The Macalope

Now PCWorld’s Robert Strohmeyer says Safari download stat is pure hype.

I know I’m cruisin’ for some abusin’ at the hands of the Mac fanatics today…

Ha-ha! They are wacky when you’re an incredible jerk, aren’t they?! But it’s not only them, Bob. The 1950s called and they said it’s high time you stop talkin’ like ‘dat. And also they said you should sit on it, Potsie.

This time, all the major tech outlets are credulously reporting on this morning’s press release from Apple, which heralds the runaway success of Safari 4 on the basis of 11 million downloads in three days.

Now, I’m not doubting Apple’s numbers.

Ah, so you just don’t know the meaning of the word “credulously” then. Got it.

But as someone with three Macs at home, I couldn’t help but notice that Apple pushed Safari 4 out as an automatic update to all of its users this week.

Bzzt. It’s not an “automatic update”. If it were an “automatic update”, people would be rightly up in arms because Apple overwrote their browser without asking. It’s a update notification. The user gets to decide whether or not to install it.

Which is pretty much exactly like what Microsoft and even Firefox do. So what’s your point again?

An informal poll of my friends and colleagues reveals a whole lot of the same. Got the update dialog, downloaded and installed it, don’t intend to use it.

So so far we’ve determined you don’t know what “credulously” means and you don’t know what “automatic” means. Looks like someone needs to get a word-a-day calendar for Christmas.

What is at issue is the ridiculously thin claim that the latest Safari is a wild success on the basis that Apple basically pushed it out to everyone it possibly could, whether they wanted it or not.

…

???

!!!

Arrrgh.

What is it about this relatively simple process that’s so confusing, Bob? Software manufacturer notifies user an update is available, user decides whether or not to download and install it.

Unless you’re just saying that people who have Safari installed — including, apparently, you — are incapable of making binary decisions on their own. That’s an interesting theory, but one that doesn’t paint you in a very good light.

The one person the Macalope knows who might fall into this category is Mrs. Macalope. But her default setting is “no”. Every time the software update window appears she ignores it. It sits there bouncing away in the Dock and somehow she manages to ignore it. Meanwhile, the Macalope, sitting next to her on the couch CAN SEE NOTHING BUT THE BOUNCING ICON IN MRS. MACALOPE’S DOCK. OH, MY GOD! WHEN IS SHE GOING TO CLICK ON THAT AND AT LEAST MAKE IT STOP BOUNCING?! CAN’T SHE SEE IT?! HAS SHE LOST HER PERIPHERAL VISION?! DID SHE HAVE A STROKE?! SHOULD THE MACALOPE RUSH HER TO THE HOSPITAL?! AFTER DOWNLOADING AND INSTALLING THE UPDATE?!

But even she’s making a decision — she’s choosing to ignore it. How she does that for an entire episode of Weeds, the Macalope has no idea, but she does.

This very clearly echoes the last big Safari update, which Apple also pushed to unsuspecting users through its update tool.

Wrong again! Good Lord, it’s like the only thing you got right in this pointless rant was your name (if you even are Robert Strohmeyer).

That was an instance of Apple including new software (i.e. Safari) for users that only had iTunes or QuickTime installed. That was wrong and the company shouldn’t have done it. But the Safari download statistic is just as valid as the download statistics for any other browser. Every single one lets the user know there’s an update and asks them if they want to download it. If not, then the vendor is doing it wrong.

Like you in this piece.

Gah. Look, Strohmeyer may be a very nice guy and he may legitimately think he’s got a point here, but two trolltastic pieces in one day, PCWorld? You’re on notice.