I think this comment over at Engadget says it best:

We don't hate on Macs, we hate on the stupid arguments that are put forth by the Apple faithful, and their derision of anything non-Apple.

We hate the arguments that somehow Apple gives you better quality hardware for the higher prices, when the hardware is the same as any Windows computer.

We hate the arguments that Microsoft is evil for some reason, but when Apple does the same, it is perfectly fine (e.g. activation of Windows vs. activation of an iPhone, or how Intel had unique identifiers in their chips accessible by software, but when they do the same in the iPhone - not a problem).

We hate the arguments that Microsoft is evil when 10 year old hardware is not supported (such as when Vista was released), but when Apple cuts suppoprt for 3 year old printers in Leopard, it is the user's fault for not owning the latest hardware.

We hate the arguments that problems with 3rd party hardware drivers it is the fault of Microsoft, but when Apple has problems with 3rd party hardware drivers, it is the hardware manufacturer's fault.

We hate the arguments that Apple never has any problems, but when a problem appears (such as not being able to activate a phone for hours), the user is at fault for not knowing the proper way of using a Mac, just plain stupid, or hate.

We hate the arguments when Microsoft services go down for an hour or two (such as Zune last week), it is said Microsoft provides horrible service and it is a Engadget front page mockery of Microsoft. But when iTunes goes down (http://www.tuaw.com/2009/07/07/itunes-store-and-app-store-problems/) nothing is said, and it really is not a problem.

We hate the argument that before the iPhone, the number of applications available for a platform does not make a difference, it is the quality of the software. After the iPhone is released, all that matters is the number of applications available.

We hate the argument that somehow Apple hardware will last forever, but other computers last only a year or two (this argument is used in this very article). I am typing on a 5 year old Dell laptop, how long does an iPod last?

We hate the argument that somehow Microsoft limits user choioce, when many people use non-Microsoft products. But when Apple limits choice (such as installing alternative browsers on an iPhone), it is in the user's best interest.

We hate the arguments that Microsoft keeps control over their products, but you need to jump through hoops just to develop for the iPhone.

We hate the arguments that Microsoft releases poor products that do not work and you need to wait for SP2 for it to be useful, is MobileMe working yet?

We hate the arguments that Microsoft does not deliver what was promised, Apple is just now delivering push notification - a year after it was promised.

We hate how some say everything was invented, created, designed, or innovated by Apple first, and everybody creates cheap knock-offs of Apple, when there is proof of it being done years before by other companies.

We hate the arguments that products such as Tablets, Netbooks, etc. are useless crap, but rumored products such as the Apple Tablet, or Netbook will be the savior of man.

We hate the argument that somehow opening a store, something that has existed for 1000s of years since somebody found they could trade a basket of vegetables for a chicken, is an Apple creation, and from now on no other company is permitted to open stores.

And, among the many others (but the last I will list), we hate the argument that somehow Apple is allowed to air commercials that lie about Microsoft and Apple's own products, but when Microsoft airs commercials that are true (a Windows computer is lower priced than an Apple computer), somehow Microsoft is evil and must stop now.

So no, we do not hate Apple - I have a Mac, an iPod, and iPhone. We just get sick of the pathetic fanboys who attack anybody who do not drink the kool-aid and do not give glowing reviews of anything Apple.

Over at the Franchise Sizzle, they’re having a kick-off contest, in which some lucky soul will be winning an iPod Nano. Here’s hoping it’s me, so I can give it to Heather and she can have a Merry Christmas.

Oh yeah, you can enter it too I suppose. It’s free, just leave a comment. Enjoy!

I was using my favorite audio player/manager, MediaMonkey, this afternoon and ran into a really annoying bug. All of the songs in a particular album would play except for one. MediaMonkey would just skip the file, no error or anything.

At first I thought the file was “corrupt”, but it couldn’t be. It had only been ripped a few weeks ago, and plays fine in other players, such as Winamp, VLC and Foobar2000. I started to think logically about the problem, and noticed that particular track had parenthesis in it’s filename. I removed the parathesis, and replaced them with another character. Nope, still skipping.

So I thought more, and concluded that the filename was the longest filename on the album. I removed a few characters and tried again. Voila, now it works!

I do some research and find that MediaMonkey (at least the new beta for Vista) uses the Quicktime API to playback AAC files. I decided to try an experiment, and attempted to load the troublesome file (with it’s long filename) into Quicktime via Quicktime’s own “open file” menu. It’s leads me to a wonderfully unhelpful error message of “Error -37: a bad filename or volume name was encountered”. Oh, really?

Doing even further research, it seems that Quicktime can’t handle a file with a name longer than 60 characters. What the crap?

Searching around the web, I find a handful of people who have run into this same problem. Why hasn’t this been fixed yet? Is this why iTunes automatically stores most songs in a “cut off filename” state when “Keep my iTunes Folder Organized” is checked?

Ugh. Will someone at Apple get their head outta their butt, fire the entire Quicktime/iTunes for Windows development staff, and start over? I’m tired of it crashing, having exploits, making my computer slow to a crawl, and not playing back “HD” content on even screaming-fast PCs. All major reasons I switched to MediaMonkey. But alas, since MediaMonkey relies on Quicktime for it’s AAC playback, I’m going to have to truncate all my AAC filenames until a fix comes out.

Apple announced all new iPods today, and whoopty-do, they manage to screw it up pretty bad.

1. Ringtones cost extra — Yeah, I really want to spend .99 cents more to take a PIECE of a song I already paid .99 for and make it into a ringtone. I also DO NOT WANT the ability to use tracks I ripped myself and convert them to ringtones. Bind my hands, please.
2. iPhone is now $200 cheaper — All you suckers who paid top dollar for the privilage of having an iPhone right away.. I am pointing and laughing at you. I still don’t want an iPhone, even with the cheaper price point.
3. The new Nano looks terrible — I know some people will disagree with me and say it’s beautiful, but I’m sorry, you’re wrong. It’s like a hobbit made love to one of the new “classic” iPods. Rumors of terrible performance (coverflow is jerky, etc.) and the small video screen don’t help my desire to get one at all.
4. The new iPod “touch”, oh wait, don’t you mean IPHONE? — Jeez, you might as well buy an iPhone. Or wait for iPhone v2, where they finally put WiFi into the iPhone. Shouldn’t they also have changed the form factor just a tad? I mean, it’s skinnier, sure, but what about making the screen bigger? Or changing up the face.. just anything to make it stand out against an iPhone. And don’t just disable things, either, *cough*e-mail*cough* on the iPod Touch to make it not compete with the iPhone.
5. Starbucks integration; who cares? — So, your iPod Touch will light up like Christmas every time you walk past a Starbucks? And you’ll get to see what artist/song is currently playing? And be able to buy it?!? It sounds like you want to force advertising in my face. And for all that, I don’t even get free WiFi internet access? Boohoo, Starbucks. Hopefully you can turn this “feature” off. I’m sure Starbucks and Apple will make gakillions of dollars, though. Whatever.
6. No WiFi syncing — Isn’t this obvious? You’ve got an iPod now with WiFi capabilities.. why can’t someone sync it when they get home automatically through the power of WiFi?

This has had me stuck for the past hour. Give me a break. I really hope this is just a bug in the “beta” of Safari.. because it’s extremely dumb.

This Javascript method takes a passed in SELECT element (via ID) and the value you want selected, and will loop through all of the SELECTs options, and select the one whose value matches:

function selectOptionListValue(psElementId, psValue) {
    var OptionList = document.getElementById(psElementId).options;
    
    for (var i = 0; i < OptionList.length; i++) {    
        if (OptionList[i].value.toLowerCase().trim() == psValue.toLowerCase().trim()) {
            OptionList[i].selected = true;
            break;
        }
    }    

                        
    return;
}

Looks simple, right? It kinda is. Works great in Opera, IE, FireFox, etc… but in Safari, nothing happens. Your SELECT gets nothing selected. It turns out, you need to specify the SELECT’s selectedIndex in order to get it to work properly— adding this line before the “return;” fixes it on Safari:

OptionList.selectedIndex = i;

Talk about retarded. Any “Safari developers” out there want to throw in their two cents?

Found a flickr account with this photo from inside Microsoft’s Zune department, of an “Amnesty” bucket with some iPods in it. Reading the comments is hilarious.

I love how Apple supporters are so defensive. God forbid there should be competition in the marketplace! Or that the Zune team should poke fun at Apple. Because Apple never does that.

<sarcasm>Yes, we should all own an iPod and do the exact same thing. Clearly iTunes is the best software out there.</sarcasm>

Ugh. This is the sort of fanboy-ism that I hate. It’s the same thing that drives Mac vs. PC debates. Look, use whatever OS/platform you want. I don’t care. What’s ironic is that Apple totally advertises that you can run Windows on your Mac, yet makes fun of Windows/PCs constantly. Which is it, Apple?

If you follow my blog, you know I sold my iPod a while back and bought a Zune. I did this because I was fed up with iTunes being a complete performance joke. Argue with me all you want, but plenty of other people are running into similiar problems with iTunes on Windows. I really like my Zune, but it isn’t without its faults. I wish the Zune team was a little more “open” to communication about their software, as there are some fairly simple tweaks they could make that would help immensely (see my post for some examples.) I have even more bulletpoint items that I don’t like about the Zune, but overall, I’m more happy with it than I was with my iPod.

And one thing I noticed when I first listened to my Zune was how crisp/fuller songs sounded. These were the same format (AAC) being played on my iPod and my Zune.. and the Zune would almost always sound better. According to this YouTube video and this forum post, maybe I’m not crazy. It appears the Zune does have better sound quality in general than the iPod. Yay Zune.

I am looking forward to what the future holds for both Zune and iPod… competition can only be a good thing in this area. Do you really only want Apple-based digital audio players out there on the market? (And before someone mentions Creative and the other companies with DAPs… yeah, right, like they’re even in the same league as iPod/Zune.)

Now playing: Tom Petty - Yer So Bad

Over at the Windows Vista blog, they’ve announced the final version of the iPod patch for Vista. This is for users who use the “safely disconnect hardware” icon to remove their iPod, rather than using iTune’s eject button.

I’d really like more details about the patch and what it does, but haven’t found anything thus far. I have to believe that it’s mainly an Apple problem, as the patch is very specific in targetting iPods. If it was some low-level USB problem in general with Vista, the patch would be labelled as such (and the bug probably wouldn’t have even made it out of Beta 1.)

Anyhow. If you’ve got an iPod and are running Vista, better update just to be safe.

I wonder if I write to Steve Jobs, and tell him a convincing story, that he’ll send me one for free?

Isn’t his e-mail address sjobs@mac.com ? Anyone know?

Or hey, want to donate to my “Give Nicholas a Macbook Pro” fund? I promise I’ll give Apple a fair chance!

For sucking so bad under Windows. I swear, iTunes and Quicktime on the PC is a ploy to get people so frustrated that they’ll just go buy a Mac.

After having so much fun with the iTunes software in Windows (especially Vista), I decided a change needed to happen. On Friday on bought a Zune. So far my experience has been most enjoyable, despite the fact that the Zune software isn’t even supported on Vista yet. But there are workarounds.

Here’s some reasons why I’m digging the Zune over the iPod right now:

• On setup, the Zune software found all of my iTunes music and imported it. It even imported my playlists and song ratings, thankfully. I’d hate to have to re-rate all my songs (it took me months!) The import process took a while, but that was to be expected, since I have nearly 20,000 songs.
• The Zune plays all the same formats of the iPod and more (Windows Media Audio.) I was worried that the Zune would have to convert the MPEG4/AAC (.m4a) files that iTunes ripped into a format that it could play… but no, it just works!
• I had to re-create my “smart playlists” (Zune’s software calls them Auto Playlists.) No biggie. The rule engine looks a little different than smart playlists, but it works the same. I was able to set my few smart playlists back up in minutes.
• The sync speed is crazy fast. To sync around 2000 songs, it only took about 10 minutes. If I hook it back up and sync it again (with no changes), it syncs in less than a second. Woot. On my iPod, iTunes would sit there for minutes trying to sync up all the data, even if nothing changed.
• For some reason, the Zune software wants to convert most of my music videos/movies to a Zune-compatable format. I suspect this is because I did not encode the MPEG-4 video in the proper resolution/bitrate that the Zune supports. I’ll have to do more research on this to see exactly what’s up.
• The Zune interface blows the iPod’s away. It’s way more graphical, and the “sideways menus” are much more friendly than having to go “up” a menu on an iPod. For example, when I choose “music” from the main menu, I’m taking to a series of menus at the top (selectable by using the left and right keys), and the list of the currently selected menu item. Hitting left and right, I can switch between artists, albums, playlists, genres and songs. On the iPod, I would have had to go “up” in the menu structure to change what category to search by.
• When music is playing, the album art takes up about 80% of the screen. Hitting the center button “zooms in” on the artwork and overlays a menu allowing you to change the song’s rating, turn shuffle and repeat on/off, send the file to a friend, or flag the song. The “flag” feature lets you set aside some songs for whatever purpose you wish. Maybe you just really dig those tracks, or you want to flag them to be deleted, whatever.
• Photos and video look great. You turn the Zune sideways to watch them. There is a small indentation in the back of the Zune (underneath the controls) so your hand can more comfortably grip the Zune when it’s sideways. Neat.

And to be fair, here are some of my gripes thus far:

• The Zune software “monitors” folders for changes, which I kinda dig, but at the same time, I’m used to how iTunes does it. Maybe I haven’t found out how to do this yet, but I don’t think there’s a way to just import a single song/picture/video into your library. You have to put it into one of your monitored folders. I want to be able to just drag something onto the Zune software, and have it imported/copied to my library.
• Can’t rip directly to AAC/MPEG4 format. You have to choose between WMA, WMA lossless and MP3. The MP3 encoder they use isn’t the best (LAME would be much better.) So I’m stuck using WMA at 192kbps, which sounds great, by the way. Just a different format to get used to, I guess.
• More to come in time…