Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Apple Blacklists "Rumor Promoting" Publications

Posted by CmdrTaco on Sun Jul 07, 2002 01:52 PM
from the wonder-where-we-fit-in dept.
Billy_D_Goat writes "Talk about control, Apple has now decided it can block users from recieving media passes at MacWorld Expo It blacklists these users by deciding if they run "rumor promoting" publications. This includs the webmasters of sites which have little to do with rumors or speculation such as Graphicpower.com/." Probably just bitter cuz Steve's thunder seems to get stolen at every show, and their lawyers can't seem to stop it ;)
+ -
unknown
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by XBL (305578) on Sunday July 07 2002, @01:57PM (#3837519)
    at future shows. I think they will learn their lesson from the backlash they will get about this. MacWorld has had their own rumors, but they are not being barred.

    These sites will just have to sit one out. I will be interested to see what happens at this show. Something big must going to be going down.

      • The point isn't that they're not allowed in. It's that Apple is being an active censor, in some cases to their biggest advocates. They're thumbing their nose at people.

        Would YOU want to promote Apple if Apple shot your site down as a rumormill after years of devoting yourself to promoting the OS, the hardware, the brand, the community, etc.?

        Apple plays this game of give and take all the time, chasing away their loyal fans with stupidity to rival that of Microsoft... Then attempting to lure in new markets as it cedes the old for no good reason.

        -Sara
  • ...doesn't seem like a wise idea on Apple's part. Why would you restrict access at ALL to a Mac convention? You could do that if you had an overpowering presence in the computing world... but seeing as Apple hasn't had that since 1984 , it just seems bogus to me. Restricting access for your own fans and users just seems like a daffy idea to me. Lordfly
  • by SpatchMonkey (300000) on Sunday July 07 2002, @01:59PM (#3837531) Journal
    So? Apple can do what it likes. It runs the expo, and decides who gets the media passes.

    It makes sense for them to not give special access passes out to those who they know are going to publish only the negative aspects of the expo. Obviously, they don't like bad press [macslash.org].

    Really, they are just trying to get the media they allow special access to print more balanced reports. You can't say fairer than that!
  • Control freaks (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Animats (122034) on Sunday July 07 2002, @01:59PM (#3837532) Homepage
    Apple, at least during Jobs periods, has always had a control-freak culture. Comes from having a CEO who's a screamer.

    But threatening the press is never good. "Never get into an argument with someone who buys ink by the barrel."

    • in a way i can see how they do this. why have an NDA if you are going to fire the people that leak info, yet reward the people they leak to? the story is that Apple pushed for this "lockout", but supposedly for whatever reasons Apple was going to tighten up on the sheer number of press passes in general. in they are going to do that i would think the web only rumor sites are the first to go.
      the one crazy rumor site behind the iWalk fever, spymac.com, responded to this news by saying they totally see where Apple is coming from.
      weather or not you agree with Steve Jobs being a control freak, he did get the company back in the black. he does seem to require a lot of control over things, and i guess it works for them. it is odd that they are doing this, though they have been strangely slack on sites showing screen shots and info on Jaguar (the next OS upgrade due out in late summer). you figure pushing Jaguar is going to be a big part of MacWorldNYC in 2 weeks and theya re letting a lott of that info out (where they used to make people pull screen shots within a few days).
      anyway, they do seem to be a little silly with the tightness on passes, but in a way you can't be too suprised that they are not the happiest with sites that make a living off of people that violate they Apple NDA.
        • > I don't even think the issuance or non-issuance
          > of media passes is really at issue here. As
          > Matthew Rothenberg suggests in his eWeek
          > article, folks can get the same amount of
          > information (perhaps more even) with an
          > exhibitor's pass as with a media pass.

          You're right; you can see a lot more at an exhibition with a regular pass than you can with a press pass. With any major company, any person with a press pass walking up to the booth is immediately shuttled to the one of a few people who has been specially trained and cleared to deal with the media. The media trained individual talks about very specific things. The reason why is that every person who deals with the media understands the number 1 rule:

          There is no such thing as off-the-record.

          Apple isn't playing "head games" with Mac news sources. The legitimate press is probably being treated as usual. But the blogs with their Jimmy Olson(TM) Real Reporter Play Kits aren't getting in.

          Apple is acting like a real corporation (or any entity who deals with the legitimate press) and they're doing their best to manage fanboy sites. For an analogy, why don't you come up with a "I Love Dubya" web site and try to get an interview with the president. Or get a media pass for a junket. Give a try and then decide if Apple is acting reasonably.

          No, the real issue is that these web sites (blogs, more specifically) don't want to pay for a general admission pass (or more than likely can't afford the price) and thus want free press passes. They claim that they have right because they're part of the "Mac Press", but when they don't get their way, they publish angry reports like this.

          Sheesh! This is almost like extortion; give me a free press pass or I'll tell all 200 of my readers how mean you are!
  • 100% solution (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Don't go to MacWorldExpo(tm). Don't support Apple(tm).

    Who is ever going to be turned away from LinuxWorld(tm)?
  • It must be sooo hard for Apple to deal with having such an enthusiastic fan base that they're willing to go to such great lengths to get previews of products. I feel sooo sorry for Steve Jobs and crew that they have to "put up" with this kind of thing.

    I think I'll stick to PC hardware and Linux instead of a company that obviously doesn't value its user base.
    • Some of these sites hurt Apple with their rumors. If I run a well-trafficked web site and I say "APPLE IS GONNA RELEASE THE G5 AT MACWORLD" some (not all) people would be inclinded to hold off purchases. Apple thrives on the media attention it gets every Macworld. If someone spoils that surprise, it spoils Apple's media splash.
  • It's their show (Score:4, Insightful)

    by qslack (239825) <qslackNO@SPAMpobox.com> on Sunday July 07 2002, @02:02PM (#3837544) Homepage Journal
    It's their show, and they can do anything they want. Nobody's free speech rights are being infringed upon, since this is a private event. Apple is only trying to stop the wild speculation that diminishes the surprise of Jobs' announcements.
    • If they were "wild speculations" they would not have anything to do with Job's pronouncements, so they couldnt diminish their surprise.
      • Re:It's their show (Score:5, Interesting)

        by x136 (513282) on Sunday July 07 2002, @02:21PM (#3837618) Homepage
        Yes, it can. At the last MWSF, rumors were flying of huge product revamps. New iMac, G5, some sort of PDA-like device, all of it. When the "only" thing introed was the new flat-panel iMac, lots of people bitched and whined like it was Apple that promised them all that stuff, and only gave them one thing. Caused a lot of people to overlook how great the new iMac was. Of course, the more reasonable people were impressed, but still. ;)
      • Re:It's their show (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 07 2002, @04:01PM (#3837973)
        Please. Nobody's being barred from MacWorld. Nobody's being told they can't say anything. Nobody's being "censored."

        A handful of people are being told they can't get in free. Period.

        Big deal.
      • You are an idiot. Yes it is okay since a corporation is doing it. It's their game and they can set what ever rules they want. Read the article, they are denying free passes to "rumor sites". Please tell me how these sites have some right to attend the event for free. They can still buy passes if they want. Is Apple/IDG being stupid and potentially alienating their custommers? Possibly, but they have the right to do business anyway they want.
      • Re:It's their show (Score:4, Insightful)

        by mr100percent (57156) on Sunday July 07 2002, @11:31PM (#3839724) Homepage Journal
        "when the company hasn't made a real innovation in years."

        WhAT?

        Firewire, User-friendly UNIX that runs photoshop natively, on-board 802.11, 6+ hour battery life on laptops, handwriting recognition built into the OS, Rendezvous, fanless computers, Final Cut Pro...

        Any questions?
  • Why is it so wrong for Apple to protect their own products from being leaked before Apple gets a chance to release them? Apple is just looking out for their best interests in this case.

    IDG's doing this anyway, not Apple. They are probably doing this because of some fear that Apple could bring some sort of legal action against them for what other publications invited to IDG's expo might publish.

    Is this the right answer? No. Do I agree with this answer? No. This will probably be repealed next year anyway. But doesn't Apple have a right to protect their products?
  • Hypocricy (Score:4, Insightful)

    by KFury (19522) on Sunday July 07 2002, @02:11PM (#3837582) Homepage
    Does anyone else find it amusing that at the January Macworld Expo, not only did Apple goad users into rampant speculation with their 5 day home page teaser campaign (changing the home page tagline to "Way Beyond the Rumor Sites" and the like), but that, in the end, the night before the keynote, the story was leaked by Time Magazine, who let out pictures and an Apple-sanctioned expose of the new iMac and iPhoto?

    The rumor sites had nothing on them in January, and for all Apple's teasing, it was their own media partners who fucked up, but you don't see Time or Newsweek getting their credentials pulled.

    One has to wonder what the point of this action is. After all, the damage that a rumor site does is done by the time they would get anywhere that a media badge would get them, unless Apple's planning on showing the press something cool under an embargo date which, given the Time debacle, you'd think they'd be ever less likely to do.
    • The rumor sites were reporting the flat panel iMac for months before the January Macworld Expo.
      • The article was Apple-sanctioned, hence the pictures of Jobs and Ives lounging around with their new baby. The fact that it was turned into an expose due to Time Canada's blunder was not Apple sanctioned, hence my saying that they 'fucked up'.

        My point though is the same as yours: The matter was dropped, because they're Time Magazine. If it were a lesser mag or site that made that mistake, you would bet Apple would have a stronger reaction.
  • by mkoz (323688) on Sunday July 07 2002, @02:15PM (#3837595)
    Perhaps I am in the minority here, but we are only talking a press passes. Apple would be within rights to deny press passes to any particular person or group. They are not restricting overall access, just special press privileges.

    Clearly, this is still a bad pr move... at least among the mac fanatics. But let's be real, we don't go to the rumor sites to read apple press releases. We (or at least I) like to surf the rumors sites for the pure humor, and occasionally a tip into what apple's thinking. Knowing of course that until 48 hours before the announcements the "information" has is more than often wrong.

    But let's remember... This is really only pissing off the people that run the "rumor" sites who enjoyed (and rightfully) one of the few perks they get. For the average rumor site surfer, it means nothing. For the average mac user... less than nothing.

    I think that this move is in line with apple's move from mac fanatics to well informed macintosh advocates. While this might piss off some people, in the end, I think the over all trend is good for the OS...
    • > Perhaps I am in the minority here, but we are
      > only talking a press passes. Apple would be
      > within rights to deny press passes to any
      > particular person or group. They are not
      > restricting overall access, just special press
      > privileges.

      You're in the minority because:
      1. Many people don't understand that the press do get special privileges at trade shows, and you don't just give passes to anyone who claims to be a journalist.
      2. Many people don't realize how every major company is extremely careful about what the press says about their company
      3. Many people want to bash Apple whenever they get a chance.

      I think some PR people at Apple are a little wary about the fanboys' sites about Apple because of reasons like this. It's like a self-proclaimed "number 1 fan" of a famous actor or TV show where the fan can be a flattering evangelist sometimes. But if the fan doesn't get the special treatment for which they think they're entitled, they can be the loudest critic and a bane to the target of their affections.

      Consider that many people in the press ridicule the overzealous Mac fans that send angry flames every time they read less than favorable article of Apple. Luckily I don't know of many reporters who consider Apple guilty by association, but if Apple starting giving the fanboys special treatment, that could change.

      So I don't think Apple's doing anything wrong by limiting the access to the press passes to legitimate journalists. That just means that the fanboys will have to buy a ticket to the event, just like everyone else.
  • but inside information.

    Remember, revoking the ability to have news coverage of the actual event could dissuade otherwise respectable news organizations from attempting to scoop each other by accidentally acquiring and disseminating ILLEGAL information for someone else's leverage in financial markets.

    If the famous Microsoft deal had been leaked back when Jobs took over, there would have been financial mayhem if someone acquired the inside info. If I remember right, the stock doubled the day of the announcement.

    Apple legal probably came to the (justified) conclusion that not dissuading the rumor sites was a de facto invitation (i.e. liability) for their own employees to pimp their insider status.
  • by mindstrm (20013) on Sunday July 07 2002, @02:17PM (#3837600)
    but this doesn't ban them from the show.. it just revokes their press pass. Well that is NORMAL.
    Press passes are handed out to those whom you want to report on the activities.

    Nothing is stopping any of these poeple from going to the show and reporting on everything anyway.
    • True, it doesn't ban them from the show. In fact on one of the sites they mentioned that many of the reporters will get a normal pass rather than a press pass purely so that people on the Apple stands will be allowed to talk to them without a member of the apple marketing machine present.

      What is the issue here is the princible of the thing (a sadly overused phrase here). Why should sites which are legitimately reporting on Mac events not get in free to do their reporting and others do simply because they happened not to report something that apple didn't like? Keeping in mind here that many of the 'rumours' reported are gained through legitimate investagative reporting rather than leaks from apple.
  • by Patrick13 (223909) on Sunday July 07 2002, @02:17PM (#3837603) Homepage Journal
    with all this Positive Press....

    it makes me want to switch [apple.com]...

  • by wahay (12517) on Sunday July 07 2002, @02:26PM (#3837637) Homepage
    I like rumor sites a lot. I read a number of the Mac rumor sites religiously because I'm constanly curious to find out what's next and when. But I support Apple in doing whatever it needs to to cut back on the flow of future info. Why?

    Back when I was a mere bouncing boy I had this wonderful portable computer called an Osborne 1. 1mhz cpu. Two floppy drives, a 300 baud modem and a CRT all running CP/M (DOS without subdirectories for you youngins). All this in a portable case the size of a suitcase. I loved the thing and did much productive playing of infocom games on it. (I had DBase 2, but could never figure out why I'd want such a thing).

    Then came tell of a NEW Osborne coming out in, like, six months or so. And this one would run PC-DOS!!! Almost instantly Osborne went out of business. Their cashflow dies as people canceled their orders for "old" computers and planned on waiting for the new one. And along came this _other_ company selling their 'compaq' briefcase computers. I imagine Adam Osborne was pissed.

    The moral of this story? Rumors can kill companies, and while Apple isn't small enoght for that to happen easily, I know for a fact that I've told people to "wait a month" to buy a mac based on rumor reporing of a new Powerbook coming real soon now. So, go Apple. Feel free to limit the rumor folks. And rumor guys, please keep working. I'd just die without my inside scoop.
    • This is exactly the reason apple wants to stop rumor sites, and is known as the Osborne Effect [folk.uio.no]. This paper should be required reading for folks who think that rumor sites do no harm.

      It has nothing to do with "diminishing the surprise of steves keynote".

      I ALWAYS tell my friends to "Wait till macworld" to buy macs. (if its close to macworld). However this attitude CLEARLY hurts apple. Apple is trying to stop the osborne effect.

    • To my recollection--and checking a few "computer history" websites seems to back me up--Osborne wasn't killed by rumor sites, Osborne was killed by itself.

      The new machine you're referring to was the Osborne Vixen [obsoleteco...museum.org]. It could read PC-DOS disks but wasn't PC-DOS compatible; it was another CP/M machine, touted as being better than a PC (and perhaps given 8086 and even some 80286 competition, it was). The Vixen was preannounced by Osborne itself, nearly a year before they were ready to go into production (perhaps because the machine was actually being designed by a consultant rather than in-house). People stopped buying the Osborne 1 waiting for the Vixen, yes, and that did contribute a lot to Osborne's collapse, yes... but that contribution was Osborne's own fault.

  • It's also the building of expectations that are too high or just plain wrong. There've been at least a few MacWorlds where what Steve did present wasn't nearly as big as what the rumor sites had been saying. I think the 'new' iMac had been expected at least a few events prior to its appearence, and DDR pmacs have been rumored about since shortly after they first hit the PC market.
  • It's there show..
    If they think your publication doesn't reach enough people or meet there criteria they don't give you a pass.

    It used to be circulation was used (you print and distribute so many copies...), but with the web it's cheap to publish, so everyone with a web site probably wants press credentials..

    people should stop whining..
  • The real press is just that--paper, ink, subscriptions, ads, circulation. Websites are not the press. Now that the dot bombs are going belly-up, Apple and others have figured out that there's nothing to gain by assisting the unfettered electronic publishing of rumors and innuendo that happens here and at other Mac rumor sites.
  • The issue isn't quite as clear-cut as the people at graphicpower.com or thinksecret.com might suggest. True, it's not entirely fair to deny access simply on the basis of what MIGHT happen, but Apple knows that these sites have definitely been apt to post very real (and hence very secret) information before a MW expo. Last year we saw a genuine (if somewhat muddy) photo of the Quicksilver PowerMac case, and of course there have been multiple other instances of information being exposed days in advance. Denying press-level passes may prevent the rumour sites from getting information at the show that would be under NDA for the press (but would likely be leaked at some point by a rumour site).

    I've heard though that a press pass isn't always ideal. Supposedly, Apple employees fasten their lips about some things when they see a press badge, but will sometimes give important info off-the-record to someone who only has a badge to visit the exhibits. I'm sure Apple wouldn't like that either... but it's easier to deny (or ignore) a few names and clock speeds than a photo!

    Who knows, this may even be a very sneaky (if not entirely smooth) PR stunt. Remember how MW San Francisco had that "way beyond the rumour sites" hype leading up to it? Denying press passes may be a way for Apple to suggest that there's something particularly juicy being shown at the expo, whether at the keynote or behind closed doors.

    One thing I do know: graphicpower.com acted very immaturely with their response. Beyond the colourful language and shutting down the site, the vow to 'use the existing computers forever' is a joke. You can be sure that the person or people from the site will probably either scream for mercy at the prospect of buying a Windows (or even Linux) system, or will be getting another Mac within two years.
  • that this says "Apache: Apple Blacklists "Rumor Promoting" Publications" Folks, although Apache may now run on OSX, this should be Apple. [mandatory complaint about suckage of editors here]

    --pi
  • There's increasingly little to choose from between Mac and *nix environments.

    The graphics / multimedia stuff is getting ported, if one wants hardware quality comparable to Apple, be prepared to spend a lot of time checking out published and user reviews of things like motherboards, cases, power supplies, but it's possible.

    I've been seriously considering Apple... but if I want to buy from a company that tries to control its own press, I might as well buy an AMD box and run XP on it.

    As I said, it's becoming a marginal choice, and I'm not a Mac fanatic.

    If Apple continues to blow off its fanatics, they may find their fanatics discovering that the choice between *nix/86xxx and Mac-unix-OS/Gx is also a marginal one, and that they'll be trying *nix/86xxx .

    Didn't Apple almost kill itself once already by blowing off their hard-core users? Do they learn from their mistakes?

    • Forgot to say that it used to be that the only way one could get MS Office compatibility in *nix was by buying a Mac. Now, CodeWeavers means one can run MS Office in Linux, and of course, there's OpenOffice.

      The choice is even more marginal now.

  • by d0n quix0te (304783) on Sunday July 07 2002, @04:13PM (#3838015)
    Did Apple install a surreptitious mod_macrumors to block out traffic to Mac Rumors sites.

    Please change this to the apple section of the site. Hate the awful poop and purple color scheme for the Apache section
  • by sg3000 (87992) <sg_public&mac,com> on Sunday July 07 2002, @05:56PM (#3838382)
    I don't work at Apple, but I do work with the press at my job a lot.

    If this is like other trade shows, the media passes are free to the legitimate press (or are a lot cheaper than a regular attendance badge), and they offer special access to some events. Thus, one wants to limit access to the badges to legitimate reporters. Why would you want to do this? Oftentimes we'll talk to the press about stories "under embargo", meaning they can't publish information on something until a certain date. A legitimate reporter can be counted on to respect the embargo (though I can think of a case when they didn't, the bastard!), but some joker who pretends to be a reporter can't be counted on to do the same thing.

    Apple is not blacklisting these rumor sites; someone involved in MacWorld Expo is just cracking down on giving away media passes to web sites that pretend to be real journalists. Oftentimes these web sites are basically being run by some guy who publishes unsubstantiated rumors onto the web. I don't read Graphic Power, but it's certainly not in the league as real media sites like Macworld, MacCentral, MacAddict, eWeek, CNET, etc.

    Despite how these guys call themselves part of "the media", it takes a lot more than a domain name and a few articles to call yourself a journalist so you can get a media pass. Media passes are intended for journalists, and giving them away to every wank that can upload some screenshots and half-baked opinion pieces is unnecessary.

    If someone were blacklisting the sites, they wouldn't be able to purchase a general admittance pass to the event at all. But in the Graphic Power story, they were encouraged to pay for the attendance fee to get in, like person who wanted to attend the show.

    The web sites supposedly blacklisted are more like blogs than real news sites, and denying them a media pass makes sense to me. Next you'll have the geek that runs http://www.startrekfans.com or whatever demanding to be invited to press-only screenings of the new Star Trek movie.

    To me this is a good illustration of why Apple is apparently not too happy with the fanboy sites. Even though these sites might sometimes might post something interesting (seemingly good for Apple), they can be a bad source of publicity if they aren't given the special treatment they think they deserve (like coveted media passes to a trade show). And as we all know, Heav'n has no rage like love to hatred turn'd. Nor Hell a fury, like a fanboy scorn'd.
    • The list itself was created by someone who works at apple.
    • Actually if you read the article on www.graphicpower.com, the blacklist comes directly from Apple. IDG then enforces this.
    • by KFury (19522) on Sunday July 07 2002, @02:06PM (#3837559) Homepage
      IDG was directed by Apple to blacklist the sites. Nathalie Welch, from Apple's PR group, directed which sites were on the list. I don't know where she got her list from, but it's interesting to note that she herself worked at MacWEKK magazine before coming to Apple, so this is in no small way one person calling the kettle black.

      My guess is that Jobs told her to do it.
    • Re:Err, no. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by zapfie (560589) on Sunday July 07 2002, @02:13PM (#3837589)
      Did you read the link? Here's quotes:

      IDG: Dear Scott, Recently, you received an automated message from the registration system for Macworld Conference & Expo. This message erroneously stated you were registered for the event. We're contacting you to alert you to this system error, and we are unfortunately not able to offer you a media badge *snip*

      GP: Unacceptable. I do not understand how this conclusion was made. Sure, there is the occasional "pre-Macwolrd Expo Predictions," but GraphicPower is most certainly not a rumor and speculation site. *snip*

      IDG:Scott, We've done all we can to accommodate as many media as possible for Macworld. It's *never* in our best interest to turn away legitimate members of the media, such as GraphicPower, as your stories fuel attendance for future shows. However, Apple has tremendous pull over who we can allow into the show as members of the media. They deem GraphicPower a rumor site and, as such, demanded that we pull your media credentials. IDG World Expo cannot reverse this decision. Call me at 617-937-2532 and I'll explain the exhibits-only pass to you. - Rob

      From the site: "Further research, phone calls, and e-mails turned up these facts:

      "GraphicPower is not being singled out, but rather this blacklisting policy has been exerted on several Mac centric Web sites that are news and information sites, not rumor sites.

      "The blacklist was given to MS&L only just Monday, and they had to scramble to notify press people who had received confirmation of their media status of the change.
      Not everyone who has been blacklisted has even been notified.
      The black list was compiled by Nathalie Welch of Apple's PR department.

      "After a few hours of hell raising on my part, Robert Halpin of MS& L, was in a lot of very hot water with Apple for revealing to me via E-mail that it was Apple who deemed GraphicPower a rumor site. He begged me to give him the list of people who I had sent E-mail to regarding the press blacklist. Later still in the day, he changed the story, saying that IDG World Expo, not Apple, was pulling my media credentials because GraphicPower had not posted new content recently enough... an obvious lie given that he had already documented that it was Apple who compiled the black list."

      And it goes on.. but it is clear that despite what IDG wants people to think, Apple had a big part in this.
    • Read the linked article.....the story that it is IDG is a COVERUP that was given out AFTER the guy was told that Apple was organizing the blacklist. He was also given an email address of the person who provided the list of sites/people to be blocked. That email address was from APPLE.COM

      Yeah, its all IDG's idea and not Apple....my ass.

    • I'm not trolling...

      Yes, yes you are. As a result, I'm ignoring your post save one point:

      Everyone says look how stable the Apple OS is, of course, it only achived that by dropping all their old code and building upon BeOS.

      Mac OS X has absolutely nothing to do with BeOS. Darwin is a combination of FreeBSD 3.2 and NeXTStep. BeOS got bought up by Palm, not Apple.

      Assuming that statement in itself wasn't a troll to begin with, you may want to actually check your facts before forming yet another "Apple is only good because..." statement; like every other moron who dumps on Apple while not having actually used a Mac in the last five years.

      • What does a press pass get one at MacWorld that a QT Stream doesn't?

        Ummm. The ability to talk to people face to face? Maybe hear something official yet "off the record"? Jeez. Maybe even a chance to get out of the house for a bit? :)

    • First, I think Apple / IDG are smoking something funny if they think this is a good idea. I mean, yeah, Apple does have to clamp down on leaks and such. Anyone who doesn't understand Apple's necessity to do this really doesn't understand their business and should shut the hell up. But is this a good way to do it? Shit no.

      After having said all that, l have a few comments on the "way to go Apple, shooting themselves in the foot again...This is why Apple will go out of business...The entire world is in chaos because Apple did it again!" crowd that has crawled out of the slashdot woodwork for this one.

      Imagine it's, oh, five years ago. I come to the slashdot crowd and ask the following question:

      What would Apple have to do to earn some of your business and respect?

      Can you imagine? After the flames and guffaws died away I might get some answers like these.

      "Sure. Call me when they open source some of their products."..."If they would only use more standard hardware I might think about it"..."If they had one or two killer apps that made everyone stand up and take notice"..."maybe when I can run Apache and Gimp on it. As if."

      And let's flash forward to today when all of those ridiculous-sounding ideas have come true. Does the average slashdotter have one iota of additional respect for Apple? I've yet to see it. Frankly I think Apple could make a completely open source, totally off-the-shelf hardware-based, fit-in-your-pocket, fanless, never-crash, artificial intelligence, world changing computer that also levitated, kept your breath fresh and costs $1.99 and most here would sneer at it still.

      Parting shot - Libertarians shouldn't use the Internet until they're prepared to discuss how a Libertarian society would have ever created it.