Jeff Carlson (.Thought)

Mac Journalism, or When Emotion Clogs the Brain

Glenn Fleishman and I wrote a review of Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard that appeared in the Seattle Times last week (we both write a bi-weekly column called Practical Mac). Depending on the topic, we get a little email here and there from readers and the occasional request for advice that has nothing to do with the topic. And every once in a while we receive letters from people who are writing based more on their gut assumptions or feelings and very little to do with what was published. This week has seen several of these, and I'm a bit perplexed.

By far the biggest response has come from a section talking about the security improvements in Leopard, which are significant. I'm posting the entire section below as reference.

Beefed-up security. Microsoft received a lot of due credit for some significant changes in Vista's underlying structure that prevent entire categories of viruses and worms.

The Mac has proved more resistant to attacks, partly through a lack of attention by crackers until recently, but the threat is still a possibility. Apple has taken a page from Microsoft's book and added new security features that should improve the odds of deflecting future attacks.

Leopard will now record information about any program you download over the Internet and provide those details to you the first time you run it. This should prevent attacks that rely on ignorance or a program launch that carries out malicious intent before you know what hit you.

Apple also added digital signatures as an option, where encryption is used to verify a program is unchanged since it was produced by its developer.

Apparently, even mentioning Microsoft means we're anti-Mac (as one person wrote). The latest email (which is titled "Do you work for M$?" which is a pretty clear sign that it's not going to be friendly) starts, "After reading your article, 'Apple's latest cool cat,' I was not sure. Your article was very biased towards MS/Windows."

Let me point out that the section quoted above is about one-sixth of the article, which gives our mostly-positive impressions about the major new features in Leopard. If you read through this block, we're essentially saying that Microsoft has had to deal with attacks; Apple has been immune so far but we know that won't always be the case; and Apple has implemented a few technologies that appeared in Vista first.

Going back to the letter, where the author reveals his colors at the end: "The plain truth of the matter is, Apple has made the finest desktop Operating System for over a decade. What they have not been doing is ripping their customers of with predatory pricing, and SW licensing fees." (Incidentally, most of the letters followed a similar pattern: Start with a concern that we've gotten something wrong, maybe with a backhanded "you did make some good points, though" thrown in; make a case that's only tangentially related to what was originally written; and end with a screed that finally gets to the person's longstanding grudge, whether that happens to be "Microsoft is evil" or "Gaming on the Mac sucks because I can't play my favorite game from 1997 on it". I think this is the Mac reader equivalent to "monologuing" from The Incredibles.)

Look, I don't like some of Microsoft's business practices (they did engage in monopolistic behavior after all), but that doesn't make them evil. Microsoft made a huge strategic mistake in not addressing security early or thoroughly enough, and they're paying for it. Apple knows that Mac OS X isn't going to be immune forever (currently hackers are exploiting a security hole in the version of Mac OS X that runs on the iPhone in order to unlock the phone), and frankly, anyone that thinks the Mac is infinitely rock solid is delusional. What keeps the Mac secure is not a BSD Unix foundation; it's Apple being diligent and staying on top of exploits that are discovered.

Another recent example of how emotion clogs the brain was a short news piece we ran at TidBITS a couple of weeks ago. It involved an Apple board member whose high-profile usage of Macintosh technology aided in a huge amount of media coverage. Of course, I'm talking about the awarding of the Nobel Prize for Peace to a number of researchers including Al Gore. Mark Anbinder wrote the piece, I edited it, and we both actively focused on what was news: Apple board member receives international recognition.

Here's the entire two-paragraph article:

Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, whose documentary film "An Inconvenient Truth" won an Academy Award (or "Oscar") and who himself won an Emmy Award for his Current TV channel, last week added the ultimate award to his resume. The Norwegian Nobel Committee announced that the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize would be shared between Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Such announcements are normally outside what we cover in TidBITS, but both Gore and his film are deeply connected to Apple and the Mac industry.

In fact, while we were hoping for other news from Apple's PR machine (see "Leopard Slated for October 26th?," 2007-10-04), they instead spent the day touting Gore's achievement, customizing Apple's home page and linking to multiple news reports on the Hot News page. The one-time politician, named to Apple's board of directors in early 2003, has frequently been linked to the company's products. He has for years been an avid user of Apple's Final Cut Pro software, and he used Keynote to assemble the material presented in "An Inconvenient Truth."

We specifically noted that this isn't the type of thing we cover in TidBITS, but the connection between Apple and Gore are significant in the Mac industry. (We even correctly wrote that the film An Inconvenient Truth earned the Academy Award; Gore himself did not receive the award, as he was not one of the filmmakers, only the film's subject.)

And yet, we were treated to several vitriolic emails and TidBITS Talk posts about how terrible Al Gore is. The words "Al" and "Gore" seem to make some people froth at the mouth no matter what context. A sample: "Come now. A 'one-time politician'? Gore hasn't stopped being a politician for 50 years, and can't stop. If Apple wants to use its time PRing a politician/board member, let them do it. But TidBits [sic] time is too valuable to use even mentioning a politician (any politician) in its pages. Please save that for the news channels."

I understand that people have strong views, and I want to encourage freedom of expression. But ranting for the sake of ranting is just a waste of our (your and my) time. I understand why mainstream journalists who don't cover the Mac get defensive and start throwing out words like "Mac zealots" and "cultists" when they cover Apple; they no doubt get much, much more volume of this type of email and don't know how to handle it.

To try to encourage better communication here are a few suggestions for people who feel compelled to write:

• Ask yourself, "Am I writing to correct a factual error or to provide constructive information?" If so, send it along! If not, then assume you're ranting.
• If you're ranting, ask yourself, "Does my rant directly deal with what was written, or am I just pissed?" If you're just pissed and writing a response helps get that out of your system, do it but don't send it. (Or, look at it tomorrow after you've slept on it and then decide whether to send it.)
• Threatening or insulting the person you're writing to doesn't help your case. In fact, it's a sure bet that I'll just toss it out. If you're compelled to make a statement about how well portions of my anatomy are operating, I won't pay any attention to whatever else you might say, even if it's legitimate. As Glenn wrote to one person, "You can't start nasty and expect a dialog."
• If you're writing because you think I'm somehow in bed with Microsoft or anti-Apple (or fervently pro-Apple) or that I'm getting some back-room kickback, know that I'm not. Glenn and I are freelance writers expressing our opinions. No one is pressuring us, no one is paying us (aside from the publication for whom we're writing for), no one has set up some cushy retirement fund that we get to tap into if we write X or Y.
• And if you legitimately have a concern with something we've written, and you can express it in a civil way, let us know and we can talk about it. (However, if you're just looking for random tech support, we don't have time to troubleshoot everyone's issues; Google search is your friend.)

Emotion doesn't have to clog the brain, and the best part is that even when it does (and I know it does), it's not a permanent affliction. A little bit of consideration will ensure that your time and mine aren't wasted.

My Leopard Review at The Seattle Times

My colleague Glenn Fleishman and I wrote the Seattle Times review of Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard, which is now available online: Apple's latest cool cat. In addition to talking about Time Machine, Leopard's signature built-in backup feature, we hit on a few things that I haven't seen given a lot of coverage so far, such as what Apple has done for improving security. Of course, Leopard is a big cat - our article was longer than assigned and still we only scratched the surface. So expect to see more about Leopard features in upcoming Practical Mac columns.

Long Hours

Midnight Pavoni Rendezvous
Originally uploaded by Jeff Carlson

On Saturday, I planned on going to bed at the same time as Kim and get a good night's rest. We spent the day with family, watching my 2 year old niece for a few hours and then having dinner at my sister's house. She lives in Bremerton, a little over an hour away (either by ferry or by driving around Puget Sound), so as a result we didn't get home until about 11:30. Still, that was the earliest I'd been to bed all week by about 3 hours.

I'm spending most of my time updating my iMovie/iDVD Visual QuickStart Guide (the new edition isn't yet listed at Amazon), which is more work this time around because iMovie '08 is a completely new video-editing program. I'm starting to warm up to the changes Apple made, and realizing that this version is deeper than I expected it to be (which means more work for me to suss out those depths).

I'm also helping to update a colleague's book in roughly the same timeframe. And since Adobe just released Photoshop Elements 6, the update to the Elements Visual QuickStart Guide is in the mix, too. Sprinkle a few article assignments in there as well.

But why should work occupy all of my attention? Why not do something really out of the ordinary, like have hardwood floors installed in our house (finally)? Heck, I might as well start a family while I'm at it.

This explains why my trusty La Pavoni espresso maker pictured here has become a reliable friend late at night and early every morning. I'm not complaining (much), because I did say yes to all of these projects. It's fun in that overwhelming sort of way. I just don't know where September and October went.

Amazon Ad Wording

From what I understand (and after watching my niece for a few hours over the weekend), you just have to wait a while to find out what was in baby.

Even More Autumn

I'm utterly swamped with deadlines and home renovation, but I snuck some photos of autumn leaves near where I parked at the office today. (Click to view the larger version)

I Love Autumn

Sunrise 09-Oct-07
Originally uploaded by Jeff Carlson

Caffeine Nap

I need to try this soon:

Scientists say that a successful midday nap depends on two things: timing and (no kidding) caffeine consumption. Experiments performed at Loughborough University in the UK showed that the sleep-deprived need only a cup of coffee and 15 minutes of shut-eye to feel amazingly refreshed.

coffee?
Originally uploaded by Jeff Carlson

(From Wired, via Lifehacker)

Contracts can be fun, too

I have two contracts on my desk right now: one for a book project and the other to install hardwood floors on the main level in our house.* The first has a lot of standard publishing legalese, and although I've signed many similar contracts in the past, I force myself to read through it all to be thorough.

The second also has legalese, but it's also a fun read! (Though it needs a good edit pass in places.) A couple of things that jumped out at me:

We make every effort to minimize that fine bit of dusting, but we cannot guarantee completely 100% dust free. Expect dust, we clean up as much as we can, but there still can be some settling of dust. It's construction not brain surgery. Expect Dust.

Pets & People - After final sanding, and before coating the floor. It's necessary that all people and pets do not walk on the floor. You might think you can dash across and not see that you left any marks, or perhaps Fido got away from you and made a dash across the room. What you don't see at that time, will surly [sic] show through in your final finish. You will have footprints. [Company name] is in no way responsible for keeping people (other contractors you might have) kids, pets, mother in laws, or aliens off your floor. If you need access at that time, please call us.

* We currently have some beautiful old fir that we discovered after pulling the carpet, but it's only in the main living area. The adjoining dining area, which we think was a bedroom at some point in the house's history, has ugly vinyl tile adhered to the wood. So we've finally decided to replace the whole thing. A local company, Re-Store is going to pull the fir for free so that it can be resold reused, and we get a tax credit for it.

Just for the record

Yes, that's my hometown newspaper, but no, that's a different Jeff Carlson.

Sputnik at 50

Great article by Vladimir Isachenkov about the origins of Sputnik, the first satellite to orbit the Earth. Turns out that the whole thing was an improvised fluke (with exceedingly far-reaching implications):

But 50 years later, it emerges that the momentous launch was far from being part of a well-planned strategy to demonstrate communist superiority over the West. Instead, the first artificial satellite in space was a spur-of-the-moment gamble driven by the dream of one scientist, whose team scrounged a rocket, slapped together a satellite and persuaded a dubious Kremlin to open the space age.

And that winking light that crowds around the globe gathered to watch in the night sky? Not Sputnik at all, as it turns out, but just the second stage of its booster rocket, according to Boris Chertok, one of the founders of the Soviet space program.