its day, before it was disbanded/renamed to 'Vista Ready' (which, ironically, has nothing to do with the Vista Ready program for hardware such as cameras, printers, and mice).
- invigorated, on 03/22/2008, -32/+7There is nothing illegal with having a monopoly if it occurs naturally because your making the best product. The only reason everyone hold's Microsoft position against them is that they were found to have gained that position by breaking the law.
Apple are just the most popular because the competition isn't up to scratch. The only lock-in you could possibly complain about is the iTunes DRM, which is a requirement of the people selling the product (the labels, ***** the RIAA). If they wanted to foster competition they'd totally drop that ***** and force Apple to go open. But they don't drop it, they enforce it.- connorf, on 03/22/2008, -16/+4It's the same with the iphone. If there was something better out there people would flock to it but there isn't so they don't.
- iiDLii, on 03/22/2008, -2/+14you're a ***** moron
- Ranvier, on 03/22/2008, -11/+5I thought Microsoft was accused of "Monopolistic practices" and not of being a Monopoly. If they were a true Monopoly, they'd be broken up.
- Xela21, on 03/22/2008, -3/+2true. i don't know why you're dug down
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 03/22/2008, -6/+5> "There is nothing illegal with having a monopoly if it occurs naturally because your making the best product. The only reason everyone hold's Microsoft position against them is that they were found to have gained that position by breaking the law."
Incorrect. Monopolies are OK as long the company isn't abusing its position. In Microsoft's case, it was found that they were abusing their position (primarily; I don't recall any decisions about *how* they got into that position, but I haven't followed it very closely). - mycoplasma, on 03/22/2008, -0/+13actually, apple's been convicted of false advertising more than once, so yes, if they get a monopoly, it will be because of illegal practices
- nmnnotmyname, on 03/22/2008, -1/+2Microsoft did not break the law really, except once. Anti-trust is on their ass still. Microsoft is just very ***** sneaky. I think Silverlight is next. Go to the Microsoft website to do any work at all and it punishes you with SIlverlight download request pop ups. Not only that, But they call it multiplatform though they only support 2 platforms, and not even that well. Does anyone else see flash 'fading away' in the next version of Windows? Honestly though, I don't remember the last time I heard about something from Microsoft I actually wanted.
- connorf, on 03/22/2008, -16/+4It's the same with the iphone. If there was something better out there people would flock to it but there isn't so they don't.
- ChrisLondon, on 03/22/2008, -27/+6The difference here is that Apple products work. If they offer me a browser that is not as buggy as IE I will take it.
- connorf, on 03/22/2008, -13/+1Agree Apple products are easy and fun to use and I don't care if they offer me new ones. MS doesn't want you to see their new products because they know they will be embarrassed.
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 03/22/2008, -1/+21> "The difference here is that Apple products work."
Have you ever tried [un]setting file and mimetype associations in QuickTime on Windows? The installer offers you the option to change them, but the next time you fire up QuickTime, all the associations are back to their defaults. It's been that way for years.- Hortnon, on 03/22/2008, -0/+15I can thank QuickTime for my familiarity with the Windows Registry. Manually setting keys for MIME-types is annoying.
- SupaDawg, on 03/22/2008, -0/+14I'd really like to see where Safari is superior to IE. IE6 & 7 are both garbage browsers, no doubt about it, but so is Safari. You want a superior browsing experience you get firefox (or hell, even flock). if you want a crippled garbage browsing experience you get safari or IE. simple as that.
- bumblefoot, on 03/22/2008, -0/+6safari is just as buggy as IE if not buggier tbh, do your self a favour and install firefox or opera
- Azio, on 03/22/2008, -3/+22My Macbook Pro was giving me ***** after only three months, I had to take it in and get the screen replaced -- and they used a part from an older model MBP without LED backlighting, so the battery life is now shorter and the viewing angle is not as good, AND they did a ***** job of putting it back together so the case is warped and doesn't sit flush when I close it. That's not what I would call a product that works. And don't get me started on iTunes and Quicktime for Windows. Apple products work, except for when they don't.
- Azio, on 03/22/2008, -0/+8Oh, and I should also mention that I run Vista on this MBP and the only problems I have with it are caused by poorly written Apple Boot Camp drivers that will likely never be fixed.
- Qumahlin, on 03/22/2008, -3/+2Well first off, if Apple did such a ***** repair job why did you accept the unit back? I've had quite a few apple products repaired and never ran into what you describe and if I had, I would make sure the issue was fixed prior to using the unit again
Next, Your right, Vista is ***** sometimes on the macbook pro due to some driver issues, it's also ***** on everything else. To blame Apple and thier drivers for the issues is laughable. I have yet to see a "smooth" running Vista system. Pretty much every person I know who used Vista, including myself switched back to Windows XP- SupaDawg, on 03/23/2008, -0/+1Please exclude me from you broad and biased generalization. I made an attempt to switch back to xo,m but when i learned that i was stuck with vista on my HP Notebook i decided to give it a chance... as of today i am a 100% certified windows vista fan. Much happier with vista today than i ever was on xp.
- Qumahlin, on 03/22/2008, -3/+2Well first off, if Apple did such a ***** repair job why did you accept the unit back? I've had quite a few apple products repaired and never ran into what you describe and if I had, I would make sure the issue was fixed prior to using the unit again
- Azio, on 03/22/2008, -0/+8Oh, and I should also mention that I run Vista on this MBP and the only problems I have with it are caused by poorly written Apple Boot Camp drivers that will likely never be fixed.
- dysonlu, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1I put my own wall around the Apple walled garden: I installed iTunes and any crap that comes with it in a virtual machine.
- joncarr, on 03/22/2008, -21/+6Nothing at all like 'Plays for Sure.' ...oh wait, maybe I mean Zune Marketplace.
- over900000, on 03/22/2008, -10/+71Damn right it was wrong.
- Spartanious, on 03/22/2008, -48/+10opera FTW
- joshualamgroup, on 03/22/2008, -17/+7Opera is good.. but it will never be open source like Firefox. Firefox ftw!
- pathy, on 03/22/2008, -9/+17And... being open source magically makes software fantastic, yes?
- sexybobo, on 03/22/2008, -8/+8For the most part yes it does.
- jakem1, on 03/22/2008, -3/+10Don't be silly. There's generally nothing wrong with open source but it's not automatically better than the proprietary alternative. Take Open Office versus Office 2007 for instance.
- CCmachined, on 03/22/2008, -5/+7Open Office runs on Linux, BSD, Solaris, Windows, Mac...
Office runs on Windows and theres a botched version for Mac. OSS rules =]
open source also means other people can contribute, which makes software better. - suprememilo, on 03/22/2008, -3/+4@CC Office 2008 for Mac is fantastic
- saisumimen, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2@jakem
Retarded comparison. Open office is FREE. Office 2007 is $399 retail.
- sexybobo, on 03/22/2008, -8/+8For the most part yes it does.
- LemmingJesus, on 03/22/2008, -5/+7Yeah, because so many of us have a use for the source code.
- logandurand, on 03/22/2008, -0/+3You do have a use for the improvements other people make with that source code, however.
- pathy, on 03/22/2008, -9/+17And... being open source magically makes software fantastic, yes?
- JoeBaynham, on 03/22/2008, -1/+19Personal choice FTW! o.0
- LordoftheFly, on 03/22/2008, -4/+1Yay Oprah?
- damndj, on 03/22/2008, -2/+1negro woman ...from the south.
- ahvi, on 03/22/2008, -0/+3Open Standards FTW!
- doshomik, on 03/23/2008, -0/+1So where is Opera now ? why don't they go to EU and cry ?
- joshualamgroup, on 03/22/2008, -17/+7Opera is good.. but it will never be open source like Firefox. Firefox ftw!
- nachochease, on 03/22/2008, -15/+305It's time people woke up and realized that Apple is far from the perfect company that the fanboys would have you believe it is. Their number one goal is too make as much money as possible, just like Microsoft and everyone else.
- CheatRZ, on 03/22/2008, -23/+7As long as they're making things that actually work, un-like microsoft, that's something beneficial to the consumer as well. I don't blame a company making a lot of money when they're actually putting work in to make their products correctly.
With that said, I do think this Safari distribution practice is wrong and not a good way of doing business.. but a far cry from calling Apple a witch and throwing them off a cliff.- djrbx, on 03/22/2008, -4/+15Work? I have two macs and two pcs, as far as I can tell, both my Vista Machines run perfectly while I get kernel panics and endless wait times on my Mac Pro.
- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -9/+3Serious question: have you installed any 3rd party drivers or other applications that needed you to enter your password when you installed them? I had enormous problems with my MacBook Pro that I traced to some particularly duff mouse drivers from Logitech. A Mac should not crash and the usual reasons when they do are bad drivers made by other companies. If you still have issues after this then speak to Apple themselves.
- Azio, on 03/22/2008, -0/+12"A Mac should not crash and the usual reasons when they do are bad drivers made by other companies."
So basically the same thing as Windows then.
- Azio, on 03/22/2008, -0/+12"A Mac should not crash and the usual reasons when they do are bad drivers made by other companies."
- Wangarang, on 03/22/2008, -8/+7Doesn't work well with 3rd party drivers?!!?? Macs are crap! I can install whatever I want on my good working Vista PC.
- arjie, on 03/22/2008, -3/+7This is a ridiculous argument, and extremely childish. The quality of drivers is outside Apple's or Microsoft's control. If there were a large number of bad drivers, one could argue that one OS has a bad API or something, but there's no such clear distinction. By the way, bad drivers can crash XP and at least Red Hat and Ubuntu in my experience (though this hasn't happened to me on my computer, it's happened on a friend's) . Is Vista particularly different in the way it handles drivers?
- CheatRZ, on 03/22/2008, -2/+3That's pretty funny considering I have yet to see a usable Vista PC to perform or do anything better than a PC running XP. If you have a Mac Pro, which I highly doubt you do after reading your comment, I highly doubt you're getting constant kernal panics or endless wait times.. either that, or you're one of the very few. I've seen much less kernal panics than blue screens. But this is 'he said/she said' stuff anyway that means nothing to the real issue.
- cquinnd, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2>> I have yet to see a usable Vista PC to perform or do anything better than a PC running XP.
Just off the top of my head, mobility and presentation options (on my laptop) are much better with Vista than with XP. I realize that YMMV with that. I also like some of the things I can do with Media Center, Speech Recognition and some of the search options on the Vista side. I know there are some better options for those out there too, but Vista is at least a step up from XP there.
- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -9/+3Serious question: have you installed any 3rd party drivers or other applications that needed you to enter your password when you installed them? I had enormous problems with my MacBook Pro that I traced to some particularly duff mouse drivers from Logitech. A Mac should not crash and the usual reasons when they do are bad drivers made by other companies. If you still have issues after this then speak to Apple themselves.
- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -0/+5Yeah, I still take issue with Apple for the issues with the 802.11n Airport Extreme Base Station issues that they only seem to have fixed this week. For a company that makes both the hardware and software I do expect it to work perfectly from Day 1 and in this case I've had to wait over 1-year for the AEBS to finally work as expected.
- Mothrog, on 03/23/2008, -0/+1Yeah, Macs work so well that trying to force quit an application on Mac OS 9 was liable to lock the entire system solid. Wonderful product, there.
- djrbx, on 03/22/2008, -4/+15Work? I have two macs and two pcs, as far as I can tell, both my Vista Machines run perfectly while I get kernel panics and endless wait times on my Mac Pro.
- jeriqo, on 03/22/2008, -18/+2Just like any company in the world so what?
At least they're not trying to sell you *****.- damndj, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1Installing Safari on Windows is Apple trying to get you to buy a Mac.
- damndj, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1Installing Safari on Windows is Apple trying to get you to buy a Mac.
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 03/22/2008, -2/+29> "Their number one goal is too make as much money as possible, just like Microsoft and everyone else."
There's really nothing wrong with that. They are a corporation afterall. It's how the company goes about it that's the real problem, and I agree with you that Apple's tactics are getting worse and worse... - Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -11/+4Shockingly, I'm not in the slightest bit bothered by this concept as I never thought otherwise. As long as they make good products for an acceptable price that I like to use then it's a non-issue for me. I am greatly against what they are doing with Software Update for Windows but while I am a Mac-fan I have never looked at Apple as some sort of charity.
- eyefork, on 03/22/2008, -0/+3"acceptable price"
Heh...
- eyefork, on 03/22/2008, -0/+3"acceptable price"
- misterjangles, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1well said nachochease. At the core, they are both large corporations selling products for profit. i do think there is a kind of fundamental difference between MS and Apple's approach though. Apple seemingly always has a unified direction whereas MS is scattered about doing a little of everything. I think it's tougher for MS to seem "cool" because they are going in so many directions. If you look closely though, they both are doing the same types of things.
- CheatRZ, on 03/22/2008, -23/+7As long as they're making things that actually work, un-like microsoft, that's something beneficial to the consumer as well. I don't blame a company making a lot of money when they're actually putting work in to make their products correctly.
- gowerski, on 03/22/2008, -11/+116agreed, at least make it clear to people what they are installing.
TBH, quicktime has always held a place in my heart, right next to realplayer...- shaelen, on 03/22/2008, -18/+2It was clear to me. I always read the text of anything on my system that is trying to install something. I read what itunes was trying to "update," and I denied it.
- banmaster, on 03/22/2008, -0/+18'update' my ass! There is NOTHING updaty about installing their ***** browser on a machine sthat doesn't allready have a version of it already installed.
- jakem1, on 03/22/2008, -8/+7Lol, I think realplayer is maybe better than quicktime but it's a tough choice.
- banmaster, on 03/22/2008, -0/+11RealAlternative and QuicktimeAlternative mean you no longer have to have either of those ***** things installed.
- kazamx, on 03/22/2008, -0/+4gstreamer lets me do everything
- iofthestorm, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2VLC Player ftw.
- banmaster, on 03/22/2008, -0/+11RealAlternative and QuicktimeAlternative mean you no longer have to have either of those ***** things installed.
- vasireddy, on 03/22/2008, -2/+19lol, agree to the Real Player comparison.
Even iTunes is irritatingly slow on Windows.- Qumahlin, on 03/22/2008, -1/+2"Even iTunes is irritatingly slow on Windows", i'm going to have to say thats a system issue. Whats funny is iTunes runs significantly faster for me in XP on my macbook then it does in OSX on my macbook heh
- Ravatar, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2Nah overall the interface is just laggy, and pretty much always has been. I've had form redraw issues as well occasionally.
I'm hoping my FX-60 with 2GB of ram and a GeForce 7900GTX is enough to run freaking iTunes.
- Ravatar, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2Nah overall the interface is just laggy, and pretty much always has been. I've had form redraw issues as well occasionally.
- Qumahlin, on 03/22/2008, -1/+2"Even iTunes is irritatingly slow on Windows", i'm going to have to say thats a system issue. Whats funny is iTunes runs significantly faster for me in XP on my macbook then it does in OSX on my macbook heh
- bsmang, on 03/22/2008, -7/+4And they both go right next to flash player, and all 3 are approx. 37 feet above acrobat.
- dajernts, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2agreed!
- dajernts, on 03/22/2008, -1/+1Hahahah....realplayer.
- shaelen, on 03/22/2008, -18/+2It was clear to me. I always read the text of anything on my system that is trying to install something. I read what itunes was trying to "update," and I denied it.
- Crisender111, on 03/22/2008, -17/+9Crapple....hmmmm
- banmaster, on 03/22/2008, -4/+5Apple Macintrash
- Darph.Bobo, on 03/23/2008, -0/+1How clever, I'm sure your burning the American flag too right?
- Darph.Bobo, on 03/23/2008, -1/+1Crapple? what you like 5 years old?
- banmaster, on 03/22/2008, -4/+5Apple Macintrash
- over900000, on 03/22/2008, -10/+134Everyone should read this thread
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=45803 ...
Apple apologists scrambling to find excuses for Apple's action is so hilarious.- bj00rn, on 03/22/2008, -33/+3Yeah, these are VERY serious actions indeed! This will not stand! ...LOL "excuses", "apologists"... It's just a ******* browser, not the end of the world.
- Sidzilla, on 03/22/2008, -1/+4That didn't work when Microsoft said it to the European Union, either. They almost got away with it in the American courts, but then got nailed for antitrust anyway. I wish you had been on the jury.
- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -7/+57I love how they all list their system specs as their taglines.
Talk about being defined by the products you own.- LemmingJesus, on 03/22/2008, -3/+23People do that with any computer they own, but that forum certainly has more of it going on than normal.
- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -4/+9Car nuts and gun nuts are almost as bad.
Almost. - saisumimen, on 03/22/2008, -0/+5I could _maybe_ see people doing that for PCs, since there are an infinite number of parts and configurations, with insane water and coolant stuff and overclocked components (especially for gamers)....
But for *Macs*? That's like bragging about what kind of upload/download speed you get on AOL and using that as your sig.
- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -4/+9Car nuts and gun nuts are almost as bad.
- geoken, on 03/22/2008, -2/+42What's wrong with that?
-------------------------------
Bank Account:$24,456
Car: Audi Q7 -fully loaded
House: 4,300 sq/ft- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -21/+8Because nobody cares. You are not (and should not be) defined by the products you buy.
- geoken, on 03/22/2008, -2/+29LOL. I don't actually have that stuff. Guess I should have included some sarcasm tags.
- bialia, on 03/22/2008, -2/+13man, people who didn't get that aren't worth your time. don't dumb yourself down for the masses. there's too much of that already.
- Roryking, on 03/22/2008, -1/+10Outstanding debt: $384,997.08
- saisumimen, on 03/22/2008, -0/+7Wife: Kinda ugly, saddle bags, scar on left cheek.
House condition: Dirty
Car condition: Keyed on right side, interior smells like cheese.
- LemmingJesus, on 03/22/2008, -3/+23People do that with any computer they own, but that forum certainly has more of it going on than normal.
- sonnybobiche, on 03/22/2008, -26/+1In the meantime, Firefox apologists can finally rest, now that their browser has stopped leaking memory all over the place...
Opera apologists can finally rest... well, no, Opera still doesn't have the market penetration necessary to get any respect.
IE apologists have their work cut out for the, etc. etc.
Apologetics is the "fever" of the free market: a nonspecific indicator that something isn't quite right.- banmaster, on 03/22/2008, -2/+5I never had any issues with FF., Must have just been everyone else on he face of the planet or something.
- DarkShroud, on 03/22/2008, -6/+1Take a look at how much memory it takes up next time you use it.
- LemmingJesus, on 03/22/2008, -0/+537,156K
- technoredneck, on 03/22/2008, -0/+340,532 K with six tabs open, seven extensions installed, and the Flash player running.
- saisumimen, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2The fools who usually "complain" are people who run FF on their parent's Pentium IIs.
- technoredneck, on 03/22/2008, -0/+3People choose to install Firefox. People choose to install Opera. They opt-in to any ***** they get from using those browser. You have to opt-out of Apple's *****, because they pretentiously assume they're entitled to install new software on your computer by default.
And Safari is far from perfect, /especially/ on Windows. Aside from WebKit (which is pretty damn awesome), it ranks right up there with IE7. - str1fe, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2There's nothing wrong with Opera. I'm using Firefox at the moment, but I enjoy using Opera just as much when I have to.
- banmaster, on 03/22/2008, -2/+5I never had any issues with FF., Must have just been everyone else on he face of the planet or something.
- LemmingJesus, on 03/22/2008, -17/+1Am I the only one that found this post incredibly pathetic?
They said it was an "option" to install Safari so that is great. When I hear things like this I think of my girlfriend who is a Windows user, but knows all about my love for Apple. She sees me with my computer, knows about the stories, and was here when I made the switch. Either way, getting Safari exposed to her and letting her play with it will be nothing but good.- eyefork, on 03/22/2008, -0/+4"when I made the switch." "letting her play with it"
...you people are weird.
- eyefork, on 03/22/2008, -0/+4"when I made the switch." "letting her play with it"
- fluxion, on 03/22/2008, -3/+15i dont see much apologizing at all, they all seem to think this idea is ssssuper!
- kazamx, on 03/22/2008, -1/+18You should have seen it when Jobs charged for the Touch update, they thought it was a fantastic idea. If you thought the Linux/Mac/Ron Paul fan boys were bad on Digg, imagine when they are on their home turf. That is one scary site to read.
Steve Jobs could take a ***** on stage announce it as the ***** and 90% of them would break open the piggy bank.- sjmulder, on 03/22/2008, -2/+4That's bull. People there, including me, were raging on, thread after thread about it. There were a few apologists, but that was not the norm.
- FatLoser, on 03/22/2008, -0/+4"...they all seem to think this idea is ssssuper!"
You forgot the *flip wrist*
- kazamx, on 03/22/2008, -1/+18You should have seen it when Jobs charged for the Touch update, they thought it was a fantastic idea. If you thought the Linux/Mac/Ron Paul fan boys were bad on Digg, imagine when they are on their home turf. That is one scary site to read.
- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -7/+1And in that thread you will also find comments from people who say it's a bad thing (like from yours truly on Page 3). Yes, lots of people think it's a good idea because Safari on the Mac is a good browser, IE for Windows is a bad browser, and that getting more people to use Safari will not only encourage more web sites to work well with it but also maybe encourage people to buy more Macs. I don't subscribe to that point of view and neither does everyone else on MacRumors.
- HueytheFreeman, on 03/22/2008, -1/+4I love how they think the only alternative to Safari is IE6/7.
- sjmulder, on 03/22/2008, -2/+1During the keynotes an on the webpage the performance has always been checked against Firefox and Opera too.
- digitalarcanum, on 03/22/2008, -0/+8"Eh? iTunes needs Quicktime to work. Without it you wouldn't hear the music or see the video. iTunes is the management app, Quicktime does all the playback.
Nothing wrong with Quicktime, not going to hurt a Windows machine anyway."
this post made me lol. he says that quicktime is required to make itunes work, which if that's the case it's incredibly ***** design, but what if it's the other way around and people just want quicktime to view a .mov now and again and that's it? of course there's the option to install it separately, but not without it latching on to your windows PC, becoming a resource whore and a sore thumb to boot:
"Nothing wrong with Quicktime, not going to hurt a Windows machine anyway."
quicktime makes it's own startup entry, it's own control panel entry, embeds itself on the taskbar and consumes unecessary resources even when you're not using it, not to mention if you're using it by choice, it's design clashes with the rest of the OS design, as quicktime looks nothing like a standard windows app. if WMP did this people would be crying foul. - eyefork, on 03/22/2008, -0/+9The fanboyism in that forum is pretty sickening. Some of them are sensible but the majority seem out of touch with reality.
- bj00rn, on 03/22/2008, -33/+3Yeah, these are VERY serious actions indeed! This will not stand! ...LOL "excuses", "apologists"... It's just a ******* browser, not the end of the world.
- ufia, on 03/22/2008, -37/+68Mac users are not used to choose on their own what software is installed.
You know when we are laughing about Windows users calling Internet Explorer "the internet", well Mac users are even more clueless.- max1018, on 03/22/2008, -21/+7Your comment makes no sense. Go away...
- joncarr, on 03/22/2008, -21/+12There are clueless and savvy users on all platforms.
Clueless or otherwise, thankfully most of us Mac users can write a coherent sentence.- FatLoser, on 03/22/2008, -1/+13Clueless or savvy, there sure is a high proportion of douchebaggery in the Mac user club.
- eyefork, on 03/22/2008, -2/+12"most of us Mac users can write a coherent sentence"
Prime example of why most people don't like to be around a Mac user. Our brains are just too inferior apparently.
- vertexoflife, on 03/22/2008, -7/+2There are sum Linux, dumb Windows, and dumb Mac users.
- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -4/+11And you know this, how? Please stop regurgitating nonsense that you read on a blog somewhere and do some research.
- thedragon4453, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1Agreed. The Mac users I know are actually much more computer literate. I guess then, since we are making sweeping generalizations, that based on my anecdotal evidence, Mac users are the l33t.
But, of course, based on the above evidence that mac users are tards, this would cause the universe to implode.
- thedragon4453, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1Agreed. The Mac users I know are actually much more computer literate. I guess then, since we are making sweeping generalizations, that based on my anecdotal evidence, Mac users are the l33t.
- tehmacuser, on 03/22/2008, -7/+3Do you even know what you're talking about? Poor grammar aside, your argument makes no sense. First, most people using Windows didn't choose it because OEMs put it on by default. Common Windows installs from OEMs come preloaded with more unnecessary garbage software than ANY other consumer product, period. OS X's Software Update lists all the packages that are going to be installed and describes (with more than a phrase) what they do and whether or not you need it. It doesn't just say "express install (recommended)" like XP does and then begins shoveling garbage onto a system, and you can never be positive whether it's useful stuff or not, because you're not even sure what's being installed! That's just an ignorant comment.
Ever try to uninstall IE from an XP install? Second, as a Mac user I chose this platform because it allowed me to develop, debug, and run software for all three platforms on one machine, with an XP, Leopard, and Xubuntu install.
The vast majority of Mac users that I've communicated with, both in real life and on discussion boards know more about how their operating system works and Terminal work than most PC users do. UNIX compliance is also a big reason a lot of science departments at the colleges around here use Macs. Go hide in a corner, and quit spreading FUD.- dolinski, on 03/22/2008, -5/+0ditto...
- EruLabs, on 03/22/2008, -1/+61) Uninstalling IE from windows isn't that hard.
2) Windows was _THE_ 'hacker' software back in the 9x days
3) The most brilliant network engineer i've ever met uses Mac with Bootcamp (and Cedega compiled for mac)
4) Linux is _THE_ way to go. There is no other option for those of you saying you want to choose your own software. If you're debating between Windows and Mac (software freedom wise), you need to jump head-first into the cool waters of OSS. Let me help you out: http://gentoo.org
- EruLabs, on 03/22/2008, -1/+61) Uninstalling IE from windows isn't that hard.
- dolinski, on 03/22/2008, -5/+0ditto...
- S0L0, on 03/22/2008, -44/+10check off the boxes or push quit. Feels like whining, even from the CEO of Mozilla. YES, I use both browsers.
- joshualamgroup, on 03/22/2008, -15/+1exactly. I use all four broswers (IE, Firefox, Opera and now Safari) and to add to that.. Firefox 3 beta and IE8 beta on top of that.
- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -0/+12Can I be your friend now?
- joshualamgroup, on 03/30/2008, -0/+1i'm sorry, but was that sarcasm?
- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -0/+12Can I be your friend now?
- theeEqualizer, on 03/22/2008, -11/+1Agreed. I use all of the aforementioned. But I try to use IE as little as possible.
- eyefork, on 03/22/2008, -0/+5Using so many different browsers must be very efficient.
- joshualamgroup, on 03/22/2008, -15/+1exactly. I use all four broswers (IE, Firefox, Opera and now Safari) and to add to that.. Firefox 3 beta and IE8 beta on top of that.
- elithrar, on 03/22/2008, -5/+57I use OS X heavily, have an iPod Touch and will be buying a 3G iPhone. I use WebKit/Safari. But that's by /choice/. Forcing users to download software they likely don't know anything about is not the way to increase market share. And Safari on Windows does have some catching up to do (as do most Windows ports of Apple software).
- nonzzero, on 03/22/2008, -19/+2Users aren't forced to do anything. They're just encouraged.
- TheWhiteOtter, on 03/22/2008, -0/+15Foe encouraged read tricked. How many people will just see iTunes update and hit go? Apple obviously thinks quite a few.
- maxlew, on 03/22/2008, -7/+1acctualy everyone i know presses no when an itunes update is available. Why do we need to download the whole program again just for a bugfix
- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -0/+17No, it will be installed "as default". You have to OPT OUT if you don't want it. People used to trust Apple. After ***** like this, a lot of that trust is gone. Now you have to investigate that installer every time Apple touts an "update".
Trading trust for market share. Good plan. - eyefork, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2Are you a Mac fan or a Scientologist?
- TheWhiteOtter, on 03/22/2008, -0/+15Foe encouraged read tricked. How many people will just see iTunes update and hit go? Apple obviously thinks quite a few.
- MisterThePlague, on 03/22/2008, -10/+2No one is either being forced to download Safari or being forced to use it. When you sign up at a website that has a box checked saying "Yes! Send me spam!", do you just uncheck the box, or do you bitch that you're being FORCED to subscribe to their spam list?
- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -1/+12So you're equating spammer tactics with Apple Software Updater.
It's a REALLY good comparison. Thank you. - djrbx, on 03/22/2008, -1/+2You are missing the point. The Point being made is the the software installing Safari is an UPDATER. The only thing the program has to do is update the current software on the computer. So if I don't have Safari installed in the first place, why should Safari installer show up in the update? What Apple is doing is wrong. There is a big difference between a Spam check box for a site and what Apple is doing.
- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -1/+3No there isn't.
- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -1/+12So you're equating spammer tactics with Apple Software Updater.
- vasireddy, on 03/22/2008, -0/+8"catching up to do", put iTunes at the top of the list please
- enri, on 03/22/2008, -0/+5Thank you elithrar, as a Mac user, for speaking out that this is inappropriate.
- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -0/+3Yes, I entirely agree with this. At the very least the option to install Safari must be disabled by default. It is not up to Apple to decide which applications I want to install. By all means automatically download updates to the applications that I have already installed (after all, that's what Software Update is supposed to do) but don't make arbitrary decisions for me just because you think I'm running IE and/or would like some money from Google for each search performed in Safari.
- deadbaby, on 03/22/2008, -3/+1If they were actually forcing people to install it (no option to not install it, ala IE on Windows) Yes, I would agree with you.
- igob8a, on 03/22/2008, -1/+3IE on Windows?
That's Microsoft's browser on Microsoft's OS. Nothing wrong with that.
crApple, on the other hand, makes users of Microsoft's OS install their useless browser. Even worse, they disguised it as an update.
- igob8a, on 03/22/2008, -1/+3IE on Windows?
- nonzzero, on 03/22/2008, -19/+2Users aren't forced to do anything. They're just encouraged.
- nonzzero, on 03/22/2008, -26/+4It doesn't require you to install Safari. I don't see how this is any worse than all those other installers that say "Hey, do you want this nifty toolbar for your Internet Browser?!"
- bxblox, on 03/22/2008, -2/+27Installer != Updater
- Goblinkiller, on 03/22/2008, -10/+1Tell that to all the linux-people who are using Synaptic, apt-get and similar. Installer and updater is most of the time the same thing - even on Windows you're often required to run an installer to get an update.
- HonoredMule, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1The terminology is supposed to accurately represent WHAT will be accomplished, not HOW. Besides, Synaptec et. al. are not installers OR updaters. They are package browsers. Aptitude et. al. are package management systems, which are still not quite the same, nor are they attributed with quite the same expectations.
- CCmachined, on 03/22/2008, -1/+1when i need updates, i click the auto-update at the top.
updates and installations are all managed by apt, yum or whatever yes, but when i click to auto-update EVERYTHING, it is done BY THE OS... this kind of stealth-installing crap simply cannot happen. If an app tries to ship as a "dependency", it will tell me before continuing.
- Goblinkiller, on 03/22/2008, -10/+1Tell that to all the linux-people who are using Synaptic, apt-get and similar. Installer and updater is most of the time the same thing - even on Windows you're often required to run an installer to get an update.
- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -0/+3Actually, I'm going to Digg you up for this comment because it is no worse than the likes of Sun trying to install the Google Toolbar when you install/update Java for Windows. However, that doesn't make it right to do so and that's why this is bad.
- bxblox, on 03/22/2008, -2/+27Installer != Updater
- GliTCH82, on 03/22/2008, -21/+3Yeah, it's wrong, but I have to admit after reading all this I was curious and I decided to run Apple Update and, wouldn't you know it, it showed me the Safari installation option and I downloaded it and tried it out. I have to admit, Safari is actually a pretty decent browser, it's certainly a lot faster than IE and Firefox at Javascript and such, but it lacks enough free extensions to replace all the ones that I use with Firefox, and it has no skinning support so you're always going to feel you're using Mac OSX while browsing the web, which brings about the same kind of identity crisis you would expect when you slap a TypeR sticker on a Dodge Neon.
- GliTCH82, on 03/23/2008, -0/+1I just had no idea that Safari was so unpopular. Can anyone tell me why they don't like it? I'm appealing to Diggers for an explanation as to why I'm getting buried.
- eyreka, on 03/22/2008, -34/+4Clueless Windows users, uncheck Safari and you won't get it. Pay attention when installing anything no matter the source.
- HonoredMule, on 03/22/2008, -1/+10Pay attention when installing [and now even when UPDATING] anything no matter the source.
So in other words, don't trust Apple. I think that was kind of the point of the article. - Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -1/+5The point is that it shouldn't be checked in the first place. Frankly, given what Software Update is supposed to do, it should not even be listed in the first place unless you have already installed an earlier version of Safari. This is how it works under OS X and it better damned well continue to do so.
- BinaryFragger, on 03/22/2008, -0/+7That's not the point. It's called Apple Software **Update**
Why is it trying to "update" software that you don't even have installed in the first place? The updater is a good idea, but it shouldn't be trying to install new software.
- HonoredMule, on 03/22/2008, -1/+10Pay attention when installing [and now even when UPDATING] anything no matter the source.
- kalidav, on 03/22/2008, -5/+65There's nothing wrong with Apple offering Safari 3.1 with their software update program, ___if an earlier version of Safari is already installed___. It's the same as Thunderbird or Songbird popping up in the Firefox Updater - it shouldn't happen. The mechanism is for updates to software currently installed, not to push completely different products.
- Goblinkiller, on 03/22/2008, -9/+1It would be the same is Firefox updater was called Mozilla update - not to say that it justifies Apple's behavior - they probably shouldn't have ticked that box - just that it isn't that weird because it's actually the Apple updater and not the iTunes or Quicktime updater.
- Arcan, on 03/22/2008, -0/+13But it's updating software I don't currently have installed! That is NOT an update.
It's fine to have a single updater for a whole brand of programs, but calling it an "updater" brings with it a certain amount of expectations. Updaters should not be installing brand new software.
If Apple wants to do stuff like this, calling it an "updater" is disingenuous. Maybe something like "software distributor" would be more accurate.- jakem1, on 03/22/2008, -1/+7I think trojan is the word you're looking for.
- Goblinkiller, on 03/22/2008, -3/+1I agree with you that they could have named their software better - but having a misleading name is quite an acceptable mistake.
- Theli, on 03/22/2008, -1/+3What you are describing is an installer, not an updater. An installer installs new software, an updater updates already installed software.
Calling this an "updater" is just misleading.
- Arcan, on 03/22/2008, -0/+13But it's updating software I don't currently have installed! That is NOT an update.
- MisterThePlague, on 03/22/2008, -7/+1I think Firefox's updater should encourage users to download Thunderbird. That would be a great way to expose people who are using Outlook Express to an alternative they've probably never heard of.
- skillled1, on 03/22/2008, -3/+1i think you should shut the hell up about basing microsoft products, and stick to the topic of apple's new update practicing maleware techniques.
- miket, on 03/22/2008, -1/+0whoa, tough guy on the intarnets! LOOK OUT!
- SupaDawg, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1He might be a bit of a douche, but his point is right on the money. Why the hell does a topic regarding the mozilla CEO stating his disdain about apple's update have to include any discussion whatsoever about microsoft?
- Memnochxx, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1I think most people using firefox already know about thunderbird.
- skillled1, on 03/22/2008, -3/+1i think you should shut the hell up about basing microsoft products, and stick to the topic of apple's new update practicing maleware techniques.
- deadbaby, on 03/22/2008, -1/+2Mozillia SHOULD be offering Thunderbird, Songbird, Pidgin, etc as optional installs. Most people aren't geeky enough to go research all these applications and switch however they might say "I like Firefox... maybe I'll like these apps too?" If you want to compete with Microsoft & Google you need to play to win. IE comes with Windows, Google ToolBar comes with most new computers and is offered in hundreds of applications. In a perfect world this type of tactic shouldn't be needed but if your competition is doing it you pretty much have to as well.
- thedragon4453, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2I wouldnt even have a problem if it prompted me to install Safari. Like if it said something like "Would you like to try Safari, Apple's web browser? y/n"
Automatically checking a box to install though is quite shady.
- Goblinkiller, on 03/22/2008, -9/+1It would be the same is Firefox updater was called Mozilla update - not to say that it justifies Apple's behavior - they probably shouldn't have ticked that box - just that it isn't that weird because it's actually the Apple updater and not the iTunes or Quicktime updater.
- LimeParrot, on 03/22/2008, -4/+29How do you turn off the Apple AutoUpdate?? It keeps popping up in the middle of games and is very annoying =(
- kalidav, on 03/22/2008, -1/+34Add/remove Programs.
- chris9902, on 03/22/2008, -9/+7You can disable it in the services or uninstall it. I think it's called Bonjour
I don't install anything from Apple anymore. None of it works on my Vista x64 system so I don't see the point.- sholt, on 03/22/2008, -0/+14Bonjour is the name of Apple's mDNS/ZeroConf service. It has nothing to do with the software update.
In ASUs preferences, you can turn off automatic updates though.
- sholt, on 03/22/2008, -0/+14Bonjour is the name of Apple's mDNS/ZeroConf service. It has nothing to do with the software update.
- banmaster, on 03/22/2008, -2/+12Or just run 'msconfig' and kil it from there.
- Jerk, on 03/22/2008, -0/+8Why would you do that instead of removing it completely and doing it the proper way?
- kodek, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2That way is faster.
- Jerk, on 03/22/2008, -0/+8Why would you do that instead of removing it completely and doing it the proper way?
- joncarr, on 03/22/2008, -14/+3"Add/Remove?" Kill it from msconfig? Wow, you Windoze users like to drive finish nails with sledge hammers don't you?
Why not simply uncheck the "Check for new updates automatically" checkbox?- Hortnon, on 03/22/2008, -1/+5Personally, I've learned that you can't trust checkboxes in Apple software on Windows systems. I've had to change registry settings when a checkbox failed far too many times.
- FatLoser, on 03/22/2008, -1/+8Lol, Apple is angry that you are enjoying your PC games so it interrupts you.
- tuh2, on 03/22/2008, -1/+4They're Jealous their Mac's dont have any games
- igob8a, on 03/23/2008, -0/+2Hey! don't be so mean, it has minesweeper and even chess!
- tuh2, on 03/23/2008, -0/+1Does it really? Never saw them on there
- igob8a, on 03/23/2008, -0/+2Hey! don't be so mean, it has minesweeper and even chess!
- tuh2, on 03/22/2008, -1/+4They're Jealous their Mac's dont have any games
- dajernts, on 03/22/2008, -1/+5Games? What are games? Will they work on my Macbook?
- Qumahlin, on 03/22/2008, -1/+1Yes, many games have been converted using the Cider wrapper, or you could just do what most do and install XP on your macbook and play them from there.
- igob8a, on 03/23/2008, -0/+1Macbook's crappy integrated graphics + PC GPU intensive games = FAIL
- dajernts, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1I was trying to be sarcastic. Guess I failed.
- Qumahlin, on 03/22/2008, -1/+1Yes, many games have been converted using the Cider wrapper, or you could just do what most do and install XP on your macbook and play them from there.
- igob8a, on 03/22/2008, -1/+1Why does apple need a separate program just to check for updates?
And why does Apple software need to have half a dozen helpers and servies running in the background? (ipodservice.exe applemobiledeviceservice.exe itunes.exe ituneshelper.exe qttray.exe quicktime.exe appleupdater.exe etc)
- Auzy, on 03/22/2008, -20/+1Another thing thats wrong is including a Ebay link in Firefox for money..
Great job promoting ebay. Everyones getting annoyed with ebay at the moment, everyone gets screwed by paypal, and that ebay link is causing anti-competitive behavior.
Bravo Mozilla Ceo. But no, not really a fan of Apple.. Just get rid of that ebay search engine by default, and I'll be happy- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2It's not really any worse than advertising and Mozilla needs the money to continue making software for free. I think you have to choose which is better - free software with "ads" or paid software.
- Oldsmobile, on 03/22/2008, -7/+52Well, I for one un-installed Quicktime because of this.
- jakem1, on 03/22/2008, -5/+45Why install it in the first place? Quicktime is the single worst piece of software ever written for Windows.
- carpespasm, on 03/22/2008, -2/+12really? I'm pretty sure there are a lot of more terrible bits of software than quicktime, though it's definitely on my "clean and kill" list when i fix computers.
- FuzzMop, on 03/22/2008, -9/+3Are you ignoring Windows Media Player on purpose? iTunes + Quicktime > WMP to some extent.
- Ouze, on 03/22/2008, -0/+6no
- BedPost, on 03/22/2008, -0/+7Real Player?
- thailand1972, on 03/22/2008, -2/+24I uninstalled mine years ago because it's *****
- doshindude, on 03/22/2008, -2/+22VLC FTW
- kazamx, on 03/22/2008, -3/+3Amarok 2, its your future.
- Rotzooi, on 03/22/2008, -2/+13Media Player Classic FTW
- Jerk, on 03/22/2008, -1/+7You really showed them! Down with The Man!
- dajernts, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1I only have Quicktime for watching movie trailers on Apple.com. But hulu is competing in this area now. I might have to get rid of it soon.
- igob8a, on 03/22/2008, -0/+7LOL I remember when apple made you shell out $30 and get quicktime pro just to watch videos full screen.
***** APPLE - thedragon4453, on 03/22/2008, -0/+3Also, Quicktime Alternative is worth a shot. Works just like Quicktime, except afterwards, you dont want to jam a pen in your eye.
- jakem1, on 03/22/2008, -5/+45Why install it in the first place? Quicktime is the single worst piece of software ever written for Windows.
- xmodem2, on 03/22/2008, -2/+47I don't think its wrong for Apple to leverage its existing Quicktime and iTunes install base to advertise Safari to users, however in this case they have gone about it the wrong way. A better idea would have been to pop up a dialog saying "Are you interested in this new software?", describing what Safari is and making clear that its not an update but in fact new software, and providing a clear choice of "Learn more", "Remind me later" or "Not interested, go away please"
- daengbo, on 03/22/2008, -7/+6Leveraging a monopoly in one market to secure a place in another? Hmmm ... It sounds familiar.
- res8qr6m, on 03/22/2008, -1/+4Aren't all popups equally annoying?
- kazamx, on 03/22/2008, -0/+5Popup < stealth installs.
- ZigVicious, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2do you mean stealth installs < popups, or do you really hate popups that much?
- FatLoser, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1he means popups are less annoying than stealth installs, that's why he used the less than symbol (<) instead of the greater than symbol (>). If he meant popups were worse, he would have used the other.
- ZigVicious, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2I thought he meant that he'd rather have a stealth install than a popup, hence the question, "do you really hate popups that much?".
but I see how that could make sense.
did two people just have an intelligent conversation on digg?
- res8qr6m, on 03/22/2008, -1/+4Aren't all popups equally annoying?
- carlvjack, on 03/22/2008, -6/+0I got the pop up today and thought it was an update for iTunes. Gave it a shot anyways, its pretty fast a heck of a lot better than the last time I tried.
- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -0/+7Entirely agreed - they can do what they want with their existing software to advertise other products (do too much and people will uninstall it completely) but they should not be pushing software via Software Update. Mozilla didn't need to use such tactics to get Firefox to where it is now so neither does Apple.
- dajernts, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1I disagree. They should have to market it just as every other company does it, unless of course its a Mac computer in which case I can see it being a feature of the operating system.
- daengbo, on 03/22/2008, -7/+6Leveraging a monopoly in one market to secure a place in another? Hmmm ... It sounds familiar.
- max1018, on 03/22/2008, -37/+5OMG THEY PUT SAFARI IN THE UPDATER THE WORLD IS ENDING GAAAAHH!!!
If you don't want it, uncheck the box. It won't be installed. Yes it is questionable about whether Apple should have done this (I don't really like Safari on Windows yet), but having it result in an uproar is sort of stupid.- hrm114, on 03/22/2008, -2/+1everything on digg seems like an uproar because all of the uproaring is concentrated onto one comments page - kind of distorts perspective in a way
- theeEqualizer, on 03/22/2008, -8/+23Isn't this perilously close to Billy Gates huge anti-trust debacle with IE? I have to admit, I fell for the Safari "update" that wasn't an update but instead an install. And I'm a tech. But hey, i was busy and I saw the apple auto-update for about the 10,000th time in my life so i approved and went on... How would I have guessed that THIS time they were pushing a new app on me?
But I also have to admit, its a really good browser. I'm kind of enjoying using it. But its not as if I'm going to stop using Firefox.
Now, if somebody would just push Opera.- MisterThePlague, on 03/22/2008, -11/+0Exactly. Anything that gets an alternative browser onto the systems of Windows users is a good thing for the web. It's not like it uninstalls IE or changes any defaults. A user who installs it by mistake will probably completely ignore it. Why should I be outraged that people are being offered an alternative web browser? I'm thrilled that millions of people will be exposed to something other than IE because of this.
- planetbeing, on 03/22/2008, -0/+8All browsers that I know about attempt to make themselves the default browser. On Windows Vista, web browsers are most frequently accessed by a link in the Start Menu that points to the default web browser, which would be Safari after install. So pretty much a clueless user will be switching over to Safari right after they approve the update.
- MisterThePlague, on 03/22/2008, -3/+0No, Safari DOES NOT make itself the default browser immediately after install. The first time you run Safari, it will ask you if you want to make it your default browser YES/NO, exactly the same thing that Firefox, IE and Opera have done for years.
- skillled1, on 03/22/2008, -0/+4Stick to the topic of it being bundeled as an 'update' when it is a fresh install. Fact is Mac is practicing maleware techniques.
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 03/22/2008, -1/+3> "Fact is Mac is practicing maleware techniques."
Maleware: Software for guys.
- MisterThePlague, on 03/22/2008, -3/+0No, Safari DOES NOT make itself the default browser immediately after install. The first time you run Safari, it will ask you if you want to make it your default browser YES/NO, exactly the same thing that Firefox, IE and Opera have done for years.
- enri, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2I am all for people using alternative browsers but tricking them into it is wrong.
- planetbeing, on 03/22/2008, -0/+8All browsers that I know about attempt to make themselves the default browser. On Windows Vista, web browsers are most frequently accessed by a link in the Start Menu that points to the default web browser, which would be Safari after install. So pretty much a clueless user will be switching over to Safari right after they approve the update.
- enri, on 03/22/2008, -1/+8That is exactly what they are banking on. They train you to click "Update" by displaying that damn update window nearly every day.
- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -4/+2"Isn't this perilously close to Billy Gates huge anti-trust debacle with IE?"
No. What Apple is doing is unethical as far as computing is concerned, but installing Safari increases choice on the computer and it's installation does not make it the default browser. I think this is a damned stupid approach but it won't result in an anti-trust case unless it starts setting itself as the default browser and making it difficult to run other ones. - deadbaby, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2It's very different. Microsoft included IE in Windows to kill Netscape. There are internal Microsoft documents that outright say it. This is more like Microsoft offering .NET, Messenger, Windows Defender, Silverlight, etc as optional installs which is something I have no problem with. IF you decide to use Windows & Microsoft software you may very well want .NET and all this other stuff too.
- baconz, on 03/22/2008, -2/+1Apparently you've never installed Adobe CS3 on a mac. They sneakily install Opera without asking AFAIK. I've had to delete that piece of crap at least 3 times!
- marson, on 03/23/2008, -0/+1A-ha! That's how I ended up with Opera on my Mac at work.. I accused the IT guy of installing it when they bought the computer, no wonder he didn't have a clue what I was talking about. I thought he was some kind of Opera fanboy or something.
- dajernts, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2Yeh! that stupid thing pops up every other second. I got rid of it. If i really need an update I can just go get it online.
- TrevorPace, on 03/22/2008, -1/+3I wish more people would push Opera...
...off a cliff. - cheald, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1I've found Safari on Windows a) sometimes locks up on a page and never comes back, b) consumes ungodly amounts of RAM if left to idle, and c) eats CPU, again while idling. While it's nice to have a Windows version for testing in, I can't afford to leave it running all the time.
- MisterThePlague, on 03/22/2008, -11/+0Exactly. Anything that gets an alternative browser onto the systems of Windows users is a good thing for the web. It's not like it uninstalls IE or changes any defaults. A user who installs it by mistake will probably completely ignore it. Why should I be outraged that people are being offered an alternative web browser? I'm thrilled that millions of people will be exposed to something other than IE because of this.
- lamiaconfitor, on 03/22/2008, -9/+33I HATE itunes and quicktime for this same reason, I dont need to be nagged about software updates all the fn time. never use either. forget yuppie morons who think apple is the god of all tech.
- joncarr, on 03/22/2008, -9/+3Hate to be nagged, but are too lazy, or too stupid to change the 'check for updates' preference?
Now who is the moron? BTW - Windows Update needs your attention.- miket, on 03/22/2008, -0/+3too bad it forgets your preferences every time it has a new update......and why are we calling eachother morons, stop acting like kids!
- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -6/+2Maybe Software Update is different under Windows but it doesn't do that on the Mac. Once a week it will run and only then pester you if there is an update but given that such updates are usually important I see this as being a "good thing".
Nice use of the word "yuppie" - I've not seen that since the 1990's. - jalo, on 03/23/2008, -0/+1Learn how to do a custom install.
- joncarr, on 03/22/2008, -9/+3Hate to be nagged, but are too lazy, or too stupid to change the 'check for updates' preference?
- PLRRights, on 03/22/2008, -19/+0I hate this anoying update. Should turn it off.
laffe
http://www.originalprivatelabelproducts.com/- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2Complaining about spam, and then spamming us with your ***** website. Classic.
Go die in a ***** chemical fire, *****.
- bjornski, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2Complaining about spam, and then spamming us with your ***** website. Classic.
- tehxen3, on 03/22/2008, -18/+4Crybabies.
- piratearggghhh, on 03/22/2008, -6/+119Imagine Apple the size of Microsoft: You can only buy their brand computers, you can only use their operating system, their browser Safari is preinstalled, their music player itunes is preinstalled that is the only software that runs ipods and iphones. This is the computing world Apple is trying to create with their ecosystem and yet everyone thinks they're so cool compared to evil Microsoft. Now they're leveraging the itunes/ipod platform for other things. Go figure.
- Twiggy794, on 03/22/2008, -15/+6Well wait just a minute. The Apple you're talking about, with it's pre-installed media players and pre-installed web browsers...that sounds like Microsoft!
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 03/22/2008, -0/+18> "The Apple you're talking about, with it's pre-installed media players and pre-installed web browsers...that sounds like Microsoft!"
Uhh... yes, that's the point he was trying to make.
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 03/22/2008, -0/+18> "The Apple you're talking about, with it's pre-installed media players and pre-installed web browsers...that sounds like Microsoft!"
- WallnutBoy, on 03/22/2008, -0/+5Winamp offers the crappy iPod support, but if you search online for ml_iPod you'll find a replacement for the plugin which actually has all the ipod features properly, including AudioScrobbler and LastFM support. They're experimental with iPhones at the moment, though - but they're steadily getting there.
- carpespasm, on 03/22/2008, -1/+5Indeed. I heard an interview with a guy that lost his religious faith after being born and raised a Jehovah's wittiness after he just asked himself "Would I want the entire world to be the way these people are?" This sounds like the same thing, if it's not good enough to use for everyone it has problems.
- jeriqo, on 03/22/2008, -9/+2Except... we like using Apple software, whereas PC users keep complaining... for years.
- cerealjynx, on 03/22/2008, -6/+1That'd be pretty sweet.
- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -1/+5True, but you can uninstall Safari and iTunes if you want and there's no limitation on installing new software. The iTunes/iPod lock-in is a fair point and it will be interesting to see what the EU court rulings are on that when they finally come to a decision.
- digitally5, on 03/22/2008, -0/+4If i were to imagine that Apple would dominate vs Microsoft.... I know I would have the option to use other Operating Systems on my computer. From MacOSX to Windows.....
- thedragon4453, on 03/22/2008, -2/+2I imagine that if that happened, and Apple took a substantial share of the market, MS would be forced to write a decent OS. They would have to try to innovate some new features that had real substance to the user. Apple's attempt to grow has forced innovation. They had spotlight long before integrated search came to windows. Multiple ways to manage windows like with expose and spaces, and so forth. Take away transparency from Vista, and it doesn't really seem a lot different from win95. Yes, I know that there is a ***** ton of under the hood improvement, but average users dont.
- Twiggy794, on 03/22/2008, -15/+6Well wait just a minute. The Apple you're talking about, with it's pre-installed media players and pre-installed web browsers...that sounds like Microsoft!
- vdog, on 03/22/2008, -2/+62To all those who state that people should be smarter and just untick it don't realise how illiterate the average computer user is- they just think that the default install is the best option, and that's if they think about it at all. Apple is using people's ignorance to push a product that they don't want. Really, it's another form of Spam.
- MisterThePlague, on 03/22/2008, -11/+0A user as illiterate as the person you described is the kind of person who thinks the internet is "the big blue e", and that's exactly the kind of person who needs to be exposed to an alternative web browser.
- Krumm, on 03/22/2008, -0/+5But the user he is referencing will be lost with this new software, and will probably end up paying someone to put it back 'like it was'.
If people reach the point that they are ready to try new software, they will go and find it, most people just want to push a button and have the same screen greet them each time so they can shop for crap on eBay. - eyefork, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2Most Apple users are just as clueless, dropping a few grand on a mid-range computer.
- Krumm, on 03/22/2008, -0/+5But the user he is referencing will be lost with this new software, and will probably end up paying someone to put it back 'like it was'.
- joncarr, on 03/22/2008, -7/+1It's terrible isn't it? Man, think what would happen if Microsoft ever included new, optional software in the Critical Updates section of Windows Update.
- Qumahlin, on 03/22/2008, -3/+1"Apple is using people's ignorance to push a product that they don't want. Really, it's another form of Spam." Um...even if you push the product onto the machine, the person would need to actively begin using it over their current browser.
- MisterThePlague, on 03/22/2008, -11/+0A user as illiterate as the person you described is the kind of person who thinks the internet is "the big blue e", and that's exactly the kind of person who needs to be exposed to an alternative web browser.
- ZeRux, on 03/22/2008, -18/+43Avoid Apple and their crappy software, that'll fix the problem.
- ludolphus, on 03/22/2008, -19/+3Why is this a problem when Apple (or whoever) uses auto-update to distribute software. Microsoft does this all the time: SilverLight, DreamScene, soon Internet Explorer 8. Yes sure these are 'part' of Windows and they it's ok ? Microsoft has been pushing the world for years to use Internet Explorer. I think it's time someone else starts showing people there is an other way to surf the internet. Mozilla should do the same thing: if you have Thunderbird, use auto-update to 'push' Firefox and vice-versa. Isn't Safari part of iTunes anyway already, for use within the iTunes store?
- banmaster, on 03/22/2008, -1/+10Huh?
You have to manually choose to get silverlight, have to actually manually tick dreamscene in Windows Update, and IE8 (and 7 for that matter) are UPDATES to EXISTING software, not totally new applications!
iTunes has its own built in html renderer for the store stuff, it DOES NOT have anything to do with *****!- MisterThePlague, on 03/22/2008, -5/+3It's not like Windows users have a choice as to whether on not their their machines have IE on them to begin with.
- skillled1, on 03/22/2008, -2/+2which they are then free to download another and use what they want retard. would you rather them have NO browser to connect to the internet by default?
- HonoredMule, on 03/22/2008, -0/+3Indeed. It's not like we have wget or aptitude, or for that matter any meaningful functionality out of the box, EXCEPT a rudimentary filesystem/web browser we can use to find useful software to get us started.
- WallnutBoy, on 03/22/2008, -1/+3Yes. Just like Apple users don't have a choice as to whether or not their machines have Safari on them to begin with.
- carpespasm, on 03/22/2008, -1/+1All modern OSs come with a web browser by default. This hasn't been a problem for many years.
- FuzzMop, on 03/22/2008, -0/+4@WallnutBoy: Just like Microsoft gives you a choice to uninstall IE after you've installed a different browser... oh wait.
- skillled1, on 03/22/2008, -2/+2which they are then free to download another and use what they want retard. would you rather them have NO browser to connect to the internet by default?
- MisterThePlague, on 03/22/2008, -5/+3It's not like Windows users have a choice as to whether on not their their machines have IE on them to begin with.
- Kelmon, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1I believe that WebKit is used to render the iTunes Store and that this is likely being used in the Windows version. WebKit is not the same as Safari in much the same way as Gecko is not Firefox; these are the rendering engines used by the browser applications. It's somewhat confusing that you can download a WebKit nightly build and it will look like Safari but that's because they put the browser application around the rendering engine so that you can interact with it.
- banmaster, on 03/22/2008, -1/+10Huh?
- starmanjones, on 03/22/2008, -18/+5i think this is just an example of the difference in cultures. mac people expect apple to be trustworthy and appreciate the updates. people from PC/Windows culture suspect alterior motives and less than quality software. for myself...
i use all platforms all the time. i am weary of updates from microsoft and usually wait to see what happens to others. windows update is one of the first things i turn off.
from apple i think nothing about it and most mac people including me have it set to automatic. apple has blown it a couple times over the years but its never been a disaster for anyone. mostly its fixed before most know its a problem.
i have noticed that upgrades from the big linux distros hold the same favor. i have my linux boxes all on auto update and i don't go look to see what might be broken. just do it.
i think its the organizations that create this. apple and linunx distros are seen as looking out for my interests. microsoft is seen as looking out for microsofts interests and collide with mine more often than not.
i've noticed the same cultural differnces in software. when free is attached to mac software it isn't refering to downloading it for free. as someone that uses software from all platforms i think we should help make mac software culture survive. if you use both then you know what i mean. the average peice of mac freeware or shareware is just better than windows pay for it.
looking for a peice of windows software to do some one off thing can take hours and risk the health of your machine. mac... 10 minutes and your done. linux seems to be going this same direction too.- CCmachined, on 03/22/2008, -0/+14apple != Linux
apple is a corporation, and is using iTunes' updater to ship a new application. an updater for a program you installed should NEVER install a different application without asking, period. the big fuss is that it's not an option you can opt in to, you have to opt OUT if you don't want it, of which, many people will just click update without looking... - banmaster, on 03/22/2008, -3/+10You're an ignorant fool if you leave windows update turned off!
- enri, on 03/22/2008, -0/+6Are you really suggesting that Apple is only looking out for my best interests when they sneakily install another of their Products on my machine?
For the record, of every Linux distro I have used, none of their auto-updates have tried to install new software. Auto-update is not an invitation to install another product on my machine.
- CCmachined, on 03/22/2008, -0/+14apple != Linux
- skillled1, on 03/22/2008, -10/+6The only reason I have Safari is it is a good medium to test in the web development world, however this practice is retarded. If they wanted to push it so much, they should allow it to appear in the update dialog, but be default to NOT download, if a user wanted too, they then would select the check box, and download it.
As it stands, windows users do not need ANOTHER browser.
IE = Firefox = Safari
IE = Safari =/= Firefox w/ Plugins
That and how Safari renders text with the 'alpha' crap messes with my eyes, even though it is supposed to be 'easier' to read, i have to keep rubbing my eyes because it looks 'blurry' to me.- MisterThePlague, on 03/22/2008, -2/+2I think the world needs MORE browser competition, not less.
- skillled1, on 03/22/2008, -2/+1Well MisterThePlague, nice handle jack from 'Hackers' noob. More browsers, means MORE programs on a computer for no reason, when the available ones do the job as it is, as well as MORE work for Web Developers to test yet ANOTHER browser for possible indescrepencies in how it displays the page. Dumb idea, from someone that knows nothing other then browsing the internet.
- miket, on 03/22/2008, -0/+0Ouch, he called you a noob. That must hurt, man, I'm sorry.
- grimward, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2Yes, you can almost smell the rabid fanboyism
- SupaDawg, on 03/22/2008, -0/+2A kid with the digg handle "skilled1" ripping on another for using a handle from a movie? How interesting.
- Sidzilla, on 03/22/2
- miket, on 03/22/2008, -0/+0Ouch, he called you a noob. That must hurt, man, I'm sorry.
- skillled1, on 03/22/2008, -2/+1Well MisterThePlague, nice handle jack from 'Hackers' noob. More browsers, means MORE programs on a computer for no reason, when the available ones do the job as it is, as well as MORE work for Web Developers to test yet ANOTHER browser for possible indescrepencies in how it displays the page. Dumb idea, from someone that knows nothing other then browsing the internet.
- MisterThePlague, on 03/22/2008, -2/+2I think the world needs MORE browser competition, not less.
