More Scoble FUD

Yet again, scoble opens his mouth and nothing much falls out.

It’s almost amusing. Just over a week ago, Scoble was saying:

The past week taught me a lot about how important it is to always keep respect for the truth.

The one difference between me and the other guy, though, is that when the facts show that I’m wrong I’m willing to admit such and correct the post

Now he’s repeating the oft-circulated rumour that if you want to play games, you need a windows machine. This is galling on it’s own – but even more so when even Microsoft release games for the mac!

Oh well, he’s been called on this one. I’m sure he’ll now correct his post, now that he knows he’s wrong.

While we’re on the topic of scoble, he’s also happy that with Vista he can happily surf the web and not have to worry about spyware. I’m pleased for him – that’s something I’ve enjoyed ever since I first switched away from Windows in 2000.

He’s also wrongly blaming his son’s iPod for his woes with DRM. Earth to Scoble, earth to Scoble – that’s not a feature of the iPod, that’a a feature of DRM. I suggest you get used to it – MS is embracing drm that will prevent your DVDs being played in full-quality unless your monitor is “licenced” to view that DVD.

Scoble, of course, loves pointing at anyone who makes a comment that is in the least negative about any competitors product. Scoble loves doing this even more than ID/creationism proponents love to misquote anyone who expresses doubt about one particular suggested evolutionary mechanism. Scoble thus links to this as “The Tao of Mac blog is asking if OS X is becoming crufty.”. It’s a good question, actually, and I think most mac zealots will agree that the answer is yes.

It’s not a question anyone is asking about Windows though – it became clear a decade ago with the launch of Windows95 that windows was, in fact, hopelessly crufty.

Scoble also links to this response from the MSN Virtual Earth team talking about some of the lessons they learned after the release of VE:

International Coverage Most functionality in this Beta release of Virtual Earth, including the map coverage, is for the United States only. Yes, we could have released the beta as Virtual USA, and renamed it in the near future when we begin rolling out coverage in more countries, but getting products renamed here at Microsoft once they are public is a little tricky; the brand police would be on us like a starved pit bull and no one wants that.

I don’t entirely buy this: Google already has high definition coverage for large parts of the world – I still think it would make sense for them to have waited until they had a product that was at least remotely comparable before release… but at least their addressing their critics.

(I’ll note that the mean reason I think of it as Virtual USA has nothing to do with the level of coverage – it’s the fact that their search doesn’t recognise any cities outside the US).

Enough rambling for today..

Leave a Reply