On Aug 20, 2012, at 9:00 AM, Lindsay Haisley <fmouse-mail...@fmp.com> wrote:

> My guess is that they don't put their top-flight people on either server
> development or server support.

I believe that they do have high quality people working on the development 
side, I think the issue is more on the support side.  And the fact that they 
don't want to talk to *ANYONE* outside of the server team itself.

>                                 Apple isn't know for servers, it's niche
> markets being audio recording, graphics editing and consumer desktop and
> laptop systems.

The irony is that they've done quite well on the server side, in the SOHO and 
workgroup business market.  Since Snow Leopard, the server version has been 
much cheaper than Windows server solutions, and they don't put any limits on 
how many machines you can use your licensed copy of the software -- which is 
why I always made sure to buy the group or family license (authorized for up to 
five machines), even though I was only using it one two or three machines in 
the house.

Apple's problems have historically been with the Enterprise market, as opposed 
to SOHO and workgroups.

>                  I've also observed, with somewhat limited experience,
> that Apple doesn't respond to complaints about bugs.  People bitched and
> moaned on Apple's user forum about a recent problem with video-induced
> kernel panics in Lion (which I also experienced) and Apple never
> responded, but the problem was fixed in a subsequent release.

Apple does listen to complaints and usually does respond, in different ways to 
different types of complaints -- also depending on how loudly people are 
complaining and how many of them there are.  Fixing a problem in the next 
release is one way they respond, another way is holding an impromptu press 
conference to explain why "Antennagate" is much ado about very little.

However, Apple frequently does not respond in the way that most people would 
expect or want them to.  I think a simple acknowledgement that there is a 
problem would go a long ways towards defusing a lot of the issues that have 
happened in the past.

>> but if they're going to make modifications to it, they need to share
>> those modifications back with us
> 
> Doesn't their failure to do so violate the GPL?

In this respect, I believe that they are probably in violation of the spirit of 
the GPL, but perhaps not in the letter of the law.  Which is probably why they 
are so very violently opposed to having any GPL-encumbered code anywhere in the 
company.

--
Brad Knowles <b...@shub-internet.org>
LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>

------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org

Reply via email to