An exploit of Microsoftian proportions…

New Malware Allows Hackers to Access Personal Information on Jailbroken iPhones – Mac Rumors

So the iPhone’s security situation worsens. This time it’s a really bad one. You can have your data stolen from your iPhone without even realising it.

You could walk past a coffee shop and someone with the right software could scan your phone and get at all your data. You wouldn’t even know it. Wow.

Of course this doesn’t affect me. Or just about anybody else who owns an iPhone.

Just those morons who took the advice from certain Mac-gurus and jailbroke their iPhones to ‘free them from the tyranny of Apple’s closed system’.

I think it’s time to admit that maybe Apple ‘knows best’.

Posted using ShareThis

‘iPhone’ worm? Not quite…

Via MacDailyNews (sub-via the BBC, but I’m not linking to their FUD).

Posted using ShareThis

So there’s a ‘worm’ that’s been discovered in the wild (or should that be outback?) in Australia.

Our intrepid license-fee paid for reporters at the Beeb, gleefully point out that it changes the wallpaper to a picture of Rick Astley, and as a side issue also point out that it only affects jailbroken iPhones.

In my opinion, a jailbroken iPhone is not an iPhone – not the iPhone that most people viewing the BBC news item would buy and use, so the headline ‘Worm attack bites at Apple iPhone’ is a little inflammatory.

Leaving aside that issue, where does this leave all the whiners who have constantly asked, nay, demanded that Apple make their iPhone an open platform?

(I’m thinking of such high-profile ‘Apple-supporters’ such as Laporte, Inakhto, to name a few).

Does this not validate and verify Apple stance of a closed system, with only approved apps allowed?

Apple said at the time that a smartphone is a far more vulnerable computer than a traditional laptop or desktop, and therefore needs a different approach in terms of what is allowed to run on it.

Maybe the oft-used and derisory statement that ‘Apple knows best’ is correct after all.

Microsoft’s retail stab in the dark…

Upon thinking about Microsoft entry into the retail space, a few thoughts occur.

Microsoft have a really deep seated envy of everything that Apple does. Now, they’ve always had this from the very first meeting about Windows 1.0, and in the past they could get away with it.

After all, despite all Apple’s efforts, they were not a mainstream company. Microsoft and their partners dominated and no-one outside Apple’s niche had ever heard of them.

All the great unwashed saw was ever greater ‘innovation’ coming from Redmond. They did not know that this innovation was a photocopied, me-too agenda based upon what Apple did.

This approach works fine, as long as Apple remains a niche.

Can you really say that Apple Inc. is at this current moment ‘a niche player’?

Group together everything that Apple does, the Mac, iPod, iPhone etc, and their approaching 10% market share (and even greater mind-share), I think not.

Why does this make a difference? Well, Microsoft can keep up the pretense of being an ‘innovator’ as long as no-one (or at least the majority) knows that Apple exists.

This is all the more difficult, and one very good reason this is getting harder, is because of those pesky Apple Retail Stores.

People used to listen to their ‘geeky friend’ on what computer to purchase, which was usually, if not always Windows.

That’s not the case now, they see an Apple Store, go in, and more often than not, purchase. I don’t know what their footfall conversion rate is (the % of customer who enter a store and either do or do not purchase something), but according to Apple 50% of those purchases are to Windows users.

So what is Microsoft to do? Well there’s only one thing to do, fight fire with fire.

But Microsoft has a problem, and it’s a problem that cannot be got around. The PC model is proprietary OS on open hardware. Apple’s model is open OS (sort, parts of etc), on proprietary hardware.

Now I don’t care what people say, Apple’s model gives us more reliable computers, Microsoft’s model gives problems – lot of them, with more chances to go wrong.

Apple’s model is naturally fits the retail environment. People enter Apple Stores for an experience. Yes, they take their computers in to be fixed, and Apple manages that quite well, as their model keeps those fixes down to an acceptable level.

Microsoft? Their model invites problems, how the hell are they going to manage all those PC users with viruses, spam, malware and faulty hardware because their ‘geeky friend’ made their computer?

This should be interesting to watch…

Microsoft to open retail stores?…

This is going to be fun to watch…

Imagine the scene: Microsoft opens it’s store, hoping that people will walk through the door and fully grasp that Microsoft software can help their digital life and will be wowed by everything they have to offer and they won’t go to that funny fruit store down the street.

However what will happen is that Joe Sixpack will walk through the door walk up to the counter and say, “Ug! Computer not work, you fix!” (Along with the 20 people behind them with similar complaints).

The patient (and butt-ugly) Microsoft genius with say, “I’m very sorry sir, but your issue is a hardware issue and I’m afraid Microsoft only deal with software, I can give you the number of the Dell support-line?”

Mr Sixpack will then say, “Ug! Dellman say your software got virus, you fix!”

The Genius eyes will then light up and say, “Aaaah, yes sir then we can help you, we sell virus killing software starting at $59.95 per month for our basic package.” He then hands him a leaflet.

Mr Sixpack numbly hands over his credit card, “just make computer work – me want pr0n!”

At the end of the month Microsoft will say that their software stores are a great success, having sold millions of software packages that help their customer get more from their computer purchase.

If anything, this will force more consumers into Apple stores because for the first time, Microsoft will meet the great-unwashed PC buying public – and their problems. I really don’t think Microsoft realise that aspect at all – they really are that arrogant and full of themselves.

The will not be able to cope – it will be a PR disaster. All Apple needs to do is air a well-timed Mac vs PC add that targets this sh*t storm, and watch them come through the doors.

Microsoft, please, please, please – carry on.

Reaction to Microsoft’s answer to ‘GetaMac’

I’ve not published for a while as I have been knee-deep in the negotiations to convert my company’s website from a standard informational website in to a fully-fledged ecommerce site.

So I’ve let pass the current effort by Microsoft to counter the resurgence of the Mac with their own set of advertising, costing $300 million no less.

Being very busy, I don’t have the time to look into the metaphorical reasoning behind the Seinfield ads, but I assure you I will sooner or later.

I’m a marketing guy and I deal with peddling bullshit to consumers on a daily basis, and at first glance these ads seem amateurish at best.

In addition, I’m too late – they’ve been pulled already.

Microsoft have continued the assault on Apple with the ‘I’m a PC’ ads. Again however, the ads seem poorly thought out and clumsy in their execution.

But I’m not going to go into detail, but one thing I’ve noticed is the reception that any advertising effort by Redmond seems to generate in the media. It seems that the press is resoundingly negative in their judgement.

Why is this? Surely something can be said of these adverts that would give Microsoft some hope? Even myself at my most impartial, could, if pushed, muster some sort of positive morsel.

It seems to me that the tables have been turned.

Back in the 80’s & 90’s, the main motivating factor, the thing, above all that would sway someone’s opinion on whether to choose an IBM PC or a Macintosh, was their friendly (or not so friendly) neighbourhood geek.

The spotty nerd at work, the weirdo that fixed the computers, the clumsy nobby-no-mates that bored you senseless with talk of RAM, memory, DOS & hard disks.

And his recommendation was (you guessed it), the DOS (and Windows) PC. He scoffed at the Mac, calling it a toy, lacking in software, no powerful and something that nobody used.

And his recommendation stuck. For years. And years. We’ve been at the brunt-end of that decision ever since. The entire IT industry is geared towards pushing us to Windows and the PC.

Fast forward to the last few years. After years of crashes, viruses, trojans, malware and ever cheap computers, that seem to last little more than 18 months, the consumer who relied of their geeky friends recommendation just doesn’t believe them anymore.

So who do they believe? Well who’s left?

Their not going to listen to a Mac user either, because we get lumped together with those geeky weirdoes.

The only thing left is the media. They are listening to the media, the ad-men, all those artists who use Macs in all the creative departments up and down the land, all those PR agencies and marketing people who use predominantly the Mac.

The Mac’s time has come – for years the IT geeks recommended the PC to anybody who would listen, well those days are gone. Now that the consumer’s ear is turning towards the media, we will recommend nothing but the Mac.

Poetic justice for all the years of misery they’ve put us all through.

Carpet bombing flaw in Safari is not a problem because…

 

Link from Slashdot to arcticle at The Register

So let me get this straight, a flaw in Safari, could allow a malicious attacker to download files (1, 2 or thousands) to your Windows desktop without your perrmission.

But the flaw doesn’t allow execution.

Because Apple’s not that stupid.

You know, to allow just ‘any’ file to just execute without permission.

So what’s the problem? Other than it being a ‘design’ flaw? It’s certainly not a security flaw is it? the files cannot be executed and therefore cause untold damage can they?

Ah, right but those files can…

By a flaw in Windows.

Not Safari, then.

So it’s Microsoft’s problem then is it?

That’s right it is.

And when will Microsoft fix this flaw?

No word on that. Yet.

I’m sure they’ll get round to fixing it asap, once they’ve blamed Apple for drawing attention to their SECURITY flaw, by a DESIGN flaw that Apple, quite rightly, didn’t really think would cause too much of a problem, because no company is stupid to allow files to execute by themselves.

Except Microsoft. Again.

 

A thought about Psystar…

Hold on a minute… what about security updates? 

Supposedly, in order to stop Apple from ‘bricking’ these Frankenmac’s, the Mac’s software update has been disabled by Psystar.

Now Psystar say that any updates from Apple will (presumably after alterations by Psystar) be posted on their support site.

Updates from Apple that correct bugs and add features are one thing, a user can live without these if needs be, but what about security updates?

Security updates usually come from Apple as separate entities, can we be certain that Psystar will a) be actually be able to offer them and b) after altering them to suit the specific hardware that Psystar is offering will they work effectively?

Apple has teams of engineer’s who know the hardware intimately, Psystar has, by all accounts, a unnamed brother.

Do you feel secure? I wouldn’t.

It’s gonna be a headache for Psystar, but I feel that they just won’t bother, all they want is your money.

But what does this mean in the long term?

Let’s say that Apple does nothing (they’ve done nothing so far).

Let’s say that Psystar’s Mac’s are a great success and sell by the boatload.

Let’s say that a really bad security vulnerability appears and Apple, as it’s duty permits, releases a security update.

This security update may also have code in it that brick’s Psystar’s Mac’s. Psystar then takes this update, examines it and somehow strips out the ‘bricking’ part. I don’t even know if this is possible, I’m not a programmer.

Even if they could, it’s going to take them a while to do this. All the time, the FrankenMac’s are vulnerable, and this happens, time, and time again. Apple releases dozens of security updates a year.

It’ll be too painful to update, and it’s not automatic so users just won’t bother.

This means that there will be a sizable proportion of Mac’s that are wide open to attack to malware & virus writers and Apple will be able to do nothing about it – it’s Psystar’s problem.

However, running the Mac OSX, Psystar’s problem IS Apple’s problem.

Psystar’s Mac’s will be the insecure bastard brother of the true Macintosh.

I think it’s very irresponsible of Psystar to potentially make the Mac-platform a target for virus-writers, simply just to chase a cheap buck.

Thinking this through – Apple, you really need to do something NOW, before this gets out of hand.

Safari malware..?

 

Unless you’ve been living under a penguin-shaped rock, it can’t have escaped you attention that Apple have released Safari for Windows.

Not only have they released it, but they’ve actively developed for it, and actively (and some say aggressively) marketed it.

Towit: software update for Windows tries to ‘encourage’ Windows users to install it by pushing it along with updates to iTunes.

This wasn’t well received by most PC-whiners. They feigned anger, saying that it was almost ‘malware’ like, but this was just a cover because they felt that it was an invasion of the Windows-space by Apple.

Most of the great unwashed would just install it without realising it and start using it instead of Internet Explorer – how dare they!

It’s strange that these same PC-pundits weren’t saying the same thing when Microsoft created Internet Explorer as a replacement for Netscape Navigator, and installed it by default, for free, even tying it into the OS, and making it impossible to uninstall.

Those same poor, great-unwashed users just started using Microsoft’s browser instead and Netscape died on the vine. Why wasn’t that described as ‘malware’?

No, I feel that all’s fair in love and war and if Microsoft can use these dirty tactics to grow their browsers market share, then it’s perfectly OK for Apple to do the same.

Oh yeah, by the way – it’s working:

 

Package, repackage, repackage…

 

So here we go…

The likes of ‘Pwn to own’ is a vital tool in the arsenal of the computer bug-fighting community, boldly going into the fray, fighting those bugs so you don’t have to. Bringing to light otherwise unknown security issues into the viewpoint of the public, and using their carefully honed skills to keep your computing life safe.

For the good of the community.

Not for any other reason.

Honestly.

Not so they can stub (another) lit cigarette out in our eyes, maybe.

No, definitely for the good of the community.

…

OK, back to reality. As you can see I’m not at all enamoured by this stunt. But before you (quite rightly) state that I am a Mac fanboy, let me just put across what I’m on about.

Yes Safari has a bug, quite a serious one and one that needs addressing. A carefully crafted website can give, once visited, root access. This is a biggie, a serious one and I’m in no doubt that Apple is currently fixing this ASAP.

However the bug isn’t the issue here. What is the issue is the way in which this bug has been demonstrated and ‘launched’ into the public arena.

This whole exercise is not about safeguarding the computing public, this is about sad Windows users getting maximum exposure for a bug they have discovered in Safari.

The whole ‘pwn to own’ is a packaging exercise, a PR stunt, to get the largest exposure possible for the discovery of a flaw in Safari’s webkit, I work in marketing and PR, and I know a PR stunt packaged as ‘reality’ when I see one.

Think about it.

1) The MacBook Air. Why the MacBook Air? Why not a Mac Mini?, or an iMac? Because it’s Apple’s flagship product, they’ve pumped millions into its advertising, so any flaw discovered would taint Apple’s top product – and give maximum exposure to the ‘event’.

2) Hacked in 2 minutes? Right. I think you mean 2 weeks and 2 minutes. The website they visited to take advantage of the flaw had been previously created by them. It took them 2 weeks to figure it out.

So a competition was set up just at the same time as they just happened to have finished constructing a website that demonstrated the flaw?

No, what happened was that they discovered the flaw, and were about to announce it when it occurred to them that simply just announcing the flaw wouldn’t be enough.

It’s been done before and it’s old news. Everyone would simply say, “A flaw? Oh, right a bad one. Hmm that’s not very good. But I expect Apple will fix it soon. Next news item please…”

So they held onto their discovery until a suitable PR event occurred, or maybe (and more controversially), a phony competition was packaged around the bug, for maximum media exposure.

Either way, they got that exposure, well done everyone.

When you look at this whole incident from this viewpoint, you have to ask yourself, Windows users are seriously in need of some therapy.

Oh, and the excuse that they won the MacBook Air and are Apple users? Of course they are, how else do you expect they know so much about hacking a Mac?

 

The month of Apple bugs…

I started writing this blog to outline some of my personal experiences of the Apple experience, in the hope that I may shine a light on the reasons why people such as myself choose Apple whenever they can.

I rarely comment on wider Apple-related tech issues, because they are usually well documented already, on blogs and Mac-tech sites far more eloquently than I could manage.

But this time I feel that I’d like to air my views on a small group of people who have made the Apple-headlines recently.

I’ll briefly go into some history (as you probably, as a Mac-user, know the details of this extensively already).

Last year a group of security experts highlighted a potential security threat with Mac’s and their wireless capabilities. They showed a Mac being hacked over a wireless network.

Now, this is about as bad as it gets in terms of security, and the entire Mac web rose up in alarm.

But then cracks started to appear. They started with the fact that the hack did not occur with the built in wireless card, but a third party one. Now, most Mac-users clearly pointed out that you would not install any third party hardware as a perfectly good wireless card was already installed by default.

Okay, said the protagonists, but you can hack the Apple-card as well, we just won’t show you that bit.

Hmmm. Coupled with a remark that they would like to stub a lit cigarette out in Mac-users eyes, most of the Mac-web (and even the more neutral sites), brushed off this ‘threat’ as minor at best.

Fast forward to late last year, and these same ‘security experts’ proposed a media event entitled, “The Month Of Apple Bugs”, to highlight one Apple bug per day, thus proving that all Mac-users live in a dream world and they are just the people to shatter that dream.
It’s now approaching the end of that month and what has been the result? Well, a little mixed. Some of the bugs are serious (Quicktime & Disk Image bugs), some pointless (cause the application to crash), and some bizarre, (using third party applications with no connection to Apple).

I have no problem with them highlighting these bugs at all. I think the work they are doing is valid and needed.

I would argue that their precept (that all Mac-users think that the Mac is bulletproof), is deluded and is created by anti-Mac press trying to give us enough rope to hang ourselves with, but that’s really not my point.

My point, or points are:

1) The motivation to highlight these bugs in the first place is suspect, and

2) The execution in highlighting these bugs is downright dangerous and childish.

Their reasons for doing this work has never been sufficiently explained. It seems to me to be born out of a frustration with Mac-users. They seem to think that we are somehow deluded in our choice of Apple, and that the software that Apple writes is just as full of security holes as Windows (which is arguable). I think they’ve spent far too much time on digg and slashdot personally, and have an axe to grind.

Whatever their reasons, their execution is, as I’ve said, is dangerous and childish.

The way it usually works is this: you find a security vulnerability and you inform the manufacturer first, before releasing it to the public. You can add a time limit on to this if you want, but it’s good manners to give the manufacturer a little breathing space. Once the manufacturer has released a fix, you get a mention in the release notes – kudos to you.

That’s it. That’s all you get and that’s all you should want – public praise for your effort, which will increase your standing in the tech community. You shouldn’t want any more praise, because hey, this is all about helping and safeguarding users by informing the manufacturer of bugs and strengthening the OS isn’t it?

It’s not about your ego, is it?

The person that uncovers a previously unknown bug isn’t the bad guy, are they?

And here is where their execution stinks. Their execution, by not informing Apple before releasing the bug into the wild actually hurts the users, damages Apple, and only gives them more ammunition for their egos.

This is all about a childish attempt by a pissed off Windows user to get back at Apple users because for some reason, the fact that there are a few stupid Mac-users on Slashdot who keep on saying that the Mac is bulletproof, he feels it is his duty to stub a lit cigarette out in our eyes (metaphorically speaking).

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – Windows users are really screwed up people.

So much code for so little life…

So another so-called virus raises its ugly (well, slightly less than better-looking) head.

And Mac users yawn…

And PC users scream…

And tech columnists spin tales of woe and doom…

The OSX.Desperation, (sorry OSX.Macerena) virus, stretches the definition of the term ‘virus’.

People use the word virus to describe all sorts of computer problems, in OSX.Macerena’s case they’re partially right, the program infects all files that reside in the same directory, it doesn’t actually damage the files however.

It can’t infect outside of the directory it’s in, so it is light years away from the kinds of viruses that infiltrate PC’s where just connecting via ethernet can infect your PC with all sorts of nasty stuff.

My views on viruses in regards as to how it affects my working life is one of careful indifference. I have ClamXAV installed on all the Mac’s in my studio, and I try to run them once a week or so, but this is more to keep the Windows IT Manager off my back than it is to actually search and destroy a theoretical Mac virus.

Let’s just imagine that we all wake up one morning to find a serious Mac virus has appeared and it’s infected a lot of Mac users. It’s the one we’ve all been waiting for (for various reasons).

The one that’s got all Mac users worried, all PC users happy (look Mac users, you get viruses as well – I haven’t made the wrong choice in dedicating my life to this pile of shit that is Windows!), all tech columnists extremely happy with their hit counts, and all anti-virus companies salivating with unbridled lust. What then is a Mac users next step?

By its very nature, it will only affect Mac networks, so Windows businesses have no worries. Only Mac users need to do something.

And what is that something? Download ClamXAV, or one of the dozens of freeware apps that will pop up the very next day to eradicate the virus, install the one of your choice, and run it. Virus gone, job done, back to productive work.

Why the potential threat of a virus necessitates the need to install anti-virus (at least one that costs money), is beyond me. Symantec anti-virus gobbles up at least 40% of your CPU even when it’s idle, so why should we install it?

No-one really asks the question however as to why? Why do people write these things in the first place?

Most of the time it’s to make money by turning your Windows PC into a zombie so that it can be used to send out spam, or it’s to install a keystroke logger so that they can find out your credit card details.

But in our case it’s different. These attempts are designed to wipe the smug smile off all Mac users faces, or in one case, to stub out a lit cigarette in our eyes.

What causes such hatred towards us, what have we done?

We’ve dared to got against the grain is what we’ve done. We’ve dared to suggest that the choice of computing platform that most IT people choose is the wrong one.

Most Windows IT people have extremely insecure personalities. Being nerdy, or a spod is something that has made them very unpopular since school. Used to a lonely life, and being picked on in their youth, they see IT as a way of grouping together with other like-minded individuals, and exercising some power for a change on all those people who ridiculed them. They might not be popular, have bad skin, smell and generally have zero social skills, but they can make you feel inferior in awe of their Windows IT skills.

And, by it’s very nature, when you use Windows, you need people like this. The whole Microsoft infrastructure makes them feel wanted, needed and superior. Whole careers, whole lives, even whole personalities are propped up by the Windows monopoly.

Then, along comes Apple and all their Mac users (and to a certain extent iPod users), with our different, fruity computers threatening all of this.

We have no respect for these people because we don’t need them. Free of the need of a geeky friend or spoddy IT support staff, we see them as they really are – sad, lonely nerds with no people skills and personalities moulded by spending far too much time fixing Windows, when they’d be far better off staring out of one for a change – this might actually stimulate an original thought.

Windows geeks, spods & nerds may not even realise this, and not admit it to themselves, but Mac users touch a very sensitive nerve that strikes at the very core of their being just by existing.

This raw, sensitive nerve is exposed every time a Windows IT Manager tries to shut down a Mac department, every time a Windows web designer ignores the Mac, every time a Windows colleague makes a jibe at the expense of Mac colleague, and every time a sad, lonely Windows geek in his bedroom, has another crack at that Mac virus he’s been working on for the past couple of years, and still can’t get to work properly.

In the Macarena code is a message from its author, it reads “so many problems for so little code”. Obviously this little statement illustrates that they are having difficulty in getting a Mac virus working.

It doesn’t occur to the author that the Mac OS is stable, well written and naturally secure from the ground up. Under ordinary circumstances any normal person, with a stable, well-functioning personality would switch platforms, or at least give the Mac some credit. But we’re not dealing with normal people, we’re dealing with people who have severe personality disorders, and they’re really pissed.

In order to vent their frustration, they’ll go back to their Dell PC in their bedroom and have another go. Best of luck.

I’ll still be here using a stable, productive, virus and problem free Mac-based network waiting for your next effort, just like the other 20 million plus Mac users out there.
It’ll be interesting to see what comes next, but only from a morbid fascination as to the motivations of people who’s lives operate like this, I won’t lose any sleep, nor will my Mac experience any downtime.

Demonstrating the gulf that divides us…

I’ve written long and hard of the battle that goes on every day between the PC camp and the Macintosh camp.

Like any conflict, it all boils down to each side failing to see the others point of view. Each side thinks that the others viewpoint is ridiculous and sortie after sortie is launched (on digg & macdailynews to name but two) in the hope of scoring some advantage.

Myself, being a hardened and battle-weary Mac-user for 15 years (although I started out, and continue to use Windows PC’s to this day), am constantly on the look out for aspects of this battle that simply put the foolishness of the Windows camp into simple, geek-free, easy to grasp terms.

Yesterday this was demonstrated to me in a way I had not experienced before.

As you may or may not know, I run an in-house, Mac-based marketing & design studio, that sits in a larger PC-based company, and we are currently in the midst of a departmental move.

I am to receive a shiny, new, larger office, with an additional member of staff, and my original office is to be converted into a PC-based office for 2-3 people to work in.
However, there is a transfer period that must occur. This has resulted in a PC user and her PC being shoe-horned into my already overcrowded workspace. But, it’s only temporary, some I’m not too bothered.

The PC-setup is not that complex, it’s a PC, running the latest version of XP, monitor, A4 laser printer and a separate fax machine.

Now, I know my way around a PC, (I have a couple of PC’s in the studio to access the Windows XP based stock database), and I certainly know my way around the Mac.

I set up this studio myself from scratch (much to the anger of the Windows PC department). It started out as a simple 867mhz G4 Mac, with monitor, scanner, external hard drives, A3 laser printer, A3 inkjet colour proofer. Since then I’ve added 3 more Mac’s (an 800mhz G4 & 2 G5’s), another A3 printer, and 2 A1 large format printers.

Everything works fine. I’ve had no reason to call in any IT support, and I’ve had 1 days downtime in 5 years, and that was to upgrade to Tiger.

Admittedly, I am an experienced Mac user. I know how to troubleshoot software, and my hardware experience only really equates to installing memory and adding internal hard drives. I certainly don’t know as much about the Mac’s hardware as the PC IT department knows about PC hardware, but then again, I don’t have to – it just works.

So, back to the PC in question. How long do you think it took the IT department to get this PC working?

Not half and hour (which would be my estimate if I were setting up a Mac), not an afternoon, not 1 day, not even 2 days, but 3 DAYS.
3 days.

At first, they brought the PC down to my department and tried to set it up. They couldn’t get the PC to see the monitor. After a couple of hours, the monitor was declared DOA.

A new one was brought in and worked fine.

Next Windows would not start. It would get as far as the log in screen and freeze. After another couple of hours it was removed and taken back to the PC department. I don’t know if they replaced it, swapped something out or hit it with a mallet, but the next day it was brought back and this time it got past the log in screen and to the desktop.

Next – the printer & fax. This took the rest of the day, and they got through half a ream of photocopy paper trying to get it working. At the end of the day it was.

The next day was connecting to the stock control system database. This is located in another part of the company, via a VPN connection.

Now, this VPN connection seems to be some sort of voodoo spell that is cast upon the company. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. Our IT department has experienced people in it, but most of the time the VPN connection is beyond them and they have to bring in a consultant to configure it.

They tried to get the VPN connection working, but couldn’t. After 2-3 hours of phone conversations with the consultant it finally worked.

The PC operator can finally sit down and get some REAL work done, and clear up the backlog that has occurred because of this 3 day delay.

The key point to all this is however, is that the IT staff actually ENJOYED it, and got EXCITED about it. The problem of this malfunctioning PC brought joy to their faces. At one point, 3 members of staff were stood around this PC, shaking their heads and actively discussing this latest problem.

They failed to see the wider problem here – the PC should have worked, out of the box in the first place. Their systems should just work, if they are not, then a serious, wider problem is taking place.

Windows, as you all know, is a mess, and I always thought that IT staff saw this as a problem. They don’t. The morass of settings, config files, registry errors, all of which is a nightmare to those of us who do productive work for a living, is the part of the job that IT people enjoy. The chance to be knee-deep in this unproductive, labyrinth of crap that Windows users take for granted makes them salivate with lust – the chance to make themselves seem superior to those of us who have better things to do with our time, like making the company we work for some money.

I admit, this isn’t the norm. However, it’s not that rare either. I hear story after story from my company similar to this. It can take literally days to get any one troublesome PC working.

I’m not advocating a wholesale switch to the Mac, as there are many reasons why this isn’t practical (maybe I’ll talk about that in another posting), but this little anecdote demonstrates the viewpoint of your typical Mac user.

We see a world, in our little design studio’s, advertising bureau’s & printers where this doesn’t happen. Ever. The PC world constantly dreams of computing heaven where there are no crashes and everything just plugs in and starts working.

It’s not a dream, it’s already here and has been here for the best part of a decade now, it’s time for PC users to wake up.

Is Bill Gates trying to re-invent himself..?

I’ve just read David Pogue’s blog concerning Bill Gates at:

http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/?p=74

I cannot begin to write how much I disagree with his point of view – here’s a quote from it: “In fact, when you step back far enough, Mr. Gates’s entire life arc suddenly looks like a 35-year game of Robin Hood, a gigantic wealth-redistribution system on a global scale.”

All very nice, but he wasn’t stealing from the rich to give to the poor, he was stealing from me (I’m not rich), and all the other poor suckers that have had dozens of PC’s over the years, running buggy, second-rate hacked together code.

This buggy code has allowed him to release, year-after-year, an OS that is a magnet for malware, spyware, viruses etc, which in turn has funded drug barons & terrorists worldwide, AND IT IS HIS FAULT.

Giving away your wealth to help the poor is to be commended, but let’s not forget what this guy has done in the past before he was ‘reborn’.

His fifth rate OS has created more wealth for the evil people in this world than he has made for himself. No wonder he feels guilty.

This has nothing to do with him anyway, it’s his wife that has encouraged him to do it. He’s still the scummy little geek he always was, he’s now just a scummy little geek, who got lucky, and then guilty.

Apple Launches ‘Get a Mac’ TV Ad Campaign…

Excellent, I like the virus one. When Vista comes out they need another one, exactly the same format, but with the PC guy wearing a colourful clown hat and loud tie.

Dialog could be:

PC Guy: “Hi, I’m a Mac”
Mac Guy: “Hi, I’m a Mac…. what?”
PC Guy: “Yeah sure, look I have this great hat, and really fashionable tie”
Mac Guy: “Erm, there’s a little bit more to it than that”
PC Guy: “Well of course, I also have these amazing devices that prevent me from getting an infection, look, I’ll switch them on”
Mac Guy: “Nothing’s happened”
PC Guy: “What?”
Mac Guy “I said nothing’s happened”
PC Guy: “Sorry can’t hear you, it’s not configured properly, let me try this…”
PC Guy collapses to floor, and immediately gets up again, saying “No I’m fine, fine, just great”
Mac Guy “So what’s changed?”
PC Guy “Sorry, can’t speak to you without the correct password”
Mac Guy “What?”
PC Guy “Thanks, OK are you sure you want to talk to me?”
Mac Guy “Well no, not really”
PC Guy “Are you really sure?”
Mac Guy “Go on then”
PC Guy “Thankyou.” He then sneezes and collapses on to floor.
Immediately 10 IT guys turn up and carry him away and replace him with an exact replica.
PC Guy “Hi, I’m a Mac”
The Mac Guy puts his iPod on.

These ads are a great metaphor, and communicate a complex topic easily and humorously.

Sony, don’t bite the hand that feeds you…

One of my favourite authors is the late, great Douglas Adams. His humourous insights into any topic that caught his eye made him an immensely enjoyable read. The book (or books) he is most famous for of course are the Hitch-hiker books and one of his observations is pertinent to a situation that has recently rocked the tech world.

Now, bear with me, ‘cos if you haven’t read the books, this isn’t going to make much sense. Arthur Dent and Ford Prefect have just ridden on the back of a Perfectly Normal Beast and have gone through some sort of hyperspace rift into a new world, one that is populated by (amongst other things) a transport café, which they visit in order to gain some refreshments, and to see The King (yes THE King). There’s some REALLY funny bits about a credit card, restaurant write-ups and nibbling fingers, but I digress.

Once entering, the author remarks on the customers of this café. The establishment is a dark and moody place, full of dingy corners and shadowy, nasty ne’er-do-wells, such as drug dealers, murderers, assassins and record company executives.

This small observation, made in jest perfectly sums up the people we are dealing with here in connection with the Sony rootkit scenario.

The problem here is one of control. The record companies know that at some point in the future (not to far away either), all media will at some point in it’s journey from producer to consumer, pass through a computer.

Now the consumer sees this as an opportunity to transform & manipulate that media into whatever they want, in order to transfer it anywhere for their convenience. After all, they bought the media and they should have the right to do whatever they want with their property, correct?

The producer (in this case it is not the musician, it is the record company), sees this opportunity in a completely different light. Previous forms of media transportation (such as cassette, LP), had little in the way of copy protection because you could never make a perfect recording, the same applies to VHS. The record companies were not too bothered by this, and there was little they could do about it anyway, the technology didn’t exist that would have allowed them to stop it, so they grudingly lived with the situation.

CD’s took them by surprise. From what I can see, record companies are run by people who have little understanding of technology. They failed to see the upcoming danger of personal computers and ripping CD’s to MP3, and are now playing catch up.

This ‘catching up’ basically consists of making up for all the (apparent) lost revenue they saw since VHS Video cassettes first came onto the market. In their eyes, when you buy a CD or DVD, you are not buying the contents of that media. What you are buying is a licence (details of which varies from country to country), to experience that media under the conditions of that licence, and to a certain extent, they are right.

Now the conditions of that licence have changed little over the years, but what is different now, is the Record Companies see that with the potential use of technology (Black Hat Rootkits), they can enforce that licence in a way they have never been able to do before, and even change the conditions of that licence when they see fit. They see this as their last chance to enforce something they’ve wanted all along, potentially make a pot load of cash in the process and they are not going to let go of it easily.

There are a number of problems with this viewpoint, they do not see them, but we do:

1) A pirate is not a potential customer, and never will be. The record companies think that every pirated copy of a song is a lost sale. This is obviously incorrect and ignores a basic understanding of how consumers operate. Bill Gates once said in connection to piracy rates of his software in China, (and I’m paraphrasing here), “If they’re going to pirate software, let’s make sure it’s ours. We’ll figure out a way to collect later.”

2) Fair use. Now this little loophole in the licensing conditions differs from country to country. Where the law applies, you can make a back-up of the CD’s you have bought for your own usage. Some countrys are less than flexible (such as the UK), and other laws state that you cannot broadcast the songs you have bought to other people. The law regarding fair use is badly thought out and confusing. Consumers need a simple, fair system that takes into account their listenting & watching habits, plus takes into account the use of new technology. Until this happens, consumers will feel it is their right to treat their music in any way they want.

3) Respect for the consumer. What the record companys don’t understand, is that by tighteneing the grip on the listening conditions of their media, they will squeeze all the life out of it, and kill it stone dead. The consumer will not agree to (for instance), buying another copy of their music CD to give to their friend. They will simply copy it using iTunes, as they did before with LP’s and cassettes. The record companies have not lost a sale, because their friend would not have bought it anyway. The tenuous relationship that exists in this licence is the best they are going to get. If they push too hard, sales will go DOWN, not up.

What they should be doing is introducing fair DRM, like iTunes, on their CD’s. (Apple – a chance to licence FairPlay here please?). How about lowering their prices, and giving better value for money with these CD’s in terms of discounted tickets for live events, fan clubs & merchandise? This would give added value to the physical CD, and is something that is impossible to pirate.

Record companies, and all media companies have a problem with piracy, but this is not a new phenomenon. Their business model is totally reliant on a flexible approach to usage rights and if they try to alter this approach to the detriment of their customers, these customers will simply walk away, (probably in the direction of BitTorrent). The best way to fight it is by treating this threat as a competitor for your customers, not by treating your customers as criminals.

If you haven’t read the passage in Hitch-hikers as described above, the following won’t make any sense either, but a statement in this book sums up the attitude that media companies should have towards us:

“You should never bite the hand that feeds you. Nibble it occasionally, even suck on it really hard sometimes, but not actually bite it.”

Keep it in the family…

It’s strange really, now that the Macintosh is part of my personal life as well as my professional, I’ve started to think of how computers affect my immediate family.
Previously, I was only professionally tied to the Macintosh from a work standpoint, and I didn’t take home the thoughts and computing bias that I clearly show at work.

I knew that some members of my family had computers, and I knew they were not Macintoshes, but it didn’t bother me. When these family members complained that their barely one year old PC was barely useable due to constant pop-ups & crashes, I just shrugged, smiled and kept my thoughts to myself by saying, “Sorry, but I use different computers at work, I haven’t a clue how to fix yours.”

But all that has now changed, and it’s changed for a specific reason.

Most of my family members bought PC’s because that’s what the staff at PC World told them to buy, they were not shown the Macintosh, they do not even know that the Mac even exists. As far as they are concerned computers mean Windows. I pity them, but I feel that it would be of little use to try and convert them to the Mac. Their view of computers is permanently tainted. As far as they are concerned, all computers act like this. When you do point out that there are other computing platforms out there, ones that are reliable, crash-free, virus, spyware & pop-up free they just look at you blankly, or if they know about the Mac, they scoff, giving all the usual FUD and misinformation.
You see, the Windows environment affects the user in 1 of 2 ways. The first lot simply accept the fact that this is the way computers act, and put up with it. They don’t wan’t to learn how to manage Windows because (quiet rightly) they’ve better things to do (such as actually using the computer). They expected their computer to be like their TV, simply switch it on and it should work. Add a printer from a different manufacturer should be as simple as adding a DVD player to a TV which is 10 years old. It’s a big disappointment to them when they realise this isn’t the case. The PC simply gets used less and less, until they replace it with a new one. They buy all the hype from Microsoft/Intel and part with their money yet again. They think (wrongly) maybe, just maybe ‘a computer’ will do all the things they say, and change their life for the better – this time. These users go back every couple of years, time and time again. The Wintel monopoly doesn’t care, because well, it’s a monopoly. A whole PC industry has built up around this simple process.

The second lot act differently. They actually try to fix their PC. For some reason it doesn’t occur to them that they were sold a faulty product. They learn about the intricasies of Windows, the registry, viruses, spyware, adware, trojan’s, patching their system etc.

Slowly they can coax their PC back to a semblence of useability. It’s during this period they learn of the Mac, usually from the PC press and their colleagues, and all the FUD gets laid down in their mind. This does tremendous good for their ego; they have triumphed over the complexity of Windows, they learn respect from their friends and they are brainwashed into believing that the Mac is a toy, and they DID make the right computer choice after all. Over time, this is what ‘using a computer’ means to them. They’ve forgot that they actually wanted to use it to create something. They become, for want of a better word, ‘a geek’.

In my family we have both of these types of users. The first type had a PC that was next to useless. It barely crawled along, it had constant pop-ups, porn sites would jump out at you every few minutes (for some reason). So what did they do with it? Instead of throwing it away, (or as they should do, take it back to PC World and demand that they replace the faulty goods with a real computer, i.e. a Mac), they sold it, YES SOLD IT, to my mother (78 years young), who has never used a one in her life and had heard about computers, email and the internet and wanted to simply ’surf’ to find holiday information and to send emails to her grandchildren.

Of course she quickly realised that the computer was next to useless and quite unbelievably offensive as well. When receiving a phone bill for over £200, we realised that there was some dial-up malware on it that was calling premium rate lines. Of course, other members of my family (the 2nd lot, the computer experts), jumped up and offered to fix it, using spyware removers, and all sorts of tinkering under the hood, but after several attempts, the computer is now a £200 doorstop.

Does this make me angry? Does this, as a Mac user who knows full well that my mothers first contact with computers has been tainted by the second rate rubbish that Microsoft offers? You bet your life it does. All she wanted was a simple computer to send emails, write letters and surf the internet. She didn’t want to learn all about maintaining it, she expected it to work. We all know that a Mac would have been a perfect choice for her. But because she’s surrounded by macho PC users, who want to sell her a crap PC, and want her to call them up when it needs fixing so that they can show her how clever her boys are, she’ll never get near one.

The relationship between my mother and her relations, the so called computer experts, mirrors the relationship the PC vendor’s have with their customers. They sell you something they know is defective, but they know full well you’ll have to come back to them to fix it, or have to replace it in a couple of years. It’s a great business plan.

Which brings me neatly back to the change of heart I have had concerning recommending the Mac. I owe it to my mother (and people like her) to show her that computers can be fun, useful and can change your life. Had she had a Mac, she’d probably be creating her own DVD movies by now, because that’s what the Mac does for us all, it’s so easy to use, it empowers you to create, whilst at the same time get’s out of your way to allow you to create. You don’t have to worry about maintaining it – that’s not what you bought it for.

But because of the PC, my mother now thinks all computers act like Windows does, just like all the other 95% do.

I’ve started to bring her round to the Macintosh way. It’s early days and she still doesn’t quite understand the differences between the Mac & PC, but as soon as I see a second hand iMac advertised I’m buying her one for Christmas. She’ll then be able to use a computer for the reason she wanted one, to surf the internet, write letters & send emails to my kids, and she will never, NEVER have to ask anyone for help when her computer breaks down, because it won’t. This is the reason why PC users hate the Mac so much, it takes the so-called experts out of the equation completely. It destorys the reliance that the geeks want us to have on them, and it destroys the PC vendors business plan. And that can only be a good thing.

Norton No More…

Yesterday marked a sad day for my personal experiences in a Macintosh studio. The very last Mac (a G4 867mhz which I use as a print server), has had the very last copy of Norton Utilities/Antivirus removed from it. For the first time, Norton is no longer part of my studio set-up, for the first time I have NO antivirus or disk utility software in my studio, for the first time I am vulnerable.

Well technically, Norton Utilities hasn’t been on the network for a while, ever since 10.2. A series of crashes, slowdowns & general instability that I couldn’t pin down the cause of, finally persuaded me to not bother upgrading when I moved the studio to 10.3, and 10.4 finally finished it off. These Mac’s have been fine since. Coincidence? I think not.

But I still had to have anti-virus right? So i bought Norton Antivirus 9, and installed it onto the Mac’s in the studio, and for while everything was good. But again, after a series of instability episodes, plus some of the feedback that I have read on the web, I finally decided that I had had enough of Symantec’s products and upon upgrading the Mac’s to

Tiger, I am finally free, and vulnerable.

But how vulnerable am I exactly? In my experience, systems previous to Mac OS X, really did need Norton. A full install of Norton, and regular (weekly/monthly) rounds of running system checks & rebuilding desktops was required to keep each Mac running smoothly. And, let’s face it, systems previous to X crashed every few days or so.

But upon moving to X, it was like a breath of fresh air. I moved to X when 10.2 was released and initially I was concerned over it’s stability, and I felt I needed Norton as a cushion for this system, and as a cushion for my misguided views in comparing it to OS 9.

Over time though, the rock-solid reliability has astounded me. It wasn’t until I had to visit a print shop that was still using OS 9 in order to see through the repro of a print job, that

I saw what I used to have to put up with. Upon seeing Norton Systemworks popping up every once in a while, I remarked that this piece of software caused more problems than it solved. I was rebuked for this, with the printer saying, “but I need that software to keep things running smoothly!”

And he’s right, if you’re running OS 9 then I would agree (just) that you do need Norton, however once you move to X, leave it behind.

But, what about viruses? Well, as you know, (all together now), “THERE ARE NO VIRUSES FOR THE MACINTOSH PLATFORM”, but I am part of a Windows organisation, and I do receive the odd email with a Windows virus attached so I should run some sort of antivirus right?

Wrong. There are 2 potential threats here. The first is the passing on of a Windows viruses via email, and the second is the very slight chance that a Mac virus may appear at some point, taking advantage of some as yet unforeseen security vulnerability in Mac OS X.

The first is taken care of by education. I keep my Mac staff aware of the problem that they should not forward these types of email. They are very easy to spot anyway.

The second part of the problem would not be solved by Antivirus. A new virus would not be covered by Antivirus as it would not know about the new virus until it struck. Antivirus only makes sense when the OS you’re using is inundated by hundreds of viruses all of different types and you need constant protection to be safe, as per Windows.

This isn’t the case on the Mac. I think we’re much better off allowing Apple to plug the holes before they’re exploited, rather than running Antivirus that sucks at your systems processor cycles. When a virus does strike (and it’s bound to sooner or later), then we’re partially protected because it would need permission to run, and if it could run without permission, it would only affect things in your home directory, as I don’t have root enabled on any Mac, (and you shouldn’t either), and I have extremely good, daily backup (as you should have as well).

It is a sad day, but only for Symantec. I can understand why the shift in focus away from the Mac makes sense, they just look at the numbers. The grass is much greener on the Windows side, and always will be, even with Longhorn’s apparent improvements. But it’s a happy day for my studio, because the Mac no longer needs Norton.