Skip to content

Apple

A look at how OS X tips spread via Google

When iTunes 8 came out, one very annoying change was the removal of the "Show iTunes Store arrow links" preference -- in previous versions of iTunes, you'd toggle this setting to remove the link arrows that appear when you select an item in your Library.

I never use these things, and they bother my eye, so as soon as I got my hands on iTunes 8, I started looking for a solution (here's how I do that). With some help from Kirk McElhearn, we soon found the solution in a hidden preference value -- a variable named show-store-arrow-links.

After a quick test, we confirmed that it worked, and I wrote it up as hint on Mac OS X Hints. At the same time, I ran a Google search for 'show-store-arrow-links', and came up with no matches.

Note that this does not mean Kirk and I were the first people to post about this workaround -- more than likely, it had already been posted elsewhere, but Google hadn't yet indexed those sites (we were doing this shortly after iTunes 8 was released).

Still, I thought this was a perfect chance to see how things propagate across the internet, as I could repeat my search for show-store-arrow-links over time, and see how quickly the hit count increased. Given the uniqueness of the term, any matches would definitely be people either linking to the hint on some other site, or actually posting their own version of the hint.

Within two hours of the original hint's posting, the hit count was up to five. After seven hours, 137. At 24 hours, 384. At that point, I grew bored with tracking the increases, and tabled the study. Today, though, after 12 days, I ran the search again, and there are now over 1,000 sites that contain the hint (or a link to it) on how to block the iTunes Store arrow links in iTunes 8.

I think that's a good measure of how many people dislike these arrows, and who really wish Apple would have left that preference in place. (Sorry iTunes for Windows users; preferences are stored differently in Windows, and I'm not sure anyone's figured out how to make similar modifications on that platform.)



Music in the new iPod nano ad…

Because I couldn't find this anywhere else on the net, here it is ... the music in the new iPod nano ad is a song called Bruises by Chairlift from an album called Does You Inspire You. I found this by doing a lyric search on the first line ("I tried to do handstands for you..."), which led me to this blog post [dead link removed] -- not directly about the iPod nano ad, but it does mention the song and the lyrics.

iTunes store link

The new nano may just get me to upgrade my original "tall" nano, which is one of my favorite iPods ... but the new one has some really nice sounding features; I'm going to try to go see one in person tomorrow.



Macs, clones, and license agreements

As you may know by now, a company known as Psystar has announced they're selling Mac "clones" for $549, complete with Leopard pre-installed. From a legal perspective, these machines clearly violate Apple's OS X 10.5 end user license agreement (EULA). If you're so inclined, you can find a full copy of all of Apple's EULAs on this page--the 10.5 EULA is a 2.1MB download. The relevant portion of the EULA is section two, part A:

This License allows you to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-labeled computer, or to enable others to do so.

Seems pretty black and white, doesn't it? Use OS X in this manner, and you're violating the EULA. So how can a company like Psystar hope to stay in business, given this legal transgression that's key to their business model? Wired offers up some legal opinions on how they may be able to survive--basically, violating an EULA isn't in nearly the same class of legal violation as is violating copyright or patent law. A breach of contract suit won't prevent Psystar from selling their clones, and probably wouldn't even serve as a financial deterrent: as one attorney notes in the Wired article, "the maximum damage Apple would be able to claim is the price of Leopard -- actually, the OEM (original equipment manufacturer) price of Leopard, which might be a few dollars." Another attorney comments that EULAs are problematic in court, as they've vague by nature. He says, "Companies make them as broad as possible but there's no way to basically enforce them. It's a scare tactic, a way to say, hey, we're reserving all these rights."

The Wired article is a good read, and notes that Apple's best defense may be in technology, not the courts--future system updates may render cloned systems unusable, which will certainly cut down on Psystar's ability to attract and retain customers. So that's what the experts think. From where I sit, over in the "just barely passed the required business law class" section of the room, here's my take on why I don't think it'd be wise of Apple to bring their EULA into the court system.
[continue reading…]



A picture 30 years in the making…

My use of personal computers began back in 1978 or so with a Commodore Pet. While it was an interesting machine to play around with, it didn't really grab my interest completely. That happened when my father brought home an Apple ][ in 1978. As I recall it now, it took but a few days for me to realize that this machine was really something special. From that point forward, there's been an Apple ][ family machine, or a Mac, in my household basically ever since (with only a couple years' exception, when I worked for IBM). Given my history with the machines and company, I was thrilled today when I finally got the chance to meet one of my heroes in person...

wozniak

When I sat down in the speaker's lounge this morning to finish up the slides for my presentation, Steve Wozniak was there, sitting at the same table as I, doing the same thing--finishing his notes for a talk he was about to give. Sitting next to him was an Apple employee I know from elsewhere, so I asked her if he'd have time for a quick picture when he finished his notes. After getting the OK, I introduced myself, and (corny, I know) thanked him for inventing a machine that basically changed the course of computing--as well as having a tremendous positive impact on my life. In person, Steve struck me as friendly and outgoing, and he chatted with the folks at the table for a bit before heading off for his talk.

So, thank you Steve Wozniak, for the chance to say hello and for taking the time to snap a quick picture with me. I know you must get sick of the requests, but you were gracious and friendly about the whole thing.



Macworld: 2007 writings

Macworld logoHere's the full list of my 2007 Macworld articles; as usual, a few are missing from the aging archives…

January
Jan 2Reading between Apple's lines
Jan 4Safe Eyes 2006
Jan 8'Twas the night before Expo
Jan 9Expo reaction: iDisappointed
Jan 11Don't crowd the iPhone
Jan 11How not to start an Expo presentation
Jan 11Ten iPhone suggestions
February
Feb 9On meaningless hyperlink graphics
Feb 28TypeIt4Me 3.1
Feb 28Don't leave the Windows open
March
Mar 15An Office 2008 VBA to AppleScript helper
Mar 16The limits of Apple's warranty
Mar 26Ring-a-ding-ding
April
Apr 9No-stress remote access
Apr 16Four ways to Windows
Apr 17Parallels: Multi-OS powerhouse
Apr 18VMWare: New kid on the block
Apr 19CrossOver: Windows applications without Window
Apr 20Boot Camp: Ultimate compatibility
May
May 1Vacuous Vista versioning
May 15Shopping, or not, at the online Apple Store
May 29MacMania VI sails from Seattle
May 29Breezing to Juneau
May 30Cruising with Leopard
May 31Juneau, you know
May 31Going on a glacier safari
June
Jun 1Ketchikan, if you can
Jun 1A cool dive in a dry suit
Jun 4Homeward bound
Jun 6Cruising for cameras
Jun 8A genuine disadvantage
Jun 10First Look: Safari 3 beta
Jun 13Apple's disappointing iPhone message
Jun 14http://www.macworld.com/article/1131761/typo.html
Jun 19First Look: Leopard preview: What's new in OS X 10.5
Jun 27Saft 8.3.12
July
Jul 9What computer should I buy?
Jul 13This enhancement is not so transparent
Jul 17Parallels Desktop 3
Jul 18Ten of my favorite iPhone things
Jul 25Application launching woes
Jul 31Six months to 1 billion
August
Aug 6My Apple event wishlist
Aug 8First Look: First Look: Numbers
Aug 8Three things I don't understand about Apple's moves
Aug 16Numbers '08
Aug 30The Beatles on iTunes: Tomorrow never knows
September
Sep 17Don't break my third-party iPhone apps
Sep 27Fusion 1.0
October
Oct 1iPhone 1.0 forever
Oct 12Walking the walk
Oct 16Customize your Mac
Oct 16A few words about customization
Oct 17In praise of TinkerTool
Oct 17Time Machine could give hard-drive sales a jolt
Oct 18How to: Upgrade a G5's optical drive
Oct 24First Look: Analyzing Macworld's Leopard draft selections
Oct 24First Look: Picking our favorite Leopard features
Oct 24Inside Leopard: Time Machine
Oct 25Inside Leopard: Finder and Dock
Oct 25Inside Leopard: Safari and Automator
Oct 31Inside Leopard: Under-the-hood
Oct 3110.5: Upgrade or not?
Oct 31First Look: Trojan Horse warning: What you need to know
November
Nov 1How to: Discover malware before installing
Nov 13From four to zero in a day
Nov 16Where did that command go?
December
Dec 7Choice additions to OS X
Dec 26iMovie versus Final Cut Express


Catching up on my Macworld writing

Macworld logoOnce again, I've fallen behind in posting summaries of my Macworld articles here. I've now rectified that, and you'll find them all in the archives here on the proper date (i.e. the date that matches their appearance on Macworld.com). I've included both blog entries (rants, usually) as well as a couple of reviews and such that I've worked on.
[continue reading…]



iPhone 1.0 forever

Macworld logoAs you've read by now, Apple released iPhone update 1.1.1 last week. This update adds some compelling new features, most notably the iTunes Wi-Fi Music Store, easily-accessible iPod play controls, louder speakerphone and receiver volume, and support for video out.

However, as you've also read by now, the update did a few other things. First, as Apple had warned, it turned unlocked iPhones into expensive paperweights, rendering them useless. (A Macworld staffer who unlocked his phone so that we could document this procedure, had this happen to his iPhones.) Second, if you had a modified iPhone that ran third-party applications, like I had, the update removed those apps. So much for my plea to Apple. Finally, if you used Ambrosia's iToner, or any other such ringtone utility, you discovered that all your custom ringtones were also gone.

Unlike most Apple software updates, I held off on running this one until there were some field reports about exactly what happened. Once those reports started trickling in, I came to a painful but obvious conclusion: I will never install the 1.1.1 update on my iPhone.

Read my Macworld blog entry, iPhone 1.0 forever, for the rest of the story...



Review: VMware Fusion

Macworld logoYou may need (or want) to run Windows, or other operating systems, alongside Mac OS X, and Parallels Desktop (4 mice) is the best-known of several programs on the market for that purpose. (Full native Windows support, of course, is also available via Apple's Boot Camp, but it requires you to reboot out of OS X and into Windows.) A new-to-the-Mac player now brings a formidable challenger to the arena, however. VMware, an expert in x86 virtualization—that is, the ability to run one or more x86 operating systems as 'guest' under a 'host' x86 operating system—has released Fusion 1.0, its first OS X offering. Like Parallels, Fusion allows you to run many versions of Windows and other operating systems from within OS X. And unlike Boot Camp, you don't have to log out and restart in order to use it.

VMware Fusion supports more than 60 operating systems: Windows coverage extends from version 3.1 to betas of Windows Server 2008. If Linux is your cup of tea, you'll find support for Red Hat, Ubuntu, SUSE, Mandrake, and more. You can also install Novell Netware, Solaris 9 or 10, FreeBSD, and MS-DOS systems. Even 64-bit releases of Windows and some families of Linux, such as Red Hat and SUSE Enterprise Linux, are supported.

Read my Macworld article, Review: VMware Fusion, for the rest of the story...



Don’t break my third-party iPhone apps

Macworld logoDear Apple:

Please ignore my prior request regarding opening up the iPhone for third-party development. At the time I wrote that request, I was convinced that some Apple-approved method of running true third-party applications (and not just nicely-formatted Ajax Web pages) was a key missing feature in the iPhone's capabilities. Well, I've had my iPhone for a couple months now, and I've changed my mind: Don't worry about coming up with a third-party iPhone SDK. Really. Just pretend I never wrote that piece.

Instead, I have a new request. Just do nothing at all regarding third-party application development on the iPhone. Nothing to encourage it, and most importantly, nothing to discourage it, prevent it, shut it down, or otherwise stop it from happening. Thank you.

So why would I (fictitiously, of course) write the above letter to Apple? Is it because I no longer feel third-party applications are important to the iPhone? No, that's not it at all. Is it because nicely-formatted Ajax Web pages really do get the job done? No, that's not it either. So why am I no longer concerned about Apple providing an official third-party SDK? Quite simply, I'm not concerned because a number of very bright, talented, and motivated individuals have managed to actually do the job themselves, without any help from Apple.

Read my Macworld blog entry, Don't break my third-party iPhone apps, for the rest of the story...



The Great iPhone Price Drop Uprising of 2007

Macworld logoAs probably everyone other than Bill Gates probably heard, Apple dropped the price of the iPhone by $200 yesterday. And, very shockingly to me, this somehow upset a number of those who bought iPhones back in June. Over on the Macworld forums, I've been involved in some interesting discussions on the matter. Basically, my position is as follows:

  • Nobody was kidnapped, dragged to an Apple Store, and forced to spend $599 on an iPhone. Everyone who bought on June 29th did so freely of their own will. (Note that I'm a possible exception to that statement, as I was asked to stand in line by my employer. But since it was their money, I didn't really mind.)
  • Whenever you buy any piece of technology, it is a known fact that it will get faster, smaller, more feature laden, and cheaper in the future. Knowing this, I have always treated a technology purchase as a pure sunk cost--whatever you pay, whenever you pay it, it's gone. If the item's price changes in the near future, oh well. I made my decision, I have the piece of technology, and I don't really care if it's cheaper.
  • People are claiming the "value" of their iPhone took a $200 hit yesterday. There's only one way I see that as a true statement: if the user was planning on selling their iPhone on eBay today. However, since we're all on two-year contracts, I don't see that as a big market at the moment. So if you were going to keep your iPhone and continue to use it, your phone's value is unchanged: it's just as important to you today as it was yesterday.

So basically, I'm amazed at the number of complaints over this issue. In one of the forum threads, I asked those who felt this was an issue to explain what they would have done had Apple announced a $200 price increase instead of a drop. Would they have all rushed out to their mailbox to drop a check in the mail for Apple? Not surprisingly, it seems that wasn't a popular suggestion. People want something for nothing, basically.

You've probably also read by now that Apple has decided to grant a $100 store credit to all those who bought iPhones prior to the price drop. Hopefully this will silence the criticism, but I doubt it since it leaves $100 "missing" from the pockets of those who are complaining. From my seat, though, Apple didn't have to do this at all. When you choose to buy something, you're basically fulfilling a contract with the product supplier: I agree to give you this much money, and you agree to give me the product. Anything that happens after that (outside of normal "price protection" windows, which are not 60+ days in length) is just something that happens.

Anyway, am I all wet in my thinking? This demand for a credit due to a price drop seems unprecedented to me; nobody complained when iPod Photos plummeted $200 a few short months after their introduction. Why is the iPhone different?