Dbug

I'd be pissed too. Apple understandably takes product information releases very seriously, and partners in those products (including those whose media may be in negotiations to carry like the WSJ) are under non-disclosure agreements.

What Alan did was inappropriate.

And to interpret news items about Apple as being negative is blowing things out of proportion. Most of it is FUD thrown around by competitors or their fans.

Some may decide the iPad isn't for them because it doesn't run traditional OS X, but it's a new class of product that by design needed an incompatible CPU. It's better that it do something different well, than act as a marginal chopped down laptop.

Judge things AFTER they ship. Apple does listen to customers. (some may remember changes to the OS X Finder in its early days due to customer feedback)

Burning bridges? Naw, you're being overly dramatic. It's companies like MS that have really burned their customers and developers. Apple's customers, developers, and shareholders are all generally very happy.

The writer certainly didn't show any effort to demonstrate non-viability of fixes, and he also didn't provide any information on performance of newer turbines or those from other vendors.

This was a case of 20 year old units being purchased used and moved to a much harsher environment. I would not be surprised if the people involved didn't even check to see what operating temperature range was specified by the manufacturer.

I don't think anyone has claimed that wind power is practical everywhere. Sites must be studied in adequate detail, and in some cases a test installation is appropriate ahead of wide-scale deployment.

There seem to be far too many writers and anal-ists giving opinions where they're not qualified to.

By definition, something that is reasoned is NOT arbitrary.

arbitrary adjective based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system

With the automatic bug report generation in OS X, Apple has direct evidence of Flash stability problems, so their knowledge of instability is NOT anecdotal either.

anecdotal| adjective (of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research

Stability problems go hand in hand with security problems. A search of the major security sites will produce a long history of vulnerabilities and also demonstrate that fixes have been slow in coming.

And on an individual level most of us can likely see an example of the instability on any platform by visiting http://flashcrash.dempsky.org/

(The 10.1 beta, which is not in any OS/browser by default, is reported to have a fix. Of course disabling Flash from loading with NoScript, Flash Block etc avoids the crash also)

The article makes use of straw-man argument by bring up VOIP apps. But the avoiding of mentioning a competing app seems reasonable. If there was a Zune store I don't think any would think it appropriate for apps to mention the iPod.

The developer can always encourage people to visit their website, and provide more company/product history there.

"Windows XP was highly successful though, although again they really failed to do anything very innovative with that OS other than keep it stable."

Just as some seem to look back on Microsoft and portray it as having been so good, there seem to be some rose colored glasses looking at XP too. Yes it was hugely better than earlier consumer versions of Windows, but between it's inferiority to OS X, and massive number of security holes, and the various ways people were locked into it, it was pretty sick.

I think it was some of the disappointments of Vista that somehow made XP seem better in retrospect Sure XP was popular in the sense of it being widespread, but the same could be said of herpes.

It's sort of like Bush making Reagan and Nixon seem better. Nixon, the criminal, sure looks saintly now. And as much as some may have disagreed with Reaganomics, he still came across as honest about his intentions, and likable with a sense of humor.

Its funny how perspectives age.

I'd give Microsoft credit for killing IBM's OS/2. What really created the PC-compatible market was the creation of "clone" BIOS. I'd give Phoenix credit for that.

Dell gets credit for being a pretty efficient if not innovative box builder, first with a major online store (ironically it ran on NeXT software) to sell over that thing called the World Wide Web which was developed on NeXT computers.

IBM deserves some blame, if not credit, for allowing Microsoft the foot in the door with licensing which led to their excessive enrichment. If IBM has insisted on buying an OS outright, or developed their own, we probably wouldn't have had the widescale mess known as DOS and Windows. Microsoft basically bought DOS outright from someone else, so they didn't even innovate that. DOS/Window success wasn't based on quality, but on licensing and taking away consumer choice (through dealing with manufacturers and bundling) as the article points out.

Anything, including corrupt files, that can crash it is relevant because it is also a security vulnerability.

It's crashing for me with Snow Leopard 10.5.2 on a Core Duo (32 bit obviously) and Safari Version: 4.0.4 (6531.21.10) Build Info: WebBrowser-65312110~2 Code Type: X86 (Native) Parent Process: launchd [157]

PlugIn Path: /Library/Internet Plug-Ins/Flash Player.plugin/Contents/MacOS/Flash Player PlugIn Identifier: com.macromedia.Flash Player.plugin PlugIn Version: 10.0.42 (1.0.4f348472)

Date/Time: 2010-02-05 22:06:52.926 -0800 OS Version: Mac OS X 10.6.2 (10C540)

Opps that was iCab 4.0.7

I confirmed the crash on iCab 5.0.7 Mac, Firefox 3.6 Mac, Safari 4.0.4 Mac and Firefox 3.5.7 under Ubuntu 9.10 in Virtual Box 3.1.2. (Using latest updated Snow Leopard)

Even if Flash 10.1 does bring performance parity with the Windows version, I won't be routinely enabling it. It's an unacceptable security risk and most of what it's used for beyond video is just annoying/fluff.

That's because Zillow.com calulates values using square footage! Calculations don't make it so! I won't disagree that square footage plays a very significant role in value, but how significant will vary.

Their estimates are interesting to look at, but are subject to error from many sources. A place with bad paint, a cracked/shifting foundation, termites, no central heat and a bad roof doesn't have those things properly accounted for. Also, one nearby property selling unusually high or low for some odd reason with throw off the numbers for the other properties nearby. I saw that with a apartment to condo conversion where the last unit went to a family member of the developer for a much lower price. As the other units sold, local houses were seeing a rise, when that last one sold there was a $30,000 drop.

Even actual selling prices aren't too reliable of an indicator now with such a disturbed market. Bankruptcy sales (or panic sales to avoid bankruptcy) certainly can distort values.

It'll vary with the market, but I think I'd feel safer testing estimated value against other criteria. The price is a fairly safe one if rental income could cover payments on a 30 yr fixed loan for 90% of the amount (the rest being the down payment). At least that method isn't so easily disturbed by erratic pricing nearby.

At the national median price you'd be lucky to get a mobile home on a very tiny lot where I live in California. And a condominium is even more. I know elderly people with single family homes that are paid for, but the valuation is so high, that if their property taxes were based on current value, they'd take their entire social security or disability income. These are people that worked and saved all of their lives.

Some low wage earners are forced to share apartments to avoid being homeless. Working full time at minimum wage is getting to where it isn't enough even for rent.

Conservatives complain about businesses covering any part of health care cost. Look at an area like Santa Barbara and you'll find businesses having trouble getting low-wage employees because they can't afford to live in the area? Are they expected to live a dozen people to a house?

From the sound of it, everyone loves him so much it might even help him to get laid!

I'm really surprised that those here don't seem to be placing much importance on the numerous security holes that Flash has brought to all platforms. The first serious one I'd heard of wasn't fixed for like a year and a half? How do people get the notion that a vulnerability that isn't see use in mass-scale exploits doesn't matter? The holes exploited selectively can certainly be a serious threat to industry or government.

To the developers that feel no choice but to use Flash, I suggest you make sure your sites use Javascript from a minimal number of domains because cautious users aren't going to enable them in NoScript when a dozen show up. It might also help that any domains needed beyond that of the site have names which give away their function.

Surfing as securely as possible includes enabling added functionality very selectively. Make sure that when you test your sites they're usable to people running Firefox with NoScript, with little or no granting of permissions.