Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Apple Not Up to It?



June 13, 2007 – Comments (15)

More on Safari:

Mere hours after Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) released Safari, "The World's Best Browser," for the Windows platform, to the general fawning of the national media, lightning-rod Apple bug-finder David Maynor has documented a half dozen bugs and a pair of potential security exploits. (He's not the only one, either.)

This is the kind of thing that would make national news -- if the flub were Microsoft's (Nasdaq: MSFT). But, of course, since it's Apple doing the screwing up, it's likely to be swept quietly under the carpet by the mainstream media. And if it resonates in the blogosphere, it'll be in the usual "So what, looser? Apple is teh aweseome," sort of way.

15 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On June 13, 2007 at 12:43 PM, KalakaGuy (< 20) wrote:

It's beta software, for Pete's sake!  The whole point of beta software is for a large community of open-eyed testers willing to deal with crashes, bugs, and glitches to experiment with it and pass along feedback to the company supplying the beta software so that it gets improved faster than a company's in-house staff (in far smaller numbers) can do it.  Articles that flame Apple for Safari for Windows without emphasizing it's beta software status are just trolling for hits.  If after a couple of months of beta testing and bug fixes, the browser still doesn't work well enough, THEN blast Apple as much as you'd like.Best,Russell

Report this comment
#2) On June 13, 2007 at 12:52 PM, TMFBent (99.25) wrote:

"These bugs have been verified in the current PRODUCTION copy on OSX (Safari 2.0.4)."

-Errata Security


And the point remains the same. The Apple fanboi base, as well as the mainstream media, scream bloody murder about any potential security holes in MSFT products, beta or not.

The difference is, only Apple apologists try and pretend it doesn't matter.

Report this comment
#3) On June 13, 2007 at 12:54 PM, TMFBent (99.25) wrote:

And more comments from the peanut gallery... (email)


Getting on the bandwagon and knocking Apple, while you own the
company that continues to fall behind in innovation.  When you have a
monopoly like Microsoft, what incentive it is to make yourself any
better.  We the pubic suffer, but of course it isn't Microsoft's time
we waste with their products when I'm constantly trying to get them
to work.  Have you ever tried an Apple computer?  Internet Explorer
is so slow.  Microsoft Windows is so aggravating and SLOW.  Your
stock price may go up some with your underhanded comments, but is it
worth your integrity?

Rich DelG*****

Report this comment
#4) On June 13, 2007 at 12:54 PM, Gildell (< 20) wrote:

Russell has it right. This is Beta software, and one should expect bugs.  When the release is final kick the tires, take it for a test drive and then complain.  As for the implication that Apple's OS security is an artifact of low market share, all of the real studies of this issue have documented that OSX is much more secure than Windows of any flavor.  This is not to say there aren't holes, but definitely fewer and smaller.  Don't take my word for it read check the experts.....  Michael

Report this comment
#5) On June 13, 2007 at 1:00 PM, Uruzone (94.24) wrote:

I agree with KalakaGuy. 

When you went to download Safari for Windows, Seth, did you happen to see the big words "Safari 3 Public Beta"?  Or how about in the title bar of the page itself: "Apple - Safari 3 Public Beta"? In case you missed those, perhaps you clicked on the button "Download Beta Now" to get your copy? Or were you perhaps emailed a link directly to the download page, where it only said "Download Safari 3 Beta" three or four more times?  Sheesh. It's BETA software.

Seth Jayson is a good, opinionated writer. But frequently - especially when it comes to Apple - he is in the same category of journalist as those who are spelling doom (or even glory) for the iPhone before they've even held one in their hands. We get half-truths and outright lies; conjecture with no supporting evidence. Exactly what was the "first page" you visited that was rendered so incorrectly in Safari 3 Beta, Seth?

I'm using Safari 3 Beta on my MacBook Pro right now. It is not perfect. I still prefer Firefox in many ways. But as a good Beta tester should, I'm tracking my experiences, forming comments, and reporting back to the developer.  I personally find this more responsible than running for a word processor within hours of download in order to hammer out yet another negative article on Apple for my bosses.

Report this comment
#6) On June 13, 2007 at 1:25 PM, JJMSpartan (99.86) wrote:

"These bugs have been verified in the current PRODUCTION copy on OSX (Safari 2.0.4)."

Interesting that all of his screen grabs are of Windows - not OSX.  Not saying he's full of it, but if he's going to make that bold statement about the bugs being verified on PRODUCTION OSX, then it sure would help his credibility to actually post screen grabs off an OSX version of Safari...

FWIW, the next time MS launches a beta version and the general populace starts finding bugs in it, will you write a similar schathing article about MS?  I don't seem to recall ever reading one of your articles where you rip MS for realeasing buggy beta software.

Report this comment
#7) On June 13, 2007 at 2:34 PM, BroadwayDan (98.08) wrote:

Did Rich DelG really write, "we the pubic" while disgracefully attacking your integrity?  Does he really think that you think your article is going to help move the price of a multi BILLION dollar stock like Microsoft?   I personally have Mac and LOVE it, but I have tons of Safari problems and couldn't agree more with Bent that Mac gets tons of passes and that Jobs is not a good person, though he is a great innovator.  I didn't see it but I hear the guy actually looked Bill Gates in the face and said those ads are not mean.  Those ads are pure genius - but they're as vicious as could be.

Report this comment
#8) On June 13, 2007 at 2:44 PM, tverhaar (< 20) wrote:

Love the reference to Mac users as "sheep." Let's see - Microsoft 95% market share, Apple 5% market share... whose noses are nuzzled into the wool in front of them, just following the crowd?

Report this comment
#9) On June 13, 2007 at 3:21 PM, interdyne (81.84) wrote:

This article is not worthy of the Motley Fool.  There are mistatements of fact: "security owed to obscurity".  Apple's OS X is inherently more secure than Windows in several ways including: requiring users type in their passwords before a program can be installed, preventing users from running as Root by default and others.  Apple's software does have security holes as does Windows software but Apple's OS X made several fundamental design decisions that Microsoft continues to be unwilling to make.

But the factual inaccuracies are the least disturbing aspect of this article. The snide tone, condescending demeanor and outright contempt that the author shows for Apple computer fans is reprehensible.  "iSheep", "fanboi" and "Apple is teh aweseome" are not the style or tenor of writing that I have come to expect from The Motley Fool.  

I thought that the idea behind TMF was simple analysis, ignoring hype and prejudice and helping the everyday investor understand and prosper in the stock market.  Does Seth Jayson's article accomplish any of these goals?

Report this comment
#10) On June 13, 2007 at 3:43 PM, ikkyu2 (97.84) wrote:

No steps to reproduce the bug(s) are published, on OS X or Windows.


Therefore, there is no bug.  What there is is a site that's getting an awful lot of hits.  I recall the last time this happened, when the MacBook came out - "Security hole in Apple's new WiFi."

Turns out that, yes, if you had physical access to the box and used the admin password to download and manually install a third-party hardware driver that was never even intended to run on OS X, you could end up with a compromised box.  But that's not how it was pitched to the public.  It was pitched as a vulnerability in the MacBook WiFi hardware, and it brought the "exposers" nationwide fame until they published the steps to reproduce.

Report this comment
#11) On June 13, 2007 at 4:42 PM, Iaato (< 20) wrote:

Well, when you lie down with dogs, you'll come up with fleas. Simple as that. 

Report this comment
#12) On June 14, 2007 at 11:53 AM, Uruzone (94.24) wrote:

Well said, mvolchok. Excellent point. I knew there was something simmering in the back of my head that I couldn't quite get out, and you did it for me. Editorials need to be clearly marked as such, or they're just irresponsible journalism.


I don't think I've EVER seen Microsoft react that quickly.


Report this comment
#13) On June 14, 2007 at 5:02 PM, orleofly (70.86) wrote:

I love the never ending argument about apple vs micro. I sympathize with the concept of apple as the alternative to an evil empire but you know what? They are just as evil as microsoft. Dont kid yourself in thinking they are some good guy company. They want to bilk you as much as any other big company. The apple product has failed me many times. Remember the ipod nano? Battery dead? Too bad throw it away! Hey but it looks cool right?

People defend apple in a weird religious way that is beyond frothy rabies like consumerism. Its a product people and its there to take your money with a minimal or decent return. Dont stick up for the company like they are your favorite uncle. Whatever was beautiful about apple when it started is long gone.

 If you want computing idealism buy a basic box and put linux on it. Jobs and Gates are equally bad in my opinion. Both of them produce buggy products but one of them is the underdog. John kerry and George Bush... they both suck and so can apple and ms.

Report this comment
#14) On June 15, 2007 at 3:43 PM, kmortelite (70.00) wrote:

When you get up and tout a Beta as the best thing since sliced bread (WAY faster than IE and FX), it kind of makes people expect it to be stable as well.

As much as I like owning Apple stock (not products), I for one would love to see the commercial he described.   

Report this comment
#15) On June 16, 2007 at 12:46 AM, Danwaywff (< 20) wrote:

The author seems more than a little upset about Apple, perhaps he's grown bitter from watching those MSFT shares ping-pong between $20 and $30 while AAPL became a ten-bagger over the same period. I'm willing to overlook his blunder in glossing over the fact that it's a beta release but I find his condescension offensive, particularly the use of the term "-boi." Surely he didn't know that that is a term widely used to describe gay people. I'd be even more miffed if I wasn't a married straight guy. This article should be rethunk and edited or simply removed.

As far as the substance of the article goes, I'd be interested to see if he could mount a straight-faced defense of Microsoft's pathetic Windows Media Player vs. the iTunes/Quicktime combo that the public can't seem to get enough of. That's not a beta, and don't try to tell me that hackers don't dream at night of a hack that would silence everyone's iPods, even temporarily. In fact, I dare say a true Mac hack would garner more press than yet another windows/explorer hack since the latter happens almost daily and the former has yet to happen at all outside of a "proof-of-concept", which is just another term for "trust me."

On a side note, I've been running OS X my mac close to 24 hours a day since 2001, always connected to the internet, and have made no effort to avoid the "dark side" of the internet. That is to say, I click on anything that interests me without a second thought as to its source. Not for one second have i sullied my machine with any of the buggy,annoying anti-virus software that a Windows machine can't survive a half hour online without. I'm happy to report that I've had no problems with any type of virus or spyware. Try that on your PC. At around 40 bucks a year I'd say I've saved around 200 bucks on that alone. Foolish indeed!

Dan T. Man 

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners