Nice try, but try again…
Apparently, other stuff was happening in the world last week but everywhere I looked people seemed to be talking about the new Apple iPad. Will you be rushing out to buy one? No, nor me.
The iPad ushers in a ‘new category of device’ for ‘the largest mobile device company in the world’. At least, that’s according to Steve Jobs. Having watched the launch event on the Apple website over the weekend I think what Apple have actually produced is a very pretty looking device that completely fails to deliver anything new, and which over-charges for the ability to do the same old stuff on a different size screen.
Don’t get me wrong – I don’t entirely hate it. It does look nice (one thing about Apple is that their current range of products is very nice to look at) and the multi-touch interface that was debuted on the iPhone and iPod Touch is getting better and better. From a using it point of view, I can see the attraction.
But from a useability point of view, it doesn’t appeal at all. Starting at $499, Apple is asking potential customers to shell out the same sort of money that, anywhere else, would get them a netbook or a low-end laptop with all the features and abilities of Windows or Linux to choose from. But from Apple, what your $499 gets you is a large iPod Touch. It can’t even be compared to the iPhone because of the lack of featues; there’s no camera (and I would expect an iSight at the very least) and while you can pay $130 more to have the 3G version – and shell out extra for a data plan – you can’t use it for making calls.
I love my iPod Touch, I use it every day. But it was over-priced. I love my iMac, I use it every day. But it was over-priced. Both of these together cover all my computing needs. There isn’t room for a third device, no matter how much Steve Jobs may say there is. To me, to be successful this device needs to be able to perform all the functions of the two devices it sits between. It can do the iPod Touch stuff fine, but it can’t do the desktop stuff because it doesn’t have a fully-fledged operating system. You can do what Apple want you to do, and that’s it. On a device like the iPod Touch that’s not so bad. On a device like this, it’s a killer.
When is a back-up not a back-up?
I was reading this article over at The Apple Blog about the worrying number of Apple Time Capsules that go to heaven after only about 18 months and it got me thinking about what really constitutes a back-up.
The author of the piece was using a Time Capsule to back up all his data, and suddenly it dies because of a known fault with the power system. The hard drive is fine, and could be used to recover the data if Apple would allow it (the basis of the article is control of the user’s data).
But has he really got a back-up of his data? Well, on one hand yes he has because he’s taken the data off of his main machine and put it onto another machine in case the first one fails. But on the other hand, no he hasn’t because his equipment is faulty and he can’t access the data.
Having more than one copy of your irreplaceable data is A Good Thing ™. It means that you recognise that technology is not infallible and you’re taking steps to plan for the day when something breaks. Think about the things that you keep on your computer – how much of it can you afford to lose? Your contacts? Yeah, you can probably re-create those from your phone or PDA but it’s a pain. The pictures from Junior’s last birthday party? Nope, those you can’t get back. So you need to protect what you can’t afford to lose.
Apple’s Time Machine and Time Capsule combination offers Mac OS X users a simple way to do this; the Time Capsule is permanently plugged in and the Time Machine software automatically backs up the data every hour. For most people, I think that’s a little excessive – my data doesn’t change on an hourly basis, that’s for sure.
But this convenience is also its downfall. First, it’s always on. Therefore it will be prone to things like overheating power systems. Second, it’s automatic. This, to me, is not as good as it sounds. Taking a back-up of your data should be something that you make a positive action to achieve. Yes, automatic back-ups don’t get forgotten but if you think you’re going to forget to back-up your data regularly, set yourself a reminder. You need to think about what data you’re backing up, why you’re backing it up, and whether you can afford to over-write the previous data set or whether you need to keep it – not just let the computer decide. And then, once it’s backed-up, you need to test that it is usable.
You also need to plan for catastrophe. An external hard drive that stays plugged into your main machine all the time is going to be subject to the same dangers that your main system is – fire, flood, power surge, theft. Ideally, you want them separated – in different buildings if possible. If that’s not possible, then find a nice secure place for your back-up drive. Keep it unplugged when you’re not using it. And, preferably, have two that you alternate.
As a guide, this is my ideal back-up scenario:
Main computer: iMac with 250Gb hard drive, approximately 60Gb of data that needs to be backed up. Plenty of music files (which I could rip from CD again, but who wants to spend all that time?), loads of photos that are irreplaceable and a bunch of other documents that need to be kept.
Frequency of data change: when I add new music or pictures, or when new documents are created. None of this happens very often, so a once-a-fortnight back-up is probably enough. Interspersed with one-off transfers of new sets of pictures as they are taken.
Back up solution: two 250Gb external USB hard drives. Powered from the computer – so no separate power unit to fail and take the whole piece of kit out – they’re small and convenient. One time, use drive A to take a copy of the necessary folders. The next time, use drive B. Only overwrite a data set when the drive becomes full. And yes, I do mean take a copy; just drag and drop folders. I prefer not to use back-up software, as while that will save space, it also adds another layer of complexity to the mix.
Storage: drive A at the office, drive B at my girlfriends house. Convenient for the frequency that I need them, and safer than having them all in the same building.
With two 250Gb drives and 60Gb of data to back up once a fortnight I’ve got space to have four months of back-ups available. With two drives, I’m not totally sunk if one fails. And storing them in two separate places – neither of which is in the same building as the computer they’re backing up – means I’m covered for acts of God, thieves, and so on.
To me, Apple’s Time Capsule / Time Machine combination isn’t a credible back-up solution and if your data is important to you, you won’t rely on it to be one.
Those Microsoft Ads
In my most recent Brief Notes, I commented on the first of the Seinfeld Microsoft adverts and suggested that it wasn’t going to convince anyone to go out and buy any Micorsoft. The second one came along a few days ago and was just plain confusing. Something about connecting with ordinary people, maybe? Whatever, it’s four and half minutes that I’ll never get back, and it still didn’t make me want to go out and buy any Microsoft products.
It seems that I was not alone in not getting what these adverts were trying to achieve, as despite supposedly originally being planned to be a longer series, the Seinfeld ads have now been canned. Allegedly, with a third one already in production. I’m sure Jerry isn’t upset – $10m for a few hours work? Nice!
But Microsoft have another ace up their marketing sleeve – the “I’m a PC” ads. And it’s here where I find myself in the unusual position of actually coming to Microsoft’s defence. I read several tech blogs and, being a Mac user, I tend towards the ones that are Mac-centric. Without exception, all of these blogs have commented on the new adverts and have torn them to pieces for jumping on Apple’s bandwagon, missing the point of the “Get a Mac” adverts, having to rely on spoofing an existing, successful campaign, and so on.
If you’ve only heard the basic premise of the adverts, and not seen them for yourself, then you might be inclined to side with these commenters so why not go and watch them? There are three – Pride, Not Alone and Stereotype – and they’re only short so it won’t take you long.
Done? OK. So, to me, what these three new adverts are showing is the diverse range of people that currently use a PC, as opposed to a Mac. It gives an insight into the sort of things that these people do with their PC and it helps to show that PCs can, actually, be a lot more than a biege box that sits in a corner being hated by everyone. I think it shows, much more than Apple’s “Get a Mac” ads do, that the PC can be used in many different settings, by people of differing abilities, and with a wide range of different goals that they want to achieve. Apple and Mac, I’m sorry to say, still have not overcome that image of being for artsy-fartsy graphic designers and too-cool people with money to waste.
But, say some, Apple are giving reasons to buy a Mac, which is their computer, but Microsoft are trumpeting the joys of being a PC, which is not their computer; why aren’t they talking about being a Window? Firstly, of course, Apple made the association between PC and Windows / Microsoft in their own adverts so – as these are intended to spoof the Apple ones – Microsoft have continued that association. But secondly, and more importantly, public perception is still very much that if you’re talking about a PC, you’re talking about Windows. Yes, Linux is making in-roads but the majority of PC users will be running Windows. So it’s a fair comparison.
Let’s face it, most people are perfectly happy being a PC. It does what they want it to do, it doesn’t cost an arm and a leg and if they don’t mess with it then most of the time it won’t fall over. (So often, the reason Windows falls over is because the user has decided to delete vital files, or change settings he knows nothing about. Trust me, voice of experience). Mac’s don’t fall over, either, but that’s because OS X doesn’t let you get at the vital files so easily so they can’t be accidentally deleted. And, of course, OS X doesn’t have to support multitudes of different hardware in the way that Windows does.
On the whole, I think Microsoft have done something good with these new adverts and I’d hope to see a few more in this vein. Apple, on the other hand, need to think about retiring the “Get a Mac” ads – they were never as funny as Apple seemed to think they were, and they’ve gone on for too long now.
If Apples were.. well, Microsofts, actually
Just came across this story at TUAW, reporting that an anti-trust lawsuit has been filed against Apple for monopolising the online music industry with their tie-in of iTunes to iPods.
Most of the commenters seem to be of the opinion that this is a frivolous lawsuit that has no merit, and that the law firm that took the case should be despised for taking a case that will obviously fail. The contention is that just because Apple have been successful at what they do, why should they be punished?
It’s a valid point; why should a business be dragged through the courts just because they happen to be better at what they do than anyone else in their market? Why should they be forced to open up their systems to allow other companies access to the consumer-base that they’ve worked long and hard to build up? It makes a mockery of building a successful business.
I don’t disagree with the sentiment being put forward; but it does seem that these opinions are held because it’s Apple we’re talking about. Don’t get me wrong, I like a lot of the stuff that Apple do (I’m typing this entry on an iMac, whilst listening to music through iTunes) but there does seem to be a commonly held belief in the wider computing world that Apple = Good and Microsoft = Bad.
But let’s face it. Microsoft have become as big as they are because they succeeded where others failed. And they get slapped down in courts all over the world and forced to give up their proprietary information for no other reason than other companies can’t do it as well as they can. But everyone seems to think it’s right they should be slapped down. And now Apple are being hit with some of the same treatment, but it’s suddenly different. I’m not sure I really see how.
Working for the Apple dollar – Updated
I wrote a post about the UK pricing of Leopard the other day, complaining that the price of £85 was way above the $129 being charged in the US. Since writing that, I’ve read in a number of places the argument along the lines of “the £85 includes VAT (sales tax) but the $129 doesn’t, so when you factor that in, it’s the same price”.
On the face of it, this seems like a fair argument but the numbers don’t really work out. At today’s exchange rate, $129 is £62.87. VAT (sales tax) runs at 17.5% in the UK, which is £11, making a total of £73.87. So, £11.13 cheaper than the £85 RRP, which is an extra 15%. OK, so it’s only £11 but why does it have to be even £1 more expensive?
Of course, this is all probably just sour grapes because I’ve had to spend the money I was hoping to spend on Leopard on getting my bike fixed instead and I feel like I’m missing out!
Wolfs Helpers
