Once again, Bruce Schneier shows the way on the topic of real security. People have to realize that the only way that terrorists “win” is if we live in fear.
|
||||
|
Following the brouhaha over the future of the Macworld Conference and Expo is interesting to me, because I am essentially an outsider here. When the Angry Mac Bastards do our thing there this year it will be the first time that I have attended a Macworld, ever. I suppose that this gives me a different perspective on things than many of the people who have commented on the matter. For one thing, my opinion isn’t colored by memories (distorted or not) of previous Macworlds. The biggest thing that stands out to me is that the majority of the people who seem to be beating the “Macworld is doomed” drum are journalists and bloggers. That makes sense to me. I can fully understand how, if the main benefit that someone derives from attending a Macworld is being among the first to hear and report on the words of His Steveness, Apple’s absence makes the conference pointless. And without an Apple booth to allow journalists to get their grubby hands on Apple’s latest and greatest for their “first look” articles, the show floor is also pretty worthless. Of course, as others have pointed out, Macworld is not just about the keynote and show floor. At it’s heart Macworld is trade show and industry conference. Many other industries have similar shows/conferences without the dog and pony show of a Stevenote, and they muddle along just fine. Again, as others have pointed out, there are many factors that will have an effect on the future viability of Macworld. Macworld may thrive, and it may well fail. If Macworld does fail though, the blame will fall squarely on the shoulders of one organization. That organization is…not Apple. If Macworld fails it will not be because Apple “abandoned the community.” As others have pointed out numerous times, even sans Apple the trade show and conference aspects of Macworld have the potential to bring value. If that value is insufficient to bring in enough vendors and conference attendees then the blame will fall entirely on IDG. Understand that, when I write that the (potential) failure of Macworld is IDG’s responsibility, I don’t intend to cast them as villains any more than Apple. That’s because there are no villains here. Regardless of whatever fond memories you may have of Macworlds past, or how much fun I intend to have there, the bottom line is that Macworld isn’t a party, it’s a product. If that product fails in the market, then so be it. Perhaps another vendor will create a better one. At any rate, there’s my two cents as a Macworld virgin. Hopefully they can help provide some perspective. I’m hungover and cranky, and I’m utterly tired of iTabet/Slate/Whateverthefuck speculation. Today, in particular, I’m irritated at this pointless exercise posted to Macworld a few days ago (actually it originated at Computerworld, but I’m too lazy to dig up the link.) The gist of the article is two “analysts” giving reasons why Apple will, nay must, announce a tablet this month. Bear in mind, I’m not offering any speculation or commentary on whether Apple will or won’t announce the Holy Grailblet. I’m commenting solely on the inane reasons given by the “analysts.”
“The technology’s ready.” So the fuck what? Flying jet-car technology is ready too, where’s my flying jet-car Ford?!?
“E-book readers are hot.” Good gods do the analtards love this one. Niche product is hot, where by “hot” we mean popular with New Media Douchebags not real people, so damn the torpedoes full speed ahead. The Tablets must flow!!!
“Tablets are fun, computers are not.” You know what else is fun you mooks? Unicorns. And hookers. Fuck it Apple, where is my hooker on a unicorn?!?
“A tablet is Apple’s next step toward world domination.” Oh yeah baby, we’re living under Highlander rules now. Here’s a clue you feckless retards, Apple isn’t interested in “world domination.” They’re interested in making oodles of cash.
Feh, a pox on the whole thing. For the love of God Apple, announce this thing so I don’t have to read any more of this tripe. For the love of Satan, is it really too much to ask that sites that purport to report on technical matters do at least a little research or even have the slightest clue about what they’re talking about? Case in point: this article by Stan Schroeder on Mashable. I really don’t give two shits about the fact that Roy Batty’s great-grandpappy runs Flash, but this quote enrages me.
Really Stan? Full support for Flash on the iPhone has been promised? Who made those fucking promises Stan? Because it sure as hell wasn’t Apple. You know Apple, don’t you Stan? The mother-fuckers who control every bit of software that makes it onto the iPhone. For fuck’s sake, how hard is it really to actually have some minimal understanding about a topic before you start spouting off about it? At this rate I might as well start a blog detailing my experiences as a poor black share-cropper in 1940’s Alabama. I have about as much experience with that subject as most of these slack-jawed mongoloids do with technology. Here’s another quick bit to remind people that nothing that Scoble says is of any particular worth. If you read any Scooby at all, then you know that he is obsessed with pointless lists. This one though is perfect as an example of the fact that Scoble’s opinion is essentially worthless. In the article Robert states that he has a database of 11,000 tweets that he has favorited since June 2009. Let that number bake into your noggin for a bit. Eleven thousand tweets favorited, not just merely seen by his account. That implies that Robert must have put at least some minimal thought into the content. Now let’s do some math. By my calculations, there were 214 days from beginning of June 2009 until the end of December. If we assume that Scoble monitored Twitter every single one of those 214 days then that gives us 51.4 tweets favorited per day. If we then assume that Robert maintains a twenty-four hour a day vigil, favoriting tweets like some sort of New Media Douchebag machine, then that works out to 2.14 tweets favorited per hour. I keep stressing the “favorited” part of the equation, because it’s important to remember that these are the tweets that Robert Scoble supposedly expended the cognitive effort on to determine that they were in some way worthy of special recognition and then took the time to act on that decision. Two tweets per hour, every hour, every day for six months? It boggles the imagination. In the end, though, it just serves to demonstrate that no opinion of Scoble’s is worth anything. Of course, all the evidence that one needs to make that determination is the fact that TechCrunch has the number one spot on his list of favorited twitters. Say no more. Seriously Robert, stop posting! While I was in the midst of my latest attempt to prove that a man can be powered by ethanol alone, Betanews ran an utterly retarded opinion piece by Joe Wilcox titled: The world doesn’t need an Apple tablet, or any other. There is much that is fundamentally wrong with Joe’s piece, but I don’t want to talk about that. Fortunately I don’t have to talk about Joe’s errors because the tech punditards sallied forth en masse to white–knight a non-existent product (remember, until Apple announces the gods damned thing, it ain’t real). Amongst the herd rushing to defend all things “tablet” was our good friend, and absolute moron Robert Scoble. In a precocious bit of blogorrhea titled: Oh, Joe, the world doesn’t need a Tablet? Really? Robert springs to the defense of the tablet platform. Sadly, he also demonstrates that what Robert Scoble understands about technology could be written in twenty-four point font on the back of a postage stamp; with room to spare. Robert’s attempt to defend the maiden honor or the tablet takes the form of a litany of successful tablet computing devices that have already succeeded in the market. Items he refers to include:
Anyone else notice the pattern here? Robert has conflated a touch-screen interface with tablet form-factor computing. Here’s a clue Scooby: Lots of devices utilize a touch-screen. Some have been successful, some not so much, but merely possessing a touch-screen does not make a device a “tablet computer” you fucking ignoramus. Seriously, go back to hawking cameras. Hell, some of them now even have touch-screen interfaces. Your vast experience with tablet computing will serve you well. I haven’t written much about the supposedly impending Apple Tablet device, mainly because I’m not in the business of tech–prognostication. If you’ve listened to the Angry Mac Bastards podcast then you may have heard me express my opinion that there will be an Apple tablet-esque device, and that whatever it is, the ideas being bandied about by the majority of the tech media will be wrong. Until now that is. John Gruber over at Daring Fireball recently posted an article that I think absolutely nails what the “iTablet” will and won’t be. Seriously, any pundit that claims to know Apple, and then proclaims that the magical mystery device will be an upscaled iPod Touch, or a touch–screen Macbook, or a dedicated ebook reader should have his or her keyboard confiscated. This has been linked far and wide, but it can’t be disseminated far enough or wide enough. Words of wisdom.  |
 
Warning: file_put_contents(/home/virtual/site269/fst/var/www/html/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/wp-walla/wpwallacache.txt) [function.file-put-contents]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in /home/virtual/site269/fst/var/www/html/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/wp-walla/Wpwalla.php on line 64 Powered by WP-Walla  
 |
|||
|
Copyright © 2010 The Angry Drunk
Powered by WordPress & the Atahualpa Theme by BytesForAll. Discuss on our WP Forum The Angry Drunk is Digg proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache |
||||
