Apple vs Microsoft Both Copycats 207
jdbartlett writes "Yesterday, we read Paul Thurrott's response to Apple's Leopard preview. In his TechBlog, Jim Thompson trims Thurrott's bloated opinion piece and presents an alternative take on four major new features, admitting that each may have been inspired but certainly not by Microsoft. Thompson ignores 6 features; some (Core Animation, Accessibility improvements) needed no defense, but perhaps not all Thurrott's points were invalid."
who cares? (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe Apple/Microsoft because they want to fight out patents. Personally, all I care about is which one does a better job of implementing the features I want.
Re:who cares? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:who cares? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:who cares? (Score:3, Insightful)
Fortunately, you don't have to choose - OS X is both available now, and does a better job than Vista is ever likely to...
Re:who cares? (Score:2)
Re:who cares? (Score:2)
Grrr waiting period!!
Re:who cares? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:who cares? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:who cares? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:who cares? (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple vs. Microsoft (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Apple vs. Microsoft (Score:2)
Right you are, but I must take exception with your spelling. "grudge match" is not spelled d-e-b-a-t-e.
TW
Re:Apple vs. Microsoft (Score:5, Interesting)
For instance, he said that MS had something like "Spaces" originally in some obscure version of NT which was never officially released, however anybody with any familiarity with Unix will have recognized that Apple probably got the idea for multiple desktops there rather than from MS. It's an insincere point.
Re:Apple vs. Microsoft (Score:4, Informative)
But the support has been in NT since the beginning.
Not that it really matters
Re:Apple vs. Microsoft (Score:2)
Remember that these people are not familiar with anything other than home computers - unix was something that the Moorlocks in the server room had to deal with while the tech journalists only noticed the home computers. Remember that these are the same losers that thought Microsoft invented the optical mouse just becuase they had never seen one before. You usually get
Apple is just another Unix vendor (Score:5, Informative)
OS X is just a peculiar Unix distro.
I find it fascinating that Linux can borrow BSD features, and AIX can mimic Solaris features, but when Apple steals a feature for its particular Unixling, it's a big event.
Re:Apple is just another Unix vendor (Score:2)
Re:Apple vs. Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
And spotlight compared to windows search? I'd say Sherlock probably beat Windows Search out, and Spotlight has the slight advantage of being near-instant (YMMV, I search 45-75 GBs on a 1.33 GHz G4).
And the big thing here is this: Apple is accusing MS of direct rip-offs (similar icons, similar UIs, etc) in addition to copying features, whereas Thurott is accusing Apple of having similar features to Windows.
Re:Apple vs. Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words, it was classic Microsoft "our vapour tomorrow will be better than their shipping product today" FUD from the Internet's #1 Microsoft toady.
Comprimise (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Comprimise (Score:2, Interesting)
"Xerox PARC was the incubator of many elements of modern computing. Most were included in the Alto, which introduced and unified most aspects of now-standard personal computer usage model: the mouse1, computer generated color graphics, a graphical user interface featuring windows and icons, the WYSIWYG text editor, InterPress (a resolution-independent graphical page description language an
Re:Comprimise (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Comprimise (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft had no such agreement.
Apple also extended the UI from what Xerox had (have you ever seen a PARC in action? Clunky, horrible UI but with the germ of a good UI hidden within).
Re:Comprimise (Score:3, Insightful)
You had such a great opportunity for a pun but wasted it on a wheat metaphor with that extra 'r', considering the history of GEM. [wikipedia.org]
Re:Comprimise (Score:2)
Still, if I said every bad pun that came to mind, my wife would probably kill me. It'd be a fair cop though.
Re:Comprimise (Score:5, Informative)
The fact is that there were people shopping some good ideas around Silicon valley at that time. Apple was the only company at the time with the guts to bring these radical ideas to market. Not Microsoft. Not Xerox. Not IBM. Not Digital Research (they made CPM and were a big deal at the time).
Re:Comprimise (Score:2)
The proof-of-concept design is not the same thing as a marketable consumer product.
Re:Comprimise (Score:2)
AFAIK the Alto and Dorado machines were not 'proof-of-concept' designs but production and productive environments, on of the guys on the core Macintosh team (Jef Raskin maybe?) had been an intern at PARC for 2 or 3 years, working in Smalltalk on altos and dorados (and "being spoiled by the environment" by his own words).
Pundits, Copycats, and Asshattery (Score:5, Funny)
Even a broken clock tells the correct time twice a day.
Re:Pundits, Copycats, and Asshattery (Score:5, Funny)
Not anymore. Mine keeps reading "88:88" (and 88 seconds) ever since the LCD display got clobbered.
Re:Pundits, Copycats, and Asshattery (Score:2)
Once we switch over to metric time, you'll be fine.
All Ideas Are Derivative-oreilly take new OS (Score:5, Informative)
Oreillys radar's site take on the new features of the OS (by nat):
A good read actually:
http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2006/08/apple_e
64 bit unix "at least" 5 years old (Score:4, Informative)
Re:64 bit unix "at least" 5 years old (Score:5, Insightful)
This is the part of all this nonsense I don't understand.
Making a nice interface onto a backup system (Time Machine) - yes, great. Tooltips, even - yes (read Alan Cooper on this - I can't be bothered to argue). Stuff like that is innovative and worth talking about.
Stuff like "Oh, we invented the 64-bit OS" or "We were the first to integrate wifi into our computers" - who gives a toss? Both are stepwise/obvious improvements to any competent practitioner in the field.
Oooh, you thought of using a 64-bit CPU to run your OS? How ever did you think of that? I mean, first we had 4 bit CPUs, then 8-bit, then 16-bit, then 32-bit...but you came out of left field and decided to use a 64-bit CPU? Fantastic!
You thought of putting another peripheral inside the main box?! Awesome!
I'm not having a go at you in particular, brokeninside, - 'you' here means anyone who claims to be first with such improvements and claim they're more amazing than they really are. It always seems a bit "I'll piss on your boots and tell you it's raining" to me.
The whole 'first' thing is kind of dumb. I once pointed out to a tedious Mac fan who had a website detailing just how great and 'first' Apple were with everything, that contrary to his belief, Mac OS was not the first OS to support anti-aliased fonts - Acorn's RISC OS pre-dated it, for one. He then told me that Apple were 'the first to make it mainstream'. Typical fanboy - when you come up against contradictory facts, just change your criteria.
(Apologies if I sound cranky - can't sleep...)
Re:64 bit unix "at least" 5 years old (Score:3, Informative)
I think OSF/1 on the Alpha may have been the first 64 bit Unix variant.
Interestingly, Tru64 is based on a Mach kernel, same as Apple's Mac OS X.
Both of them suck (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Both of them suck (Score:2)
I did just that (Score:2)
In general, though, I agree. The best customer service e-mail response I ever received was from Bare Bones Software, the company that makes BBEdit. I wasn't e-mailing about a BBEdit issue, though. I was
Re:Both of them suck (Score:2)
The network appliance tanks whenever it is tested in the marketplace. Dell at entry level is under $400.
Re:Both of them suck (Score:2)
Oh so familiar (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Oh so familiar (Score:3, Funny)
VINIVIDIVICI! [slashdot.org]
Bravo, my friend. Bravo.
Three Skills Come To Mind (Score:5, Insightful)
Seeing the itemized list of who's providing what, made me think about why everyone thinks their "allegiance" is the one to do it right and to do it first. In general I think the trend is:
That probably sounds negative to any of the three groups, but I think it explains more about why users don't "remember" that someone else perhaps did it first. An Apple aficionado who appreciates good user interfaces will never acknowledge anyone else as coming "first" after seeing the demo of Time Machine; there's just never been anything like it. But a Unix user will guffaw at the crash they had during the demo and state that they're the ones with the "first" version since they really see reliability as their cornerstone. As for adamant Microsoft users, it just seems to matter about when something was released rather than the quality. The next version may completely drop the interface or re-engineer the back end. But often these users can quote feature lists and continuity better than most Trekkies or Whovians.
In a lot of ways, I think there's a lot to be improved from all three camps. Make it work. Make it usable. And make it known. I think there are things each developer group can learn from the other, but advocacy will be self-selecting.
TechBlog is missing the point (Score:3, Interesting)
It's not so much that Thurrott is claiming that Microsoft invented all of these features, it's merely a rebuttal against all of the Vista bashing that Apple indulged in. Thurrott is not claiming that Microsoft invented the 64bit OS (contrary to what TechBlog seems to think) - he's just saying they beat Apple to it.
Also, for those that seem to think this is all pro-Microsoft hogwash, the following came up within the first few paragraphs:
Re:TechBlog is missing the point (Score:2)
That aside, you are correct: a hefty chunk of Thurott's piece was rebuttal of Apple's incendiary anti-Microsoft campaign. Specifically, it was a rebuttal of the claim that Microsoft copied Apple. TechBlog is simply explaining that both are copying (or rather, "taking to the next logical stage") older technologies.
It's been said before... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It's been said before... (Score:2)
"Good writers borrow. Great writers steal."
Chances are, he stole the quote, but Chet Atkins was The guitar god. He can be forgiven.
Of course he probably orginated this observation:
When watching K D Lang perform on the TV at Brown's diner he says, "She's eaten more pussy that Porter Wagoner."
)
Everything is stolen nowadays (Score:2)
iChat (Score:3, Informative)
Re:iChat (Score:2)
Re:iChat (Score:2)
So iChat will allow multiple people to watch and listen to the conference. And it'll allow asking questions just as well as those classes I was in. Throw in a hardware mixer and you've got the whole deal.
The OS X/Windows/UNIX feature cycle (Score:3, Interesting)
2. OS X (or Windows) borrows the feature, puts a GUI on top of it, and trumpets it with the next release.
3. UNIX (or OS X) copies the feature, customizes the GUI, tweaks it a bit to make it more powerful, and mentions it in the next release.
4. Windows (or UNIX) copies the feature, integrates it into the OS completely, tweaks it a bit to make it less useful, and fails to mention it at all.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Re:The OS X/Windows/UNIX feature cycle (Score:2)
Making Mountains out of Nothing (Score:2)
On the other hand, the Microsoft fans have to admit that Microsoft too has set themselves up for criticism by being so far behind on Vista t
Re:Making Mountains out of Nothing (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple usually doesn't say anything until they've already got the particular feature working. When they do pre-announce things they almost always come through. The one exception I remember is when they promised 3GHz G5s. Whether it's because of that failure or not, Apple switched to Intel after they failed to deliver
Re:Making Mountains out of Nothing (Score:2)
That's because Apple got burned badly with Copland. 10 years of development, announcments, product demos, development releases, and they had nothing to show for it. They'll not make that mistake again. That's why we find out years later than Apple has had an x86 OSX all along... they've been planning a switch to x86 for years.
Re:Making Mountains out of Nothing (Score:2)
Re:Making Mountains out of Nothing (Score:2)
NeXT ported ther OS to x86 a long time ago, but it didn't do them any favors. (It didn't help tht the hardware requirements were extremely specific and virtually nobody could run it. (The only person I know personally who ran a copy worked at a computer shop and had purchased the best equipment he could at the time, helps when you get significant discounts). OS/2 ran on significantly more hardware than the Intel version of NeXT.
Since NeXT ported their OS from
Re:Making Mountains out of Nothing (Score:2)
As GP said, they've had working x86 versions of OSX zipping along for a few years 'just in case', and you can be sure that somewhere in Cupertino they're running OSX versions for fully unsupported processors just in case they have to switch again one day.
Re:Making Mountains out of Nothing (Score:2)
Re:Making Mountains out of Nothing (Score:2)
I'm Visually Impaired (Score:5, Informative)
There is a 3rd party software package called "JAWS" which costs around $400 - $500, is locked down with DRM so if you have to reinstall your system or upgrade you have to reactivate it. Also, the software is very picky as to what kind of video card and sound card you have, and its prome to crashing. The software had also been none to deactivate itself for no reason, thus requiring you to reinstall it and reactivate it.
I looked at VoiceOver in Mac OS X and I was very impressed. Someone with no vision at all (I have some, I just need an extra large monitor) would have little trouble navigating the system using it. I know a few people with no vision at all and they were also extremely impressed with Voice Over, and I know at least one person who will benefit from Mac OS X Leopard's support for Braille displays. Also, the APIs and tools needed to make Mac OS X apps work with Voice Over are freely available to developers so any Mac app can be made Voice Over compatible with minimal effort. For JAWS its much harder.
Beginning of the Post-Windows Era (Score:5, Insightful)
When all of this happens, the other shoe will drop when business owners and business managers begin asking: Why is there no search feature on our corporate network that works like Spotlight on my kid's computer? Why is it so difficult for our marketing department to create a podcast, when my nephew can do it on his laptop in 15 minutes? Why do my wife's e-mails look better than the ones from my office? Why can't I get that spreadsheet back like I can on my computer at home? I can't video conference?! My kids do it all damn night on their computers!
Apple is trying to reach out and grab the teenage and college demographic, because no matter how smart an adult thinks they are, they never want to look stupid or "old" to their kids. If Apple can pull it off, it will be the beginning of the post-Windows era, when Microsoft's marketshare falls below 75%, the competition heats up, and software companies begin to deliver programs that actually save time and money for everyday office work.
Re:Beginning of the Post-Windows Era (Score:3, Funny)
Apple will get out of the hardware business and make an OEM OSX for Dell and HP long before Apple ever gets 25% of the market.
Re:Beginning of the Post-Windows Era (Score:2)
I don't care... (Score:2)
All the talk about copying ignores innovation (Score:5, Interesting)
RoughlyDrafted Magazine has articles on what's really new in Time Machine in The Time Machine Rip-off Myth [roughlydrafted.com],
explained what new stuff Thurrott overlooked in WWDC Secrets Paul Thurrott Hopes You Miss [roughlydrafted.com],
and gave Three Reasons Why Microsoft Can't Ship (and Apple can) [roughlydrafted.com].
The RDM Paul Thurrott story was dugg 1300+ times today!
OneNote Notes (Mail) (Score:2)
You could make an argument that OneNote certainly had it's predecessors as well, but certainly not in the rich graphical way that made OneNote so neat when it came out.
gentlemen start your attacks! (Score:2, Insightful)
Core Animation looks an awful lot like Flash (Score:2)
Apple's "Core Animation" looks like a scheme for developing apps with a Flash-based GUI. Video games have been doing that for years; in many games, the user interface is authored in Flash, but displayed with a third-party Flash player built into the game. For that matter, developers have been able to put Flash-based GUIs into Photon applications for QNX since about 2001. So this isn't exactly a new idea.
Did Apple provide any useful guidance for developers on what a GUI developed this way should look l
Copying is good, yet should still keep track of it (Score:3, Insightful)
First of all, copying is good. We would still be trying to make fire by randomly hitting stones against other stones if we weren't allowed to copy other people's innovations (which, by the way, is why I think Patents hinder progress rather than helping it). It's good that Apple's copying virtual desktops from Unixes. It's good that Microsoft is copying the trash can from Apple. It's good because:
So in general, there's nothing wrong with copying because it makes the ecosystem as a whole better.
Yet, all this being said, it is good to keep track of who is mostly innovating and who is mostly copying, and reward the innovators with your money. That way, you put the money where it will be used for further innovation. You reward the innovator. You accelerate the improvements already happening.
Useless Argument (Score:2, Interesting)
Even CoreAnimation is not beyond the "copying" argument. Microsoft shipped DirectAnimation years ago. Here's a link to the press release. [microsoft.com]
But this entire argument is completely useless. There are a number of skills at play when it comes to building and shipping any techology. First, a company needs to see an opportunity. Then, they need to design the right product for the market. Then they need to implement the product so that it can be easily used and make sure it's flexible enough that users can mould it
Well, duh. (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally, I think that everyone with their head on straight knows at this point that copying is something that everyone does on this level. You may be one of the holdouts to think that this is bad, but if it was bad and nobody would do it, where would we be today? Just taking the Mother of All Demos [wikipedia.org], nobody except the by Engelbart designated innovators would be given access to the stuff presented there: the mouse ("Bug"), video conferencing, email, hypertext... When people are bitching about "copying" or "stealing", I don't think they consider the alternative and how much more crappy it is.
There's also a thing as overdoing it and not inventing enough on your own, but I don't think any major vendor (Microsoft, Apple, Sun, Red Hat, Ubuntu, and so on) are doing that as of today. Apple's poking fun at Vista to rally the troops (it's a developer conference!) and to twiddle Microsoft's nose once more while they have the chance - it's marketing, not the universal truth.
I also think that 10.5 is misunderstood at this level. Take Time Machine: even if we discount the smoke-and-mirrors display of the thing or the fact that the OS helps you backup efficiently with a non-boot volume and four UI controls in its preference pane, the big innovation here is really that you can restore not only one file but that there are *built-in hooks* for "here's this old file and here's this new file" which means that you can cherry-pick old items from old database files. This is something very neat and very useful that in 99 cases of 100 couldn't be done before without resorting to poking and prodding the database files themselves; and now that it's built-in to some of Apple's apps, it's not only going to be tremendously useful there but there's going to be an onus on third-party developers to provide support for this, which means a better user experience for everyone.
As a developer, I'm very excited about 10.5. There's all sorts of new APIs, the old APIs have been extended in better ways, and the developer tools have reportedly gotten the biggest facelift since, well, *ever*. Xcode 3.0 may even trump the step from OS X's Project Builder to Xcode 1.0, and the Interface Builder has finally received some much-needed love. Gruber's right [daringfireball.net]: "Complaining that the announcements at WWDC only appealed to 'the geeks' is like going to a rock concert and complaining that all they did was play loud music."
Re:Paul Thurrot (Score:2)
Regarding windows search, it took me all of a few seconds to find a column dated January 2004 that discusses it. Didn't read it but maybe you should: http://www.searchengineguide.com/hotchkiss/2004/01 12_gh1.html [searchengineguide.com]
Who's the shill here?
Re:Paul Thurrot (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm not sure I really care though.
This simple fact is Apple delivered through on their tech promise. People seem critical of the 'cards close to the chest' attitude at times from Apple but it seems to work out a lot better than the MS Vista approach. Lots of promises, fewer in the delivery, stuff to come later (i.e more promises). Spotlight/Windo
Re:Paul Thurrot (Score:2)
"He said that Microsoft was ripping off Spotlight with Windows Search in Vista, which in fact, had been developed and publicly discussed long before Spotlight ever saw the light. (To be clear, Apple borrowed that one from Microsoft, but implemented it much more quickly.)"
Your question is valid and I don't know if he can justify his second claim. It is clear, though, that Microsoft was planning search functionality before Apple publicly disclosed Spotlight.
"Spotligh
Re:Paul Thurrot (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Paul Thurrot (Score:5, Insightful)
Simon
Re:What about Leopard 64-bit? (Score:3, Informative)
Supporting mixed models is not a new concept even if 64 bit itself hasn't been done. OS/2 did it, Win95 did it. Ultimately there is no reason for the end user to care.
Re:What about Leopard 64-bit? (Score:2)
Please note that these new features, including full 64-bit/32-bit mixed-mode compability, were announced at Apple's World Wide Developers Conference, not the World Wide Users Conference.
So while you're correct that it may not be a big deal to users, users weren't the audience. To the developers who want or need to code 64-bit applications, i
Re:What about Leopard 64-bit? (Score:2)
and I say again "So what?" Why is it important, "breaking news", that OS X allows that? It would be breaking news if it didn't.
I suppose the argument being made is that it's amazing that Leopard won't require all drivers to be rewritten? Why is that a surprise?
"To the developers who want or need to code 64-bit applications, it's a big deal indeed."
Are we talking drivers or applications? Application developers would expect the App
Re:What about Leopard 64-bit? (Score:2)
If so, this is breaking news, as no other 64-bit OS out there allows that.
If Leopard truly runs as a 64bit OS and allows 32bit drivers, then this is good for Apple, but hardly earns them the innovation of the century.
The fact is, many OSes have done this over the years, and it is not revolutionary. Even Windows95 could load 16bit drivers in addition to 32bit drivers.
My real question here is, how much of Leopard 'really' i
Re:For those of you.... (Score:2)
Re:For those of you.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:For those of you.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Well, I don't know about the argument, but I'd certainly mod the blog post about that. I love how arguments can just magically be dismissed nowadays by being 'FUD' (most overused acronym on Slashdot now?). "Hey, I don't agree with this guy - he's just trying to spread FUD!"
That's reall
Re:For those of you.... (Score:2)
Selective quoting? I copy/pasted his entire arguments. Didn't you read his article? And here you are, selectively quoting my blog and not pasting my entire argument. You're taking many of my remarks out of context.
Re: Apple stole Alt-Tab and Fast User Switching (Score:2)
If we are keeping a score sheet however Microsoft by far has borrowed much more from Apple, right down to hiring ex-apple OS interface designers for Windows 3.x. Susan Kare is a prime examp
Re: Apple stole Alt-Tab and Fast User Switching (Score:2)
Re: Apple stole Alt-Tab and Fast User Switching (Score:2)
Re: Apple stole Alt-Tab and Fast User Switching (Score:2)
At the point Microsoft *bought* $150M of Apple non-voting stock, Apple had around $4B in cash sitting in the bank (well, liquid assets and cash).
The promise to keep Office on the Mac was *far* more important than a few dollars, and most commentators saw that at the time.
You need to research your history, and yes, your post should be modded down because it's just plain wrong.
The $150Mil settlement (Score:5, Interesting)
So let's look at facts:
Re:The $150Mil settlement (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, the Office and IE applications were part of the same dispute. IE as the default browser, even, was also decided in this whole mess. It was a (I believe) 5 year agreement to keep supporting Office and other applications on the Mac platform which has since ended and been renewed in spirit by the Mac BU publicly at a previous WWDC. It is not often realized that Microsoft is one of Apple's closest, largest and most successful third-party developers, and both benefit greatly from the relationship. The light-hearted jabbing the Steve Jobs does makes it appear otherwise to those not entirely in-the-know.
Re:The $150Mil settlement (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft got a get out of jail free card, plus a way to make a profit on their settlement.
Microsoft also got rights to keep Internet Explorer 5 as the Mac default browser (this was before Safari), and as wacky as it sounds, it was the best browser on the platform at that time.
Apple got to show a commitment from one of their largest developers that was rather long (5 year commitment for software). Plus they got to show off by
Re:Konfabulator (Score:2)
Are you talking about Desk Accessories? Sorry, those are nothing like Konfabulator widgets.
Desk Accessories were just little programs that used ROM tricks to enable a really poor pre-emptive multitasking.
Widgets were closer to Active Desktop than anything else.
Konfabulator nothing like Desk Accessories (Score:2)
Re:but it's all the same (Score:4, Informative)
Thus, both Thurrott and this article appear to have largely missed the point in their attempt to show prior art here.
Re:but it's all the same (Score:5, Insightful)
Last time I checked, service packs were more or less major security patch bundles, every release of OSX introduces new tools, refinements to the core OS itself and new technologies.
Sure they come often, but upgrade W2k from SP3 to SP4 (hell, upgrade W2k from original version to SP4) and you still have Windows 2k, nothing new under the sun, maybe your calculator's been updated if you're lucky.
Update OSX from 10.3 (Panther) to 10.4 (Tiger) and you're in for major changes, upgrade OSX from 10.1 to 10.4 and you've basically got a different OS. Which is why Ars manages to do 15+ pages full text reviews for each new iteration of OSX. There's just no way to do that with service packs.
Re:but it's all the same (Score:3, Insightful)
With Apple it's the whole lot - end applications and programming APIs. I suspect this may start to change now that OS X is mature, and there is less need to generate cash from existing customers / more focus on new customers - i.e. we may see new APIs introduced in point releases at WW
Re:but it's all the same (Score:3, Insightful)
I doubt it. Apple's current model has one major advantage: Simplicity. You don't have to put a whole bunch of individual requirements for a piece of Mac software, all you have to do is say "Requires Mac OS 10.4 or later", and you have everything in the bag. One of the things that Steve and Apple are trying to stress is simplicity and eligance. It's probably the first bullet point in the creation of "The Apple Experience", which is, virtually, the thing that continues to keep them alive and well. It's in all
Re:Price Factor (Score:2)
No you weren't, and if you were you either don't know what Volume Shadow Copy is or you don't realize what Time Machine is poised to do.