Apple: the new Microsoft?

Posted by: Anonymous

Apple: the new Microsoft? - 03/05/05 04:13 PM

Apple have been taking legal action against one-man website and a couple of other <br>rumour sites, to force them to give up names of Mac Software developers who've been <br>leaking details about up coming products. The first amendment protects <br>journalists (freedom of speech.)...but Apple has managed to get some kind of <br>ruling that the journalist's have to give them names. The websites are fighting <br>back, trying to get the case dismissed, but with George W Bush' increased<br>support of corporations and legislation to give them more power - will freedom of <br>speech win? Apple is acting more like Microsoft nowadays. It's a real shame. <br><br>Apple have consistently 'broken' the mold in terms of computing. They've listened to it's <br>supporters, created inspiring and innovative machines and software that people <br>actually enjoy using. They command a strong following of dedicated mac users <br>because they've always been a company that's thought differently! <br><br>Apple in the 90's was very similar to how Google is now. Apple allowed allowed you <br>to take your pet to work! Yes it's a business, but to a lot ofpeople (me included) it's <br>more like a thriving community...their products give you that 'wow' factor. Yes, it's <br>'material desire' but it still doesn't really get to me. If the world ended now, I could live <br>without Apple! Anyway, my point it...Apple's profits have been surging. As they've had <br>surging profits they've done some VERY strange things:<br><br>1. Made a Pepsi advert that slated file sharers and listed their names (shocking, <br>absolutely shocking). This is all in support of Pepsi's iTunes music giveaway.<br>Weird? Isn't this the opposite to their previous marketing?<br><br>2. Started suing journalists for commenting on material that arrived to THEM freely.<br><br>3. The 'Made for iPod' campaign. Yes it stops crap products on the market but<br>taking a proposed 10% of manufacturer's cut?! That's incredible! I mean, it could<br>mean death for a lot of independent manufacturers! <br><br>This is turning into an essay. It's a shame...there's a petition on the net one for Apple <br>suing the people and one against. The one for suing has 92 signatures and the one<br> against has 5125. Support individuals, not corporations. That's also<br>the tag line of Acquisition's website. It seems to me as if a lot of shine has<br>come off Apple...I love the company, what they do...it's just a shame.<br><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by HarveyPooka on 03/05/05 07:14 PM (server time).</EM></FONT></P>
Posted by: Bryan

Re: Apple: the new Microsoft? - 03/05/05 10:06 PM

Apple is a corporation. As such, their sole mission is to create value for their shareholders. Nothing more, nothing less. <br><br>Yes, they're just like Microsoft, which is also a corporation with the same aims. <br><br>If Apple is suing Thinksecret or kneecapping their resellers, it's to make more money. They may go too far, and certainly there's nothing wrong with taking them to task for it. <br><br>But make no mistake: the days of the pirate flag, "the computer for the rest of us" and 1984 are dead, over and done with. It's all about making as much profit is possible. <br><br>
Posted by: hayesk

Re: Apple: the new Microsoft? - 03/05/05 10:13 PM

It's a shame that a forum has to put up with trolls that have no idea what they are speaking out against. But to address your stupid points:<br><br>1. These "journalists" were actively seeking people to violate their NDA. They were soliciting information - people didn't suddenly come to them. That's a big difference. You don't hear real newspapers and TV news outfits asking for people to break their confidentiality agreements to give them dirt, do you?<br><br>2. Pepsi ad: So what if they printed the names? They're the people in the commercial - they were paid to show their names. Besides, if those people admitted to breaking the law (downloading music) then I say prnt their names whether they like it or not.<br><br>3. Made for iPod campaign: as you said it stops crap on the market. There. Nobody is forced to pay for the label. If a company makes a good product it will sell anyway - just like they have been for the past couple of years.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Support individuals, not corporations. That's also the tag line of Acquisition's website<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>What the heck does that mean? People who work for corporations aren't allowed to protect their work? The products they make have to be given away for free? Don't employees of corporations deserve to make a living? What are you really trying to say here?<br><br>
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Apple: the new Microsoft? - 03/06/05 02:42 AM

Well, support people not corporations was actually supposed to mean support the individual websites, not Apple. Maybe a bit of a convoluted way to say; support shareware, not multi-layered corporations! Hayesk, well, why have forums anyway? I mean, why not just have you posting constantly without interuption. Sounds like<br>a damn good idea to me!<br><br>Bryan, I think you're right. The spark of individuality in a world of corporations<br>seems to have disappeared. 1984 was a powerful video - I'm not sure I've seen<br>anything like it. It doesn't even contain products or tag lines. Ridley Scott <br>created it didn't he? Anyway, yes it's image, but still very powerful.<br>
Posted by: steveg

Re: Apple: the new Microsoft? - 03/06/05 05:10 AM

Aw, quit yer whining. Both hayesk and Brian are right. Both cite the hard realities of commerce today. However, regarding Bryan's point, originality as applied to running a business may have waned somewhat for Apple, but in terms of product and marketing, they are still one of the most innovative corporations around.<br><br>
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Apple: the new Microsoft? - 03/06/05 12:04 PM

Aye. They're both right! I still feel it's a shame. I thought the fact that Apple was much more than a 'company' was adequate reason for people to treat it<br>like a religion. If it's just now a money grabbing machine then it makes the mac<br>geek thing...dunno...sad?<br><br>
Posted by: hayesk

Re: Apple: the new Microsoft? - 03/06/05 01:59 PM

The problem Apple will always have is the constant struggle for positive mindshare. To do that, they have to remain profitable. To remain profitable they have to constantly out-innovate other computer companies. Constantly! That's an enormous amount of pressure. If Apple lets these web site owners go, then that opens the floodgates to other organizations revealing Apple's corporate secrets. Apple won't be able to remain in business is Microsoft and Dell hear of the plans far enough in advance to be able to announce a competing product.<br><br>Even if you cite an example that wouldn't damage Apple (like revealing a product only a day before it is announced), that doesn't matter in the eyes of the law. Apple has protect all leaks if it wants to successfully protect some of them.<br><br>I enjoy reading the rumour sites as much as anyone else, but unfortunately, they solicited illegal information. They knew what they were doing and took the risk.<br><br>
Posted by: adzoox

Re: Apple: the new Microsoft? - 03/08/05 04:50 AM

I agree with all the points Hayesk made. I am also the originator of the "Apple Please Pursue Litigation Against Think Secret Petition"<br><br>There are two main reasons this petition doesn't have as many signatures:<br><br>1) It was not posted prominently on all the major Mac News Sites. The other was posted on just about every single Mac News Site.<br><br>2) Most people don't have all the facts concerning this case and see Apple as being a big corporate bully. When, in fact, they are trying to help ALL Apple developers. Griffin, a well known Apple Developer, gets corporate info stolen as well and reported on rumor sites. I wish they would come out with a statement in support of Apple on this issue.<br><br>It is clear that this IS NOT a 1st ammendment issue, it is clear Nick Ciarelli is not a journalist, and if he can be termed as such, not an ethical one.<br><br>It is clear Nick is bribing informants - maybe not with money - but with "fame and ego boost for being the bean spiller"<br><br>It is clear The Deplume Organization SOLICITS (not just receives) information. There is a phone number on the website with the words; "Got Dirt?" - No other rumor site has this!. Until recently, there was a "how to" on the Think Secret website that looked like this:<br><br>Before <br><br>Think Secret appreciates your insider information, tips, and confidential materials. ... When submitting confidential information relating to Apple, we do not recommend emailing from a .Mac/iTools mac.com email account. (No other rumor site has this)<br><br>After (ie, current)<br><br>Think Secret appreciates your information and tips.<br><br>It is also clear Nick doesn't like Apple and is doing this at OUR expense. He has partnered with the EFF which has defended downhillbattle.org - a site that HATES Apple for iTunes and the iPod and has had MANY negative "screw Apple" type promotions on it's website. One being iTunesIsBogus.com and the other iTunesPeriPod.com and yet another to collect iTunes/Pepsi Caps and not use them to show Apple they suck! The EFF lawyers don't win that much - so it was a poor choice of representation - even if free - in my opinion.<br><br>Think Secret has a close personal relationship with Elite Computers and Macadam. The two horrible former Apple resellers who are suing Apple. I had been to both stores and seen their stores and service. Both are reasons why Apple chose to open their own stores. MacAdam has one of the worst customer service records of ANY Apple reseller EVER!<br><br>Every motion, every legal procedure Think Secret makes - is adding a few pennies to EACH Mac we buy. It seems with these ridiculous dismissal motions - this may be the intent.<br><br>Lastly ... there isn't even a debate if the Uniform Trade Secrets Act was broken or not. It clearly states, "If you know or have reasonable ability to know the information you are publishing are trade secret OR corporate business plans - you can not publish it without the permission of the corporation or business.<br><br><br><br>WWW.ADZOOX.COM & www.JACKWHISPERS.COM