
Joe Wilcox at Microsoft Watch wrote a screed about why Leopard isn’t better than Vista. I subscribe to the Watch feed, so I was a bit surprised and disappointed in how weakly the article was argued. I left a comment on the site, reproduced here:

Joe Wilcox at Microsoft Watch wrote a screed about why Leopard isn’t better than Vista. I subscribe to the Watch feed, so I was a bit surprised and disappointed in how weakly the article was argued. I left a comment on the site, reproduced here:

I guess with the little BSOD joke that has some people up in arms, there are now people looking for hidden Microsoft slams throughout Leopard. This picture is now making the rounds:
In case you hadn’t heard, the picture above represents the icon used by Apple to depict Windows shares on the network. A BSOD machine. Most people think this is humorous, as do I.
However, some people think it’s less so, and still others decided (incorrectly) it’s all about smugness. The post is ridiculous. For example, we get this:

I wrote about a “first look” at Leopard earlier this week. Now the first wave of bona-fide Leopard reviews have come out, so let’s take a quick look…

Apple’s Q4 numbers were released today. This is being covered everywhere, so I won’t dwell too much on the overall numbers, but they’re phenomenal:

Let’s face it, the big news for Apple is next week with their quarterly earning call on Monday and Leopard release on Friday. Still, there was a lot of interesting stuff this week to comment on…

InfoWorld published an article on Mac OS X Leopard, calling it “a beautiful upgrade.” What I really like about their take on Leopard is that it doesn’t just spend a few paragraphs re-hashing the “obvious” features, but rather dwells more on the overall operating system and its beauty-is-more-than-skin-deep quality:

Paul Thurrott weighed in with his thoughts about Leopard on his clearly unbiased (cough) Windows IT Pro site. As usual, Microso–, er, Paul, figures there’s no sense beating around the bush so it starts with blatant lying right off the bat:

I’ve written about Radiohead’s latest album twice. First, like many people I thought distributing it themselves was a great move, and even bought the album, though I felt only a popular band like a Radiohead could pull this off.

BusinessWeek published a story about yet another move Universal is taking against Apple. Before we get to their latest, let’s review the recent shots Universal has fired:

As I mentioned a few days ago, Radiohead is selling their new album at a “name your own” price, bypassing the labels for initial distribution. I thought this was an important step for a major band to take, and though details on the download files were non-existent I paid $7 for the album. I did so because I thought Radiohead would get it right. In my own words:

Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails has proclaimed the act a “free agent” from record labels. While we have to wait until some announcements regarding 2008 to find out just what NIN is up to, this looks dramatically different than what Radiohead did a few days ago. Gizmodo doesn’t seem to get that:

Paul Turrott has been laying low lately. He says it’s because he’s been working hard on his Microsoft Propaganda SuperSite blog, but I tend to think he was also ramping up for some serious Zune humping. He did not disappoint.

So the new Zunes are here. Stories are just rolling in since the embargo only recently lifted for the major outlets a little while ago (though smaller outlets trickled the word out, such as the Gizmodo picture above).

So Radiohead is eschewing the labels for their new album, and they’re distributing it themselves as well. An interesting move they should be able to pull off (curious if issues will occur on 10/10 when everybody tries to download it).

TechCrunch’s Erick Schonfeld provides an indication of why Business 2.0 went under with a post on Apple that claims Apple is thinking like the phone company and Jobs should “think different.” For any writer to imply the iPhone is something the phone companies would ever have produced is reason enough to ignore the post completely.