Apple software quality in decline

Asher · June 5, 2003, 23:24

It's true, it's true, I read it on The Register!

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/31065.html

Quote:

On the iSync fiasco that didn't have to happen
By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco
Posted: 05/06/2003 at 21:31 GMT

Steve Jobs should pause for thought before carrying out one of the ritual executions that follow a public humiliation. The fiasco over the release of the iSync software update - which lost real data central to users' lives - could have been easily avoided.

iSync brought 20 new devices under the umbrella, from several different handset manufacturers. Bluetooth has always been dogged with compatibility issues, and this was a disaster waiting to happen. But it didn't have to be this way, had Apple abandoned its traditional secrecy policy a smidgen, and undergone a real beta program with real users. This need not even have been a public beta. However the most catastrophic bugs could have found within hours.

For example, Rendezvous needs to a punch a hole through the OS X Firewall. So does the new iSync update. Ideally iSync would have opened port 3004 itself, just like all the other software that needs to get through the firewall. But the word didn't get out: it simply wasn't documented.

Apple chose to create a marketing event, a 'big bang' instead. The iSync release led the Apple website on Tuesday, with a smart graphic of raining phones. Then our troubles began.

A reader, Richard Phillips, says this attitude is endemic.

"Apple do seem to be releasing stuff that should really still be in beta at the moment," he writes. "Take a look at the Apple site discussion groups regarding the new iPod (which I have) it's so bug prone it's next to useless.

"And this time it's not just Apple users asking for the Lilly to be gilted, there seems to be a whole raft of problems with it - most of which should never have got past the QA stage."

We understand - and we hope it's not true - that Apple failed to contact the handset vendors for technical data which would have guaranteed better interoperability. To some extent, everyone does Bluetooth their own way, hence the need for plug-fests.

Instead of a plug-fest, we got a bug-fest.

While Apple's secrecy is understandable in advance of the introduction of major new products, it's unforgivable for potentially catastrophic software releases.

We must ask Apple to stop experimenting on humans as live guinea pigs, and allow the QA guys to introduce a form of vivisection we know in the software business as a "Beta Program".

Apple's leadership in Bluetooth is impressive, especially compared to the horrific user experience of Bluetooth on Windows. Let's hope it learns the lessons and gets back on track.

monolith94 · June 5, 2003, 23:33

:yawn:
I never used isync, and have no need for it... Everyone makes mistakes... Hell, the version of Myth 2 which was released on pc erased your whole hard drive if you uninstalled it... talk about vindictive programmers!

My apple products work fine, even my ipod. I do wish that Apple would be a little bit less tight-lipped however... We don't need the compatibility problems that pc users have to deal with.

Asher · June 5, 2003, 23:34

Remember the iTunes installer that toasted people's HD who had two partitions?

Cruddy · June 5, 2003, 23:36

If you scratched the Apple from the headline, ie software quality in decline as a whole, I would agree with it.

It seems we're paying more for less every day. No wonder people download warez. Is it the cause, or the effect? Any answer is just speculation, but I'm very cynical about "new breakthroughs", "wondrous new software capabilities" when companies won't beta test and pay peanuts.

Makes me think I'll go the shareware route when I've got code to offer (don't hold your breath - that's years away).

Imran Siddiqui · June 5, 2003, 23:39

It amuses me that a poster named 'Cruddy' is talking about cruddy software

. Don't know why... just does.... ok, move along

.

Agathon · June 5, 2003, 23:39

Yet again you get spanked. The end of that article.

Quote:

Apple's leadership in Bluetooth is impressive, especially compared to the horrific user experience of Bluetooth on Windows. Let's hope it learns the lessons and gets back on track

So his conclusion is: however horrible isync is, it's still better than MS's offerings.

isync sucks, I never have occasion to use it. I get the feeling that the author of this article is just whining because his phone doesn't work. There doesn't seem to be the buzz on the mac sites I go to that would indicate this is a major problem for most users.

Agathon · June 5, 2003, 23:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Cruddy
If you scratched the Apple from the headline, ie software quality in decline as a whole, I would agree with it.

This app has been plagued with problems from the word go. It doesn't represent the rest of Apple's stuff which works just fine.

Apocalypse · June 5, 2003, 23:43

I don't really see why people are saying software is more expensive. Most new games cost $30 to $50 while back in the day it was $50 to $70. Back then you usually had to call (usually long distance) for tech support too.

Asher · June 6, 2003, 00:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Agathon
Yet again you get spanked. The end of that article.

Look at my text in the first post, I thought it was obvious I don't take TheRegister completely serious.

TheRegister is an anti-MS tabloid of an online site (really).

Quote:

So his conclusion is: however horrible isync is, it's still better than MS's offerings.

MS doesn't have an iSync offering, so no wonder, huh?

Also, read carefully, he never mentioned anything about MS' offerings, just experiences with them on Windows (because they're 100% third party, they just happen to run on Windows).

Urban Ranger · June 6, 2003, 00:27

An MS fan comments on the software quality of another company. This is one of the best ironies I have seen.

Giancarlo · June 6, 2003, 00:38

Apple in general has been in decline as per market share in the past couple of years.. it was only a matter of time until they had less money to spend on their products.

Asher · June 6, 2003, 00:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

An MS fan comments on the software quality of another company. This is one of the best ironies I have seen.

MS software quality has been on the rise.

Even the strictest of Linux zealots would agree WinXP > Win98 > Win95 > Win3.1

(I'm pretending WinMe didn't exist, because it didn't!

)

Giancarlo · June 6, 2003, 00:42

I don't know where I would be without Windows 2000 Pro... truly in my opinion, an excellent operating system.

Ari Rahikkala · June 6, 2003, 03:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Cruddy
Makes me think I'll go the shareware route when I've got code to offer (don't hold your breath - that's years away).

Shareware? You know, you aren't going to get much money from that. Shareware IMO one of the worst trade-offs between getting money and being a good, useful person... and one of the more annoying ones, too. Besides, by the time you get into the software "industry", the Free Software Revolution *coughs* will already have taken place

.

Quote:

MS software quality has been on the rise.

I agree. Fortunately, however, MS evilness is also on the rise and people are starting to notice it

.

Quote:

I'm pretending WinMe didn't exist, because it didn't!

Harovan · June 6, 2003, 03:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher
Remember the iTunes installer that toasted people's HD who had two partitions?

You mean like all the installers of Windows 9x, who automatically assumed, that they have the whole HD for themselves and screwed everything else without even asking?

Harovan · June 6, 2003, 03:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher
MS software quality has been on the rise.

Even the strictest of Linux zealots would agree WinXP > Win98 > Win95 > Win3.1

If size is your criterion, absolutely yes. Not sure about quality.

Quote:

(I'm pretending WinMe didn't exist, because it didn't!

)

It did exist, and still persists, spouting shame and embarrassment on its creators.

Urban Ranger · June 6, 2003, 06:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher
MS software quality has been on the rise.

Even the strictest of Linux zealots would agree WinXP > Win98 > Win95 > Win3.1

I grant you that, but it's not saying much

This reminds me of the tee shirt that says, "Windows 98, it sucks less."

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher
(I'm pretending WinMe didn't exist, because it didn't!

)

I pity the people who got suckered into paying retail for it. It must hurt.

Q Classic · June 6, 2003, 08:36

winme...

ah, i can recall being quite amused that it crashed and burned beyond the point of no return the first week i bought a new computer...

actually, amused might not have been the word for it...

Asher · June 6, 2003, 08:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
You mean like all the installers of Windows 9x, who automatically assumed, that they have the whole HD for themselves and screwed everything else without even asking?

All that did was overwrite the boottable, it didn't toast the data. It took a few seconds to fix, but it was annoying.

Hueij · June 6, 2003, 10:41

Quote:

"Apple do seem to be releasing stuff that should really still be in beta at the moment," he writes.

Oy, just like that other software company??

Q Classic · June 6, 2003, 10:49

who, infogrames?

(or atari, as we should now call it)

optimus2861 · June 6, 2003, 12:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher
TheRegister is an anti-MS tabloid of an online site (really).

That's rather simplistic. Of the headlines on their front page today, I only see four that have anything to do with Microsoft: one about a Windows Server 2003 discount offer, one about XBox production costs, one about the first WinServer 2003 patch, and finally one about the MS/Sendo mobile phone boondoggle.

They're against MS, yes, but they're skeptical of just about everything they cover; they've been picking on Google for a while now (about the prevalance of blogs in their search results, and their new Google News service), they haven't been impressed with iTunes, they're always against RIAA/MPAA (who isn't?), and are profoundly distrustful of the UK government's moves on such things as ID cards and security.

Apocalypse · June 6, 2003, 12:52

Wow, just looked at TheRegister main page for the first time. That's an incredibly horrible layout. Seriously, it's the worst layout for any site I've seen in a long time. How are they supposed to have any credibility with that crap?

monolith94 · June 6, 2003, 14:13

If I ever see windows 3.1 in action again I will laugh hysterically...

Gatekeeper · June 6, 2003, 14:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Fez
Apple in general has been in decline as per market share in the past couple of years.. it was only a matter of time until they had less money to spend on their products.

Apple has never had a huge part of the computer market share, but what it does have is generally quite loyal. I wonder if MS could survive (much less prosper) on less than 10 percent of the computer market?

Furthermore, Apple, to my knowledge, is still sitting on a huge pile of monetary reserves, so they sure as heck *don't* have less to spend on their products. The last I heard, Apple had slightly more than $1 billion in reserves. Anyone have updated numbers on that?

Gatekeeper

Asher · June 6, 2003, 14:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Gatekeeper
Apple has never had a huge part of the computer market share, but what it does have is generally quite loyal. I wonder if MS could survive (much less prosper) on less than 10 percent of the computer market?

MS could survive with 0% of the computer market. They've got enough resources to do whatever they want, hell they'd even make a good investment company with MS Capital.

Quote:

Furthermore, Apple, to my knowledge, is still sitting on a huge pile of monetary reserves, so they sure as heck *don't* have less to spend on their products. The last I heard, Apple had slightly more than $1 billion in reserves. Anyone have updated numbers on that?

Current assets:
Apple: $5,468,000,000
MS: $54,672,000,000

Net tangible assets:
Apple: $4,025,000,000
MS: $54,925,000,000