New Apple Column on Ars Technica 54
Steve Cowan writes "A new Apple column by Eric Bangeman, called Mac.Ars, debuted at Ars Technica. The first edition is an insightful, unbiased take on the current state of Apple and its offerings. The author discusses Panther, the G5, consumer hardware offerings, Premiere, Microsoft Office, the 'Switch' campaign, the effects of Apple's relatively recent purchases of products like Logic and Shake, Apple's position in the server market, and lots more." What's the fun of being a Mac pundit unless you are biased?
don't forget linux (Score:3, Insightful)
bias? (Score:4, Funny)
What, you mean like Slashdot's bias for anything Linux or Open Source?
Re:bias? (Score:2)
This is why
Where's the beef? (Score:5, Insightful)
I got from that article that the writer:
- Intends to create a column for in depth technical review where other rumor sites fall short.
- Feels the Switch campaign didn't work out for Apple because the consumer line can't be customized
- Feels Apple's software development strategy yeilds great results but might present a probelm if Apple is the only one developing for the market
- Feels there is no market for the Xserve but there is a market for Panther Server (...though there is no market for server grade hardware?)
SO WHERE IS THE IN DEPTH TECHNICAL REVIEW? The author basically did a feature review. There was nothing new - a few opinions about consumer's desire to have faster graphics card - but no in depth anything.
I sure am glad I have apple.slashdot.org and macrumors.com to read because Ars' Apple column won't be on my list again.
Re:Where's the beef? (Score:5, Interesting)
I was kind of hoping for more along the lines of Hannibal's amazing 970 guess work or the insightful analysis of the OSX Finder. There are plenty of other things open to analysis.
I'm hoping for more than Forum summaries that aren't too terribly novel or informative.
How about an analysis of the StartUpItems method of startup scripts and the still present bug that stop commands don't work at shutdown! How about an analysis of the upcoming UI in Panther along the lines of the guesswork Hannibal did to the 970 and was done for OSX as a review? I can name a half dozen such things that I could have written.
Re:Where's the beef? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Where's the beef? (Score:2, Funny)
That being said, while it didn't tell me anything I didn't know from reading elsewhere; it did still keep me from being productive on a Friday
Apple isn't offering Panther or G5's yet. (Score:2, Interesting)
Just come out with the new powerbooks already. I'm probably just going to buy a notebook from PowerNotebooks [powernotebooks.com] instead since I've already got a 900MHz iBook and a G4 Tower. I was looking forward to a new powerbook. Oh well...
Re:Apple isn't offering Panther or G5's yet. (Score:1)
If a couple months wait is more important that selecting the hardware and software platform you use for the life of the device, then an Apple laptop just isn't for you (no matter what you SAY you have already purchased).
Right (Score:2)
Re:Right (Score:2, Troll)
A rumour site keeps stringing you along . .
You get angry at Apple for not releasing unannounced products . .
Yeah, go buy a Windows machine.
Re:Right (Score:5, Insightful)
Shit, Macosrumors was going on and on about the "G5 production progress" for at least a year before they were actually announced. Did they get TEH SCOOP? No. The G5 was obvious, but it turned out not to be soon. If Apple had called it something else, MOSR would have just said that the production name had changed at the end of the testing cycle blah blah blah.
It's all bunk. Don't get caught up in it or you'll just get disappointed like so many other Mac users. And you have. Of
If there's ONE thing I'd like to bring over from Windowsland, it's how no one gets really swept up in the rumour mill and either let down, pissed off, or both.
Re:Right (Score:5, Insightful)
Dude, if you think an x86 box serves your needs better then buy one - but what the f**k does it matter who else owns Apple boxes? You don't want to buy a computer because the other people who own them strike you as Arrogant Assholes? So if you think that a Makita or DeWalt was the best woodworking tool for you - but every one you knew who owned one of those sets was an ass you buy a Craftsman instead?
If you don't like Apple's secrecy that's a valid point. Their hardware mark-ups are public information - if you think wanting to make ~25% profit on your products is too greedy then that's a valid point as well but in the end that doesn't effect the product you actually buy.
It's a tool, it's an appliance, buy what suits you needs. It's not like you give other Apple owners your email address or have to invite them to your home - and other then the secret meetings every week in the - but I've said too much already...
Lighten up - it's a computer not a religion,
=TKK
Re:Right (Score:1)
Come on, if you know how it goes - as you said if they release it today it won't be available for 3 months - then why wait? Is there a technology you need t
Re:Apple isn't offering Panther or G5's yet. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Apple isn't offering Panther or G5's yet. (Score:2)
We live to serve Him, and you!
That would make for the Best... "Switch" ad... ever.
Who's biased? (Score:5, Insightful)
http://daringfireball.net/2003/03/antiantialias
http://daringfireball.net/2003/07/grab_htm
http://daringfireball.net
http://daringfireball.net/20
http://daringfireball.ne
If those article gives you an idea of what you'll find there sometimes, you'll see that the stuff DF.net posts isn't just rabid OMG APPLE RULZ!!!1 kind of stuff.
It's a Mac user talking about Macs and Mac stuff. That doesn't make it biased on that basis alone.
Can we start moderating comments in story summaries? Please?
Exactly. (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, it can be difficult linking to things that don't exist...
Re:Who's biased? (Score:2)
Whoever submitted the article calling John G. (heh, Memento!) a biased person, just because he covers macs, should go purchase himself a fucking clue.
Yes, because ArsTechnica are *never* biased... (Score:4, Interesting)
So they follow it up with data from their server logs: And potentially, a huge chunk of that unknown value are Mac. They even state that themselves: So they begin doubting the poll results from their readers, so they check their server logs. They're then shocked to find that there really is (potentially) over 30 percent of their readers using Macs.
They then pull out their server's browser logs, which show that Safari is the second most used browser by their readers (unsurprisingly trailing Internet Explorer).
It took all this trawling though their logs, and yet they still wouldn't admit that the poll's results could be somewhat accurate. Perhaps this new section is Ars actually admitting, in a very backwards way, that many of their reader do actually use Macs. Not they they want to admit it.
Say what you will about other sites [daringfireball.net], but claiming that ArsTechnica are unbiased is a joke.
Re:Yes, because ArsTechnica are *never* biased... (Score:3, Insightful)
Ars Technica IS Biased... (Score:2, Insightful)
Every article there on anything remotely Mac has been biased.... Ars Technica is more anti-Mac than Slashdot is.
The "We're not biased" attitude (And tone of voice) should not fool anyone... after all, how many people here think CNN and Fox news are totally objective? (They're both biased, just in different ways.)
Ars Technica excells at selling FUD wrapped around plausible sounding and "technical" analysis. Its one of those things that unless you are proficient in the technical area you won't recognize t
Re:Ars Technica IS Biased... (Score:5, Informative)
Considering their excellent articles on the G4, G4e, and now the 970. And also on the Mac OS X finder I think many people would disagree with you.
You should check who actually writes the articles and hangs out on the forums there and what they do.Many of them are engineers, there are those involved in processor design and also programmers and not small fry either. (Check out the about box in Photoshop then look for Chris Cox at ars he can tell you a thing or two about optimising stuff for altivec and the bandwidth constraints of the old PowerMacs), then take the time catch up on the Perpetual CPU thread GPUL and look at all the analysis done that when Hannibal was able to actually speak to IBM turned out to be almost spot on
Yeah the signal to noise ratio gets pretty low sometimes but it's pretty much self policing and without a moderation system too. There is no doubting that Ars tends to attract a more knowledgable person.
As for being biased Ars, like Slashdot is a hang out for technical peeps, and the old Mac OS didn't register on their radar except as perhaps a thing to make fun of. Things change, the Mac is now interesting to geeks. It may not do what we all want but you can't deny it has an attraction to pull it to pieces and see what makes it tick.
Re:Ars Technica IS Biased... (Score:3, Insightful)
As a loyal Mac user and a regular
Re:Ars Technica IS Biased... (Score:1)
Re:Ars Technica IS Biased... (Score:2)
As a loyal Mac user and a regular /. reader, I have not found an anti-Mac bias here. While /. seems to be more concerned with OSS and Linux (somebody has to do it), coverage of Apple has been taken seriously.
I suspect you have your comment filter set to 3 or higher. There's a lot of anti-Mac statements, but they're always from trolls or people who obviously have no first-hand experience, and never get modded up.
Re:Ars Technica IS Biased... (Score:1)
Re:Ars Technica IS Biased... (Score:1)
You have much higher tolerance than I do!
Re:Ars Technica IS Biased... (Score:1)
Re:Ars Technica IS Biased... (Score:3, Interesting)
can't figure it out (Score:5, Insightful)
What's the fun of being a Mac pundit unless you are biased?
Pudge, was that a shot, or just good-natured ribbing? Gruber writes the best-written (and yes, most opinionated) columns on Apple-related topics anywhere, on the web or in print. In other words, it's not just a diary with a few sentences about whatever came into his head on the way to work that day, nor is it hype-mongering drivel [macworld.com] about Apple, but rather they are extremely well thought-out and tightly-written articles. Pudge, you're a smart guy (I've heard you speak and read your own blog/mail list posts), you don't need to be reminded that all news media contains bias. I'm glad that Gruber has the sack to acknowledge this, and write what he really thinks rather than tone down his writing [daringfireball.net] to get syndicated on some mainstream Mac site.
I don't agree with everything Gruber says, but his feed is at the top of my NetNewswire client and I look forward to his content every week. I think a lot of people will take your comment out of context -- care to explain?
Re:can't figure it out (Score:4, Interesting)
Surely it was good-natured ribbing. "Biased" isn't necessarily pejorative. Heck, "unbiased" often means "boring", so I'm pretty sure he was trying to pay me a complement.
objectivity non-existent (and bloody boring) (Score:2, Flamebait)
Facts, figures, comparisons, great stuff. But - in this context - meaningless without some extrapolation, guesswork and creative thinking...
I look for a bit of bias in everything I read and view, if only to check or offset against my own. It's fun. And the sites mentioned don't seem to claim to hold the holy grail of platform objecti
A Welcome addition (Score:2)
This site has a good reputation for good content and none of the biased crap that is found on other tech sites and *gulp* Slashdot, or Dvorak's arse talk.
And one thing I've always said: if it's not on Ars Technica, it's not worth reading.