Apple: The Bad and the Ugly. And Some Good
Apple does some good things. Boot Camp for example. Everyone’s talking about Boot Camp. If I had been writing last week, I too would have been writing about it. In fact I was last Thursday. But I lost that piece. That event lead me to this article
I had been scratching together pieces for this article for a few weeks as the blinders have come off, and I had been noticing lately all the things that Apple and its products don’t do so well.
This came to a head last Friday when my hard disk passed away. I spent the next four days getting my system back to close to what it was. Fortunately I did have backups. Not perfect ones though as I hadn’t done a full backup for two weeks, but I had backed up my critical data the day before. I also learned some lessons about how I should have been doing things (mind you, things with 20 years experience, I already knew and should have been doing.)
In the recovery process, I discovered some things that displeased me to say the least. On top of other recent experiences of little and big grievances I have with Apple’s way, it is time to write about it.
The Bad
- Apple’s Backup application does not verify the integrity of backups after they are completed. (I know some people don’t like Backup, but I had found it to be the most reliable solution - too many others I tested aborted the backup when they found open files.) The restore function also needs to be able to skip corrupted backup files and give more options on handling replacement of existing files. But I have been kicked in the pants by a lesson I already knew… Check your backups. Do a test restore. Regularly. With Apple’s Backup, you can also show the package contents of the backup file, then drill down to the Contents and in there, open the Backup.sparsimage file. If it fails to open, do a new full backup - even if the failure was in an incremental backup. It would be appreciated greatly if Apple included an option to test a backup file - at least for readability.
- Backward compatibility of OS X extends only until last week. Ok, maybe to Panther and occasionally to Jaguar. One reason I’ve continually upgraded with each iteration of OS X, is to ensure that all applications will run on my OS. Have a look through the Apple store and see how many applications need Panther or later. For example, the minimum OS requirements for various applications on the Apple Store are: iLife - 10.3.9; iWork 10.3.9; MS Office 10.2.8; The Print Shop - 10.2; Photoshop Elements - 10.3; Final Cut Studio - 10.4.4; The Sims 2 - 10.3.8; Quicken 2006 - 10.2.8; Toast 7 - 10.3.9; Logic Express - 10.4.3; Logic Pro - 10.4.3; QuickTime 7 - 10.3.9. Now notice the pattern? Apple is the worst offender. If you want to use Apple’s software, you must upgrade to the latest OS. That last one, Quicktime, is interesting. If you want to run it on a Mac, you’ve got to have an OS released just two years ago. Yet the Windows version will run on the six year old Windows 2000. So it’s all well and good that Apple keeps updating OS X, but at least on Windows, most software will run on OSes more than two or three years old.
- Finder’s copy doesn’t merge folders. When you copy a folder in Finder, it treats the folder as a single entity, rather than looking at each file within the folder. If you want to merge folders you either have to copy the files for each folder individually; or use XCode’s FileMerge utility (which also lets you merge folders); or find a utility online that will do it - though most will cost you money. I tested this on a Windows computer and XP does merge folders. So if a clapped out system from way back in 2001 can do it, why can’t OS X Tiger from 2005? For the zealots who believe Apple’s is the only way, maybe OS X (being sooo user friendly…) could provide a prompt asking if you want to merge or replace.
- Again on backward compatibility, iPod users suffer. If you want new features, you buy a new iPod. Apple doesn’t seem to have any interest in providing new features for older iPods. Case in point: Volume limiting. Surely this is a simple firmware upgrade. Even if it doesn’t work the same way as on 5G iPods. 5G iPods have the security function built in so they can be password protected but is that hardware dependent? It shouldn’t be. The same functionality could easily be offered to owners of older iPods. But no, Apple wants you to buy a new one. So everyone is going around saying how great of Apple to introduce Volume Limiting, but there’s half-a-gazillion iPod owners that won’t get that function. There’s possibly more teenagers frying their ears with older iPods than newer ones. Thanks for your kindness Apple.
- We’re all well aware of how Apple is monopolizing it’s share of the MP3 player and music downloads markets, but it monopolizes its computer market just as much. Whether it’s by forcing upgrades, charging for incremental upgrades, not allowing OS X to run on PCs or not licensing FairPlay, Apple does frustrate with it’s “My way or the highway” attitude.
The Ugly
If I was really cynical about Apple trying to screw more money out of its customers, I would have put the backward compatibility issues under “The Ugly.” It was border line… But I still have a couple of uglies.
- Apple is a technology company right? Do you reckon it knows anything about software development? Database development? Sales systems? Do you reckon that just maybe, it could link its sales and warranty systems? You see, the hinge broke on my PowerBook that came with a free three-year Apple Protection Plan warranty. Apple won’t honor the warranty unless I, yes I, me, this person typing, can prove that it came with the APP! Excuse me?! In 2003 when I purchased it, Apple had a promotion on whereby purchasers of Macs, who were in government or education, received a free three year APP. This included me. Now wouldn’t you expect that each system sold would have been tagged on Apple’s database as having that deal? No way - Apple doesn’t want you to be able to claim your warranty unless you can prove it. Possibly the reseller may have screwed up by not listing the APP on the invoice, but Apple should still know about that deal and my Mac being bought on it. If I give my serial number, Apple should know everything about the purchase of my machine. Zero for Apple’s customer service.
- Right at this point in time, I’d find it hard to recommend anyone to buy an iPod because of this and the next point. I bought a 30GB iPod Photo last year to use for backups and to allow me to move data between computers - kind of like a souped up USB key. That’d be fine if I only wanted to transport files between Macs but a Mac formatted iPod will not work on a Windows PC without the iPod being reformatted. And the thing is, to reformat your iPod to work with Windows, you have to use a Windows computer. And then God only knows what will happen next time you plug your iPod into your Mac.
- From my testing, it appears that iPods carry their iTunes configuration on them. So you can’t change an iPod’s settings without plugging it into your computer. But when you do, it kicks in with its settings. As I found out to my horror, with auto-syncing of iPhoto, it will wipe your photos from your iPod if you plug into a different computer. No questions asked. No prompts. When, like me, you use the “Full Resolution” option so your iPod is your primary backup, and your secondary backup has already failed, how do you think you feel? Very ill to say the least. Dear Apple, No application should ever wipe files without first warning the user and giving them the option to abort. I was on the verge of paying for SubRosaSoft’s FileSalavage or its Sibling, iPodSalvage, until I discovered a third backup of my iPhoto library. You can’t have too many backups! I’ll go into this more when I review Backup.
The Good
Regardless of the disaster that befell me, and the subsequent horror stories, there have been some things I’ve really appreciated about Apple.
- Despite some failed backups meaning a much more manual restore process, .Mac’s Backup is a good tool. You just have to test those backup’s regularly. I’ll explain in a later article how to get around a failed incremental backup.
- Sync (in .Mac in System Preferences) is an excellent and simple way to backup and restore your bookmarks, calendars, contacts, keychains and mail settings. If you’ve got .Mac, you should use it as it’s even easier than using Backup for these items. Also for this reason, I will probably switch to using Keychain for saving registration numbers, etc, even though it can be a little cumbersome to use at times.
- Firewire boot is a Godsend. Fortunately, I had a couple of months ago installed OS X on my external hard drive. So when my internal died on Friday, I simply booted from the external - which I am still operating from. Apple does make a lot of things easy, and this is one of them.
I will post a review of Apple’s Backup in the near future and go into more detail about my experience and about better backup practices, but if any developers of backup solutions are reading this and believe they’ve got a better product, feel free to contact me by email at chrish at this site’s domain.
So those are my issues, but maybe it’s just me. Maybe I’m the only one who’s experienced the bad to ugly side of Apple and Macs…
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
Yeah, I think Apple’s latest productivity software should not be tailor made to take advantage off Apple’s latest OS improvements so I can use iMovie 6 to cut HD on a platinum G3 tower that I can’t get Tiger to run on. I also think OS X before 10.3 was just sooo performant & pleasing to use that I see zero reason to upgrade
Do people really use Backup? People make… *incremental* backups of private machines with their probably rather limited amount of data? I mean, I can see the point, it’s fast, it’s convenient, but call me oldfashioned: I prefer a good clean full system clone of my main unit over anything that I have to trust not to mess up in places I don’t check too often.
BTW, the other day the system presented me a screen telling me there was a software update for my iPod. Automatically. I installed it. What it did was reactivate the Euro volume cap as I just found out with goPod. The iPod in question is a 3G.
If you contact Shirt Pocket I’m pretty sure they’ll help accommodate your situation with a feature-complete trial version (supporting disk images and Smart Update, as you probably know).
I currently have one bootable volume cloned from my iMac’s startup volume (excluding /Users since it’s on a separate volume) and multiple sparse images for everything else that’s backed up (including a couple older single-volume systems). There’s more I could elaborate on but won’t bore anyone here with those details.
I’ve got a few years on you.
Also developing a few different backup solutions.
A counterpoint piece to Jonathan ‘Wolf’ Rentzsch’s Hole in the Umbrella: Backup 3?
“As I said, why not have a “Replace or Merge?” prompt in this situation? Would keep everyone happy.”
And again, I have to disagree. Every time you add a step to the process, the OS becomes more complicated and less user-friendly (at least from an Apple point-of-view)
As I pointed out, this is the manner in which the Mac OS has *always* behaved. It’s been well-documented - usually with a “box” or italics to draw your attention in books like “Missing Manual.” IIRC the dialogue specifically offers the opportunity to “Stop.”
Here’s a tip for all: when you see a prompt, make *sure* you’re sure. That way, you don’t overwrite files on your Mac, or on your iPod. I know. I use Windows, too. I know you get so many prompts that it becomes second nature to just hit “Enter.” I find that the Mac OS tries to stay out of your way. Usually, when there’s a system prompt, you should consider your answer.
As for Beeblebrox’s comment, I take it you didn’t spend a lot of time reading my actual comment. You might have taken from it that I’m not a drooling fan-boy. I consider OS X to still be essentially a beta release. And, uh, well, when I describe someone as an egomaniac, it’s not a compliment.
On the other hand, I don’t feel the need to apologize to people who assume that the Mac OS is going to respond in the same manner as the Windoze box they dumped because they finally got tired of dealing with it.
“Apple regularly scores at the top of all consumer surveys with regard to customer service.”
“One look at the drooling Mac-bots among the Apple fan base and it’s not hard to see why. It would be like taking a survey of Catholics and asking them what they think of Jesus.”
Yes, I’ve had ridiculously good experiences with Apple Customer Support, but then, the consumer surveys generally aren’t reflective of those who regularly surf the Mac Web. They’re general consumer surveys, from outlets like Consumer Reports. Not exactly a hive of Mac fandemonium.
As for Mr. Howard, when you finally get around to looking at the Human Interface Guidelines, you might begin to understand why the one-button mouse lasted so long, and continues to be happily supported today. (I use an IntelliMouse; it works for me.)
The point of the Mac OS has always (until fairly recently, I should amend) been to achieve the simplest and most intuitive interaction between user and machine possible. Admittedly, it helps to understand the paradigm, but simply assuming that you know what’s going on because you’ve used an MS OS for 20 years isn’t likely to help.
There are plenty of problems with Apple and the Mac OS (Backup would be included among them). There are some great things (and FireWire booting is in there). But complaining about your incorrect assumptions just tends to prove annoying.
CapnVan
I wrote a huge reply but it got so long, I’m going to post it as a couple of articles, so I’ll just make a couple of dot points:
- A HIG are written by each OS creator is nothing more than a set of guidelines for developers so their software is consistent with the OS. In no way does a HIG claim or justify that any approach (eg 1-button mouse) is superior to any other OS’s method. So when you say “you might begin to understand why the one-button mouse lasted so long”, it’s because Apple wrote their OS and consequently their HIG, to prolong the life of the one-button mouse.
- Intuition is subjective. Your comment “But complaining about your incorrect assumptions” proves the point. My assumptions were based on my intuition - which has been learned, just likes yours which has learned the Mac OS way.
Regards the Finder Copy function:
There is nothing intuitive about the folder copy function performing a copy and replace.
If the boss handed you a file on Bill Smith and said “File this in his file.” Intuitively you would toss out his existing file and put in the new one? I don’t think so.
As I have re-iterated, I certainly did read the instruction before clicking the Replace button. But let’s have a look at it.
A dialog appears labeled “Copy”. The text in the box says:
Firstly, we have a contradiction. We are copying as the label states, but the description says we are moving. As Fred User, I’m now confused about what it’s really going to do. And I have another doubt. Is it going to replace just the folder or the contents of the folder as well? No indication either way. My intuition still says it will prompt for each duplicate file within the folder but I’ve learned over my 3 years using Macs that it’s not the way. Despite the implication I rarely need it, I often would appreciate folder merging, but do it the long way.
But on this occassion, I didn’t want to copy each folder’s files individually as it would be too time consuming.
So then I had to go searching the internet for a solution to merging when copying folders.
Regards your argument about adding a Merge button to the dialog: Every time you add a step to the process, the OS becomes more complicated and less user-friendly
I’m not talking about adding a step to the process. I’m talking about clarifying what is going to happen by giving the user an extra alternative - all on the same dialog. No extra steps.
In fact, an “OS becomes more complicated and less user-friendly” when it is nebulous. As that word itself demonstrates.
Ironically you twice point out that OS X is confusing, one by saying that you need to get “The Missing Manual” to get the function of copy clearly explained, and two that Apple don’t follow their HIG anyway.
From Apple’s own HIG they say: “Anticipate common problems and alert users to potential side effects.” The folder copy dialog makes no mention of files within the folder being replaced so fails that test abysmally
You can defend OS X’s way all you like, but you’re only doing so because that’s the way Mac OSes have done it and consequently that’s the way that has become intuitive for you.
You might have taken from it that I’m not a drooling fan-boy.
Denial. What a shock. But using words like “Windoze” (you probably describe Dells as “Dulls”) and describing Apple products as “drool worthy” while refuting complaints about OS X as “baseless” bely that denial.
I mean, you’re ranting and raving with Chris about a COPY function and disputing his belief that it could be minutely improved. Nope, no fanboy you.
It’s not like I’ve never heard these same apologist comments before, including the rather asinine defense of OS X’s lack of features (like a merge or move option for folders) as somehow upholding this fantasy standard of simplicity.
Just look at OS X’s context menus and try to tell me that they’re holding back options for the sake of user-friendliness. There are almost as many in OS X as there are in Windows. To claim that one or two that might be missing (ignoring for a moment the one or two that Windows doesn’t have to balance it out) is part of some grand philosophy is the kind of delusion typical of the red-bellied, yellow-crowned Mac-droid.
A HIG are written by each OS creator is nothing more than a set of guidelines for developers so their software is consistent with the OS.
And at this point, one can’t really take anything of the sort seriously from Apple anyway. Their “philosophy” might be more accurately described as the current sales pitch designed to get you the <strike>sucker</strike> consumer to buy whatever they’re selling at the moment, believing that because it’s a “principle” that they’ll never put video on an iPod or switch to Intel or boot Windows or release a 2-button mouse that somehow Apple won’t do a complete 180 six months down the line, requiring you to buy the latest product.
I kinda don’t want to lump myself with the other macbot, apple-apologist, anti-beeblebrox-loving drones, but don’t you think your article was a bit nitpicky?
Minus your rants about each item, your list basically boils down to:
<u>Chris Howard’s Things I Hate And Find Ugly™:</u>
- Backup is ghey,
- the slight update to Final Cut Pro released last week doesn’t run on my OS X from 2 years ago,
- I can’t ‘merge’ two folders,
- the volume ‘enhancement’ released last week doesn’t run on my iPod from 2 years ago,
- OS X won’t run on my PC,
- The store forgot to give me my protection policy form,
- I put my iPod into a new computer and my photos got deleted :(
Of all the things you’ve mentioned I have never even thought about having to come close to using. = nitpicking. I think you just had a bad Apple week, Chris.
Seriously, I am on Panther and I don’t mind if the newest Final Cut Pro - with brand new integrated spotlight finder and dashboard widget - only works on Tiger. If I can’t afford (or want) to make the jump to Tiger yet, why on earth would I want to upgrade to the very latest version of a single application? Am I choosing to stay on Panther because I prefer it over Tiger? No. I am just happy as I am. Likewise to the version numbers in my applications’ start-up screens.
I think you made an assumption that those of us yet to upgrade OS X still lust access to the latest application upgrades. There are three reasons people like me haven’t upgraded: Either we’re happy as we are, it’s a monetary problem, or it’s a hardware problem.
Even though you brought it up, I strongly doubt it’s actually a problem you have had to deal with, Chris. I have the feeling you were most probably nitpicking again and it came into your head as a good point, thinking it’s some big huge deal to those of us yet to upgrade. Well it’s not. The reasons we’re still on 10.3 or 10.2 or even 10.1 are the exact same reasons we don’t need Final Cut 8 or Office:mac 2008.
Luke, being forced to upgrade to the newest OS and the latest FCP isn’t “nitpicking” for some of us. It’s a huge expense and hassle that we need to make in order to keep working.
Any complaint about anything could be dismissed as “nitpicking.” “So you’ve got a virus in Windows. Stop nitpicking!” Heck, what complaint made about Apple over the Mac would you NOT consider so minor that it shouldn’t even be brought up ever.
Well said, Beeb.
The “nitpicking” line is one of four used to counter criticism of the Mac. The others are “Read the HIG”; “Apple must be right”; and my favorite, distort the argument, eg “Hmm? It’s a bit cloudy - it might rain” response “What are you on? There’s not going be a thunderstorm.”
Luke, (and others who’ve said I’m nitpicking), it won’t be nitpicking when it happens to you, for example, when Apple won’t honor your warranty because you can’t prove the product in your hand has one. Even if you’ve got the invoice.
I know a lot of companies do it, but are you saying you think it’s right? Just because Apple do it?
It’s not right in this day an age where computers can track and manage information so well. It’s no better than the insurance industry using “Act of God” as an excuse not to pay up.
If Apple had any customer service - and a reasonable computer system - they would say “We’re sorry Mr Howard, we can see from our records, that your computer should have had an APP package delivered with it but the reseller has left that off. We’ll get one out to you right away.”
But of course, because I’m talking about Apple - who can do no wrong - people berate me for nitpicking or not accepting the ways things are.
I bet it’d be different if I substituted Microsoft for Apple.
I bet it’d be different if I substituted Microsoft for Apple.
I remember one numbnut on this site defended Apple’s HIG philosophy because in the context menu the “New Folder” option was at the top, whereas Windows was endlessly confusing because it was several options down. And how many times have you heard about how confusing it is that you have to click the “Start” button in Windows to shut down. “It’s counter-intuitive!” That’s NOT nitpicking?
“Apple must be right”
I’m actually astonished at how often this one gets employed. It happened in this thread and in the one I described above regarding context menus. It works hand-in-hand with “feature creep” and is among the more asinine apologist excuses.
To sum it up, the “right” number and set of features is exactly the number and set of features that any Apple product has. No more, no less. Discuss a feature that another product has that the Apple product doesn’t, and it’s over-complicated, violating some retarded screed about simplicity that Apple hasn’t seemed to have followed in years. But then Apple users will be the first to brag about a feature that an Apple product has that some other product doesn’t.
Again, the defining argument for what is a necessary feature is anything that Apple does, period, even if that standard constantly changes and even as Apple adds features that were previously argued as over-complicated. (by the way, this scenario leads inevitably to the ol’ “no more excuses not to buy a Mac” argument engaged about every five seconds, see also Boot Camp)
I love Apple for their simplicity, but am glad I’m not the only one who thinks Finder’s copying functionality is confusing. It seems odd for a copy function to remove anything, except for overwriting files with the same name. If I have folder “1” with files A, B, C in one location and a folder “1” with files “D, E, F” in another location, why should putting the folders in the same place cause files A, B, C to disappear? The only argument seems to be that it’s the way Apple has done it for a long time, which isn’t very objective.
I do agree that it’s not fair to complain about your iPod not making the best backup drive when Apple never designed it to be one. You said “how hard would it be for Apple to provide an option to partition other iPods for dual filesystem access” but do you not see how completely irrelevant that question is? Of the millions of iPods sold and the millions of customers that use them, the number one issue that Apple should address to make all their customers happy is not something so obscure and technical. And besides, isn’t your problem caused by Windows not supporting the HPFS filesystem Mac-formatted iPods are using?
OH my God. I’m actually astonished my comment was dismissed entirely and so easily too. Not by Beeblebrox, but by you, Chris.
But yes, if it did happen to me then of course I wouldn’t call it nitpicking. And I would even get pissed if someone accused me of that. So maybe “nitpicking” isn’t the right term, but it’s the closest word I can come up with.
What I consider nitpicking are pointing out things that will affect 0.1% of the users. How many people do you think actually have problems with their Apple warranty, Chris? Or how many people do you think are desperate for the option to test a backup using Backup? I don’t even know what that program is! Let alone know anyone else who uses it and might want that function.
Chris, you should at least have the decency to consider the things I say this time, instead of brushing it aside immediately, while thinking to yourself that I’m some Apple drone and then to shoot back how accusing you of nitpicking is “one of the top 4 arguments used to counter criticism of the Mac.”
You totally have the right to criticize Apple and their products, but not to turn the smallest things into an entire article and then try to convince us they’re Apple’s largest failings, then to reject all counter-criticism on your article. This should’ve gone in your personal blog.
And HOW THE HELL can you even defend your point about the iPod volume thing as not being nit-picky!? It astounds me, Chris!
It seems to me you’ve convinced yourself you’re utterly correct in your article, further building your confidence by buying into Beeblebrox’s hype, believing his comments are actually a credible way to back yourself up.
If anyone here is drinking the kool-aid, it’s you Chris, drinking your own.
Beeblebrox: Luke, being forced to upgrade to the newest OS and the latest FCP isn’t “nitpicking” for some of us. It’s a huge expense and hassle that we need to make in order to keep working.
That makes utterly no sense. What is preventing you from working on your current version of FCP?
Your old copy does actually still work after a new release comes out, yunno?
Or are you just one of those people who have to have the latest version just for a new shiny feature you’ll likely not even use? And in that case, why the heck are you complaining? Shouldn’t your ‘type’ already be on Tiger? Oh wait, I bet you are on Tiger, and you’re just arguing for the sake of it, like usual.