« C'mon crybaby, squirt a few | Main | I hearby declare... »
I see this pile of crap from, of course, ZD(vorak)-Net. I normally would ignore ZDNet, but since Tom Negrino, via Twitter, pointed out that Paul mentioned my review of Leopard in his silliness, well, I have to say something.
Paul is basically ragging on every Mac OS X 10.5 review as being nothing but puff-pieces. I get a special mention, because...
Now, obviously, I didn’t read all available reviews -but among those whose efforts I did read only one: John Welch writing for information Week, mentioned DTrace - and that in passingSpecifically, I said:
For developers and sysadmins who have a need to monitor the low-level activities of any application on a given Mac, Mac OS X 10.5 now comes with its own implementation of DTrace.
That's evidently not good enough for Paul. Well Paul, I wrote 5,528 words in that review. While I did not in fact, spend a lot of time on DTrace, it's because a) I'm not really a developer, and b) I don't know enough about DTrace to speak intelligently on it, so I, (here's the whacky part), didn't say anything about it because I would then be guilty of talking about something I don't know anything about. I know that's a silly concept at ZDvorakNet, but in my world, it's important. Of course, Paul leaves out the list of non-UI puffery that I did mention like:
- The death of Netinfo, and some details on its replacement
- Improvements in Directory Services behavior for mobile users
- File System events, a major component in how Time Machine works
- Changes in AppleScript and the OS scripting architecture
- What the new AutoFS implementation does for you in the real world
- A light overview of security changes
But evidently, since I didn't spend another 10K words on developer items that I am rather unqualified to talk about, I was writing a barbie interview.
Of course, I'm still doing better than Ol' Paul, who is talking out his nethers all over the place:
Similarly, none of them mentioned ZFS or its relationship to “Time-machine”That would be due to there not being a relationship between ZFS and Time Machine. (Not "Time-machine". Time Machine. Two words...."Time"..."Machine". Time Machine. New backup application from Apple. Big hit. Time Machine) Time Machine uses HFS+, not ZFS. Of course, the fact that ZFS support in Mac OS X 10.5 is read-only would make it rather hard to use it for backups, because, as I recall, there's rather a lot of writing in the backup process.
exactly nobody mentioned that the new Spaces capability (essentially the standard Unix multi-screen capability) now supports separating the display from the rest of the machine.Huh? WirelessVGA? When did *that* happen? Or maybe he's confusing Spaces with Apple Remote Desktop. Paul...Spaces is just multiple desktops. It doesn't "disconnect" the display from the machine. It's not Terminal Services, nor is it even X11. That would be of course...um...X11.
It gets better:
But if you ignore the partisan reviewers and ask what the real bottom line on “Leopard” is, the answer turns out to be the iPhone - because the current Mactels are this generation’s Apple IIIs.Okay, come on, admit it. There's a "Most Full Of Crap Article of the Month" award at ZDvorakNet, and Paul's really working it hard to get his bronze crapper. By the end of it, he's not even writing English:
What’s going on is that 10.5 is a mixed bag reflecting both short and long term agendas. In the short term it cleans up some x86 issues and offers some new user features raising the bar for Microsoft’s next effort -particularly with respect to time machine because this will be hard for Microsoft to duplicate while Apple’s adoption of ZFS means that all of the compexity here will disappear in the next release.I'd try to interpret that, but gosh, it appears I don't speak idiot.In the long term, however, what 10,.5 is about is positioning Apple’s application developers to jump to the integrated server/playphone world of the future - that’s why there’s so much Solaris and Java development stuff there.
Every time Paul Murphy mentions my name, I taser a baby. Is that what ZDvorakNet really wants?
Technorati Tags:
Beat the Dumb, TEH STOOPUD, WTF?, Paul Murphy: Dvorak Wannabe, ZDvorakNet, Just say no to ZDNet
Posted by John C. Welch at 00:44 | Permalink
Comments
Warning for Notes users: The commenting system uses HTML.I know this will be scary for some of you, especially Notes fans. However, open standards, rah-rah.
If you want to use less-than or greater-than signs, or other similar charachters that HTML reserves,
you'll simply have to learn to do it the HTML way. Luckily, HTML is kind of popular, no matter what
your re-educators have told you, and you can easily find help on the intertubes.
I'm a blogger (wifinetnews.com) who proofs his own work and I'm not even as incomprehensible as Murphy is on a site that might expect to have some minimum editing requirements.
"new user features raising the bar for Microsoft’s next effort": That'll be great. I'm looking forward to Windows Rainier edition in 2012.
Posted by: Glenn Fleishman | November 14, 2007 1:27 PM
umm, John? I was actually praising you - you know as the only reviewer I read who actually noticed DTrace.
Now about ZFS vs time machine - here's the thing: TM wasn't quite ready when Tiger got released but has hung about ready to go ever since. i.e. it preceeds ZFS chronologically and is now in the product.
ZFS, however, does time machine better than time machine does. In other words you can expect the next release to use ZFS in the back end instead of all the silly symlinks etc used in TM. i.e. the next generation may look the same and be named the same, but will actually be a couple of zfs one liners.
The fun part here will be watching MS try to cope. Think they'll adopt ZFS? if not, they'll be forced to match all the complexity in TM - and that will be a hoot.
Posted by: Paul Murphy | November 14, 2007 4:04 PM
Paul, give me a break. You called every single review out there "My Pretty Pony Reviews Leopard", or close to it, including Siracusa's. Now, I rarely agree much with Siracusa, but a lack of technical depth? NFW man. In fact, you obviously didn't even try to google it too hard, or read Siracusa's review, or you would have seen that he spent a LOT of time on DTrace. Here, read it yourself: http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/mac-os-x-10-5.ars/5
You also can't just suck it up and admit that your statement about Time Machine and ZFS was wrong, so now you have to dodge. Okay, fine, but you dive into inane trying to defend it:
Now about ZFS vs time machine - here's the thing: TM wasn't quite ready when Tiger got released but has hung about ready to go ever since. i.e. it preceeds ZFS chronologically and is now in the product.Come on dude, you have any kind of proof? Besides, that still doesn't create some magical relationship between ZFS and Time Machine, it just shows you may be able to read a calendar. This ain't "Artie McStrawman's House Of MacZeal", you have to do better than that here.
ZFS, however, does time machine better than time machine does. In other words you can expect the next release to use ZFS in the back end instead of all the silly symlinks etc used in TM. i.e. the next generation may look the same and be named the same, but will actually be a couple of zfs one liners."I have no fucking clue as to how Time machine works, nor have I bothered to read the tech notes, so I will take a bunch of LSD and let my visions guide me."
The fun part here will be watching MS try to cope. Think they'll adopt ZFS? if not, they'll be forced to match all the complexity in TM - and that will be a hoot.You obviously have me mixed up with the "ZFS IS THE SECOND COMING" crowd, which tells me you haven't bothered to read this site at all. Suffice it to say that unlike you, I don't cast everything in terms of what Microsoft will or won't do.
Posted by: John C. Welch | November 14, 2007 10:49 PM
Freaking hilarious Welch. Nice work.
Posted by: Paul Teeter | November 15, 2007 6:54 PM
