- Last Active
I think CR's rationale for turing of cacheing is perfectly reasonable:
I don't think anybody did anything wrong here -- neither Apple nor CR -- and both are handling it appropriately.
zroger73 said:This change doesn't come without a cost. In addition to a "more complete and rich experience", it also encourages code bloat and reduces the number of installable applications.
This is about assets, not code.
The 200MB limit was stupid. This is long overdue.
Apple could make the AppleTV a decent gaming console if they lifted half a finger. This change is lifting maybe 1/10th of a finger.
AQ said:Makes perfect sense to disable the cache. CR is testing a browser retrieving content from a server, not local files. The animosity from my fellow Apple fanboys is disappointing.
Everyone has handled this well except for the rabid fanboys.
This sure does ring true.
Even if it's not, it's pretty clear to all but the most die hard Panglossian Apple sycophants that there has been real trouble in Mac Land.
I hope that Apple's senior management is getting the message that they can't neglect the Mac like this. The Mac is a vital part of the ecosystem, and Mac users are the core of their customer base. The Mac is such a great product -- this neglect is tragic.
Watching Apple right now is like watching the X-Files in those years when they clearly had no idea where to take the show.
How does it make sense to cancel a product like this (or displays) but keep a very niche product like Logic?
If you depend on any product from Apple other than the iPhone, iPad, or MacBook I suggest you start looking for alternatives because no matter how good the product is, no matter how popular within its market, and no matter how much you are willing to pay -- Apple can and in many cases will kill the product with no clear reason and no warning.
I personally don't understand how Apple as the largest company in the world with no concerns about cash flow can't have multiple successful product teams going.
How hard is it for them to put out a decent looking updated monitor for example?
The culture there sounds brutal too...?
There have also been articles speculating that Apple's functional organization contribute to this problem.
I certainly don't want Apple to end up with independent, competing product divisions. They need to keep a unified structure in order to produce a unified ecosystem. But the current structure clearly needs refinement. Adding a bit more parallelism to the organization, so that multiple products can move forward simultaneously without running into a senior management bottleneck, does not require separate profit/loss statements for every product. It just requires a decision from Tim Cook that maybe we don't need Jony Ive to sign off on everything.
It's almost as if Apple is structured as a single core CPU that is now running up against the limits of clock speed scaling. They need to figure out a way to add parallelism. They need to go multi-core, but still with a single OS.
dick applebaum said:Hodar0 said:And these people, who are no smarter than you, write policies that bind you, limit you, restrict you, and punish you for any infraction for how you do you job. These policies are now a primary defining method of monitoring you perform your job, and they are inflexible. In Gov't, you sacrifice economic growth potential, for job security. You sacrifice freedom of defining your career path, the way you define your job, how you do your job, for security. You are now a cog, in a very large, slow moving and inflexible system.
None of the above needs to be true! The agency is part of the Administration which is lead by the POTUS -- the only person in Government who is answerable to all the people of the United States.
I interact with federal employees on a fairly regular basis, both those near the top of the bureaucracy and occasionally with political appointees. Some are great, some are terrible, and there are plenty in between. The thing that they all face -- and which may skew the distribution more in the direction of "terrible" than we might like as taxpayers -- is that one of the two major parties in the US is as opposed to the existence of the federal government as some of our nation's worst enemies. Imagine working for a company where a majority of the board of directors hates the company and wants to shut it down. Probably kind of demoralizing, don't you think?