Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 28th Sep 2009 16:18 UTC
Permalink for comment 386677
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-06-30
It isn't but the people here who are afraid of Apple's success love to get all worked up about nothing. "OH - MY-GOD I was offered a software update that I didn't want and which might take up 0.0000001% of my hard drive - what will these Apple Nazis do next!?" "
heya,
Ok, apart from your faulty maths*, I hardly think disk space is the main beef most people have.
It's with the fact that this update is opt-in (like those stupid Yahoo/MSN/Google toolbars, or every other malware package out there), when they very well know a lot of users (maybe not so much OSNews readers, but the people we'll have to then give help to) will not notice or ignore it. It's sneaky and underhanded - if it was a related, or required package, I could understand, but it's not even tangentially related.
Secondly, Apple tends to install a whole bunch of stupid, resource-hogging background processes. I find this incredibly annoying. It puts Apple up there with annoying Symantec auto-updates, and stupid laptop manufacturer utilities (looking at you, Asus and Lenovo - although I do like Lenovo machines).
And thirdly, their apps run like molasses under Windows. Somewhat unrelated, but if you're going to pollute your users computers with background processes, at least make it lean.
And I'm sorry, but your post reeks of immature Apple-apologetism - "OH - MY-GOD I was offered a software update that I didn't want and which might take up 0.0000001% of my hard drive - what will these Apple Nazis do next!?".
What they'll do next is use the same sneaky up-sell techniques used by seedy malware firms, and dodgy software outfits to get their software in. I can't remember the last time I installed a package on Linux, and was asked, nay, defaulted to installing a completely unrelated package. Sorry, but this just isn't cool - opt-in, sure, but opt-out? No.
Cheers,
Victor
*: On my computer, I have a 128 GB SSD. 40 Gb Linux partition, 40 Gb Windows partition, 40 Gb shared NTFS (these are approx, 1000 vs 1024 and all). Itunes and Quicktime, and all that garbage is what, 120 Mb last time I checked? That's about 0.03% of my Windows partition. Not terribly earth-shattering, but still annoying - I could have stored two CD albums in that space. Seriously, it's a music player - how big does it need to be? And oh gosh, it's also a "music management suite" or something. Ok, so it has a library to talk to iPods. How darn big can that be? Libgpod is what, 2.5Mb when installed? And I don't want QuickTime, I really don't.
Edited 2009-09-28 22:00 UTC