Wired News published a horrible story this morning. In Hide Your IPod, Here Comes Bill, author Leander Kahney writes:
To the growing frustration and annoyance of Microsoft’s management, Apple Computer’s iPod is wildly popular among Microsoft’s workers.
Now read the story. Read it carefully. (I’ll wait.) Note that the entire thing is based on an interview with one “high-level [Microsoft] manager who asked to remain anonymous.” From this one source, we are able to calculate with confidence that 16,000 employees at Microsoft’s Redmond campus own iPods and that management is ready to send teams of security guards out to locate anyone wearing white earbuds and send them to a re-education camp.
Well, having spent a fair amount of time around Microsoft’s campus, I can tell you that this story is mostly … what’s the word I’m looking for here? Ah yes, bullshit. I have no doubt that lots of Microsoft employees own iPods. But taking an offhand remark from an unknown source (who may or may not have a hidden agenda and who may or may not know what he’s talking about) and extrapolating it to the entire campus is just silly.
I’m fairly certain that senior management at Microsoft would rather that all Microsoft employees used something other than an iPod, which is why the Windows Media team is working so hard to come up with devices that could compete with the iPod and be called something like, I don’t know, “insanely great.”
One thing they teach you in Journalism 101 is that when you have a single anonymous source, you don’t have a story. That’s still true. When you’re covering a subject outside your normal beat (which appears to be Cupertino for this reporter), you can’t just talk to one person. And if you’re going to quote a post from Scoble’s blog, why not actually, you know, talk to Scoble, who actually publishes his cell phone number right there on his highly trafficked site?
Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.
Update: Paul Thurrott read the Wired News story and had the same reaction I did: “Hide The Truth, Here Comes Leander Kahney.” Meanwhile, Scoble says he declined Leander Kahney’s request for an interview. And a pseudonymous Slashdotter takes note of my remarks about not publishing a story based on a single anonymous source and comments, “Well, you’ll never get a job at CBS with THAT attitude, young man!” Heh.
Update 2: The Seattle P-I Microsoft Blog has a nice round-up of commentary on this story.
Update 3: Don’t miss Leander Kahney’s comments. He thinks Mac fans are “paranoid” and “defensive.” Imagine that…
Ed Bott 
“And if youre going to quote a post from Scobles blog, why not actually, you know, talk to Scoble, who actually publishes his cell phone number right there on his highly trafficked site?”
Scoble turned down their request for an interview. Presumably you could have found this out by asking him, before making this unsubstantiated claim. Scoble
“Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.”
We can’t argue with that.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with a single high level source, if you verify that the person is who they claim (presumably done here and you have no contrary evidence). Major publications frequently quote single, high-level sources. It’s pretty big news that iPod usage has gotten to the point where MS management have had to issue memos about it – and the source described and/or provided email evidence of such memos.
If there were any other evidence of any original reporting in this article, then the “single anonymous source” would be just fine. But there wasn’t any such evidence. Just a single thin interview stretched to absurd conclusions.
And a good reporter would have noted in the original story that Scoble declined to be interviewed for the article. Please note that I’ve updated my remarks.
“But there wasn’t any such evidence.”
What about the email from Fester?
What about Chris Anderson’s comments from his blog?
What about Scoble’s blog?
What about Mary Jo Foley’s comments?
What about the numerous quotes anmd not “one off-hand comment”?
What about the journalist stating that Apple and Microsoft declined comment?
It seems you’ve stretched your own writing to absurd conclusions. It’s seems your writing is all the more sloppy.
Dear Please,
If you honestly think that the Wired News story contained any serious reporting, you and I will just have to agree to disagree. Go through your list of sources:
Mary Jo Foley “said she had no knowledge of the iPod’s popularity on Microsoft’s campus.” Not exactly a supportive quote for the author’s thesis, is it? In fact, it says practically nothing. Chris Anderson and Robert Scoble both blogged about their personal ownership of iPods, and neither one said a word about being persecuted for it. Again, not exactly support for the thesis that huge numbers of Softies own iPods and are coming under fire for it. Finally, go read Dave Fester’s memo again. It doesn’t exactly support the thesis that Microsoft’s management is irked, frustrated, and annoyed. He’s the guy in charge of the division; he wants his managers to make sure that people know about what he considers great products from his division. Do I need a decoder ring to read the secret hidden message that says anyone who buys an iPod will be sent to Siberia?
I’m happy to hold myself to high standards in my commentary. But please note that I don’t claim to be a “news service.”
Oh, and you’re welcome to decline to use your real e-mail address, but giving yourself a fake email address that points to my domain is rude. I’ve removed the address (but left your comments untouched).
I disagree with you on two fundamental questions: the journalistic integrity of the piece and its thesis.
Firstly, journalistic integrity. It primarily has one source, but they are quoted numerous times, and you or any one has not provided any evidence to doubt its veracity. I don’t even think you are, so there should be no qualms there. The author also cites a well-known Microsoft analyst. The authur also cites an internal email from a high ranking Microsoft executive. The author quotes two well-known Microsoft bloggers. The author explains they tried to contact Microsoft and Apple, and that they refused comment. Sounds like a perfectly well written article to me.
Secondly, the thesis: you really claim this article is suggesting iPod owners are persecuted? Did you read it?
The article has a provocative headline but most stories do these days. Beyond that it paints a picture. Yes, he does provide Mary Jo’s comments despite your absurd theory and the fact that this comment flies in the face of it. The story doesn’t say anything about Chris or Scoble being persecuted, does it? The article says that the white earbuds can be seen around campus, doesn’t it? The article says the manager being quoted flaunts his iPod, doesn’t it?
All the iPod says… more precisely, suggests… is that management doesn’t like it. That they have encouraged the opposite. That some employees, particularly if it is sensitive to their work, feel they should keep a low profile.
It is you who is acting absurd by claiming such things as:
“management is ready to send teams of security guards out to locate anyone wearing white earbuds and send them to a re-education camp.”
“Chris Anderson and Robert Scoble both blogged about their personal ownership of iPods, and … [are] being persecuted for it.”
“Do I need a decoder ring to read the secret hidden message that says anyone who buys an iPod will be sent to Siberia?”
Yes, I do need that decoder ring. I think it is clear that Fester is “irked, frustrated, and annoyed.”
I don’t need a handwritten letter from Gates to know that they are “irked, frustrated, and annoyed.” That’s freaking obvious. To suggest the contrary is absolutely absurd.
Ed, you have a very narrow definition of “reporting.” Wired sought comments from Microsoft and Apple about what this high level source said – that’s reporting (i.e., trying to gather more information). Microsoft just refused to comment – which is not Wired’s problem.
Wired had a high level Microsoft source attest to a number of things – mainly about the consternation of Microsoft management about iPod use among Microsoft employees.
That’s called news – Microsoft management concerned. The fact they’re concerned shows lots of iPods are being used by MS employees.
Yes, it’s one source (a high level one). But how many sources are you going to find like this? Wired went to Microsoft and gave them an opportunity to deny this person existed or that Microsoft management was concerned about iPod use. They refused comment.
This is legitimate news. Like all news, it could be wrong. But it’s not bad or improper journalism. There’s nothing remotely improper or inadequate about it. It’s a single source. The reporter tried to gather more facts straight from Microsoft. He did his job.
OK, please find the substantiation for these statements, all of which appear in the story:
“16,000 iPod users among the 25,000 who work at or near Microsoft’s campus.” That’s absurd.
“So popular is the iPod, executives are increasingly sending out memos frowning on its use.”
One e-mail (not a memo) quoted.
And which paragraph is correct?
“[On] Microsoft’s leafy corporate campus in Redmond, Washington … Wherever you go, white headphones dangle from peoples’ ears.”
Or:
“Employees are hiding their iPods by swapping the telltale white headphones for a less conspicuous pair.”
They can’t both be true.
And if this reporter was walking around the Microsoft campus and saw all these folks wearing white earbuds, why didn’t he stop and talk to them? Oh, wait. I know. Because he wasn’t there! He made that part up! Heh.
Look, the iPod is a great product. It has 65-70% market share in the world. At Microsoft, according to this story, it has roughly the same percentage of use.
The PR departments at Apple and Microsoft refused to respond to this guy’s story. That was predictable. Meanwhile, this story is still based on a bunch of really convenient quotes from one anonymous guy, who may or may not be a senior-level manager and for that matter may or may not exist. Sorry, but the closer you look, the more this is just a hack job.
“One thing they teach you in Journalism 101 is that when you have a single anonymous source, you dont have a story.”
Are you too young to remember “Deep Throat?” (the Watergate source, not the movie). That was a single anonymous source and, well, it sure seemed like a story to me.
Funny, both you and Thurrott link to each other’s blogs and praise each other. FYI, Thurrott states that the Wired article is not true reporting but he is as far from a true reporter as you are. I’d be insulted to be in the same category as Thurrott. You seem to love it.
Both those statements can be true at once because they are referring to different size groups of people. The first refers to the whole campus overall, the second to those who work in an area that is a bit more sensitive to having iPods at MS.
Regarding the whole article, I didn’t take it all that seriously. It read more like a fun article that started from a single fact/source.
For bad journalism, check out this site
http://www.divisiontwo.com/articles/Macmini2.html. He confuses the shuffle with the mini; he thinks 40GB hard drives, CD writers, and video cards with 32MB vram were available in circa 1995; he calls OS X a stripped-down Windows CE OS; he doesn’t realize that weather programs on the Mac exist all over the place; and he rails against the mini for not having anti-virus, virus/malware removal software.
And he’s certified as an MSCE.
I was in Journalism school during the Watergate hearings, so yes, I remember Deep Throat. Go back and read All the President’s Men. You’ll find that Woodward and Bernstein did a lot of digging to corroborate what DT told them. Most of their stories started with a lead from DT and weren’t simply written based on that source’s quotes.
Standards today are, sadly, different. Mentioning this reporter in the same breath with Woodward and Bernstein is unfair to them.
From the inside, I see no evidence that the story is true. Microsoft encourages us to use products that support the WMA format, but I have never seen or heard of any discouragement regarging use of an iPod.
Bott, before responding to your new comments, I’d like to go back to our earlier posts. Primarily, you claim the thesis of this article is: people who use iPods on Microsoft campus are being persecuted. Are you backing off this claim? I see nothing like it in your latest quote. If you do back away from this, your concerns are rather minor. Let’s take a look…
“”16,000 iPod users among the 25,000 who work at or near Microsoft’s campus.” That’s absurd.”
Firstly, he is solely basing his math on the statements made by his source. Secondly, is it so absurd? I work for a small (150 people) non-technical company, and I would estimate 50% of the staff have mp3 players. Is it absurd to suggest that 80% of the most technically-oriented company in the world has mp3 palyers? Maybe… But even you seem to agree that 80% of those that do probably have iPods. Thirdly, you, Scoble, and Thurott are commenting on this, seem virtually hysterical. All of you say, “No way, no way.” But you don’t provide any evidence whatsoever either.
“”So popular is the iPod, executives are increasingly sending out memos frowning on its use.”
One e-mail (not a memo) quoted.”
And? Does the fact that only one email was quoted mean that none others have? No. Do people use the word “mem” generally to refer to internal office correspondance? Yes.
“”[On] Microsoft’s leafy corporate campus in Redmond, Washington … Wherever you go, white headphones dangle from peoples’ ears.”
Or:
“Employees are hiding their iPods by swapping the telltale white headphones for a less conspicuous pair.”
They can’t both be true.”
Sure, they can both be true. He didn’t say every iPod owner is swapping headhones. He said employees are generally feeling a need to go stealth, adn this takes on many forms. If two people swapped their headphones, both statements would be true, and it would still be true that iPods are prevalent at Microsoft but some are feeling the need to downplay that decision.
“And if this reporter was walking around the Microsoft campus and saw all these folks wearing white earbuds, why didn’t he stop and talk to them? Oh, wait. I know. Because he wasn’t there! He made that part up! Heh.”
How do you know? You don’t. Heh. And what part of this story requires that he did or is lying about doing so? If one person said: “You see lots of people walking around with iPods”, he’s not allowed to write that without verifying it for himself, even if it is plainly true?
“Look, the iPod is a great product. It has 65-70% market share in the world. At Microsoft, according to this story, it has roughly the same percentage of use.”
Yes, the story says that as well. But it’s 80%.
“Meanwhile, this story is still based on a bunch of really convenient quotes from one anonymous guy, who may or may not be a senior-level manager and for that matter may or may not exist.”
No, again, it is based on the one anonymous manager, Scoble’s blog, Chris’s blog, Mary Jo’s comments… Secondly, do you really doubt he exists? Is that your current assertion? That all the quotes, this guys position, are made up? You have zero evidence of that.
” Sorry, but the closer you look, the more this is just a hack job.”
The closer I look, you seem a pathetic and jealous man. Your posts are less credible and less verified. You make more absurd and wild comments (“persecution, Siberia, etc…”), and all you are doing is confirming the basic facts presented in this story.
You don’t need a PHD in Journalism to know, just because the Sun News Weekly says there are UFOs, don’t mean they are out there.
The press knew Scoble’s reaction to their request BEFORE they made it. This has been on his website since inception:
“Q: Why aren’t you talking to the press?
A: For a variety of reasons, biggest of all is that it’s in my employment contract that I not talk to the press without prior PR approval.”
So they know Scoble could not clairify.
“the Windows Media team is working so hard to come up with devices that could compete with the iPod and be called something like, I dont know, insanely great.
Well they have it half right, Microsoft has created ‘Insane Crap’
For years Thurrott has been telling us that the iPod would NEVER succeed and Microsoft would crush the iPod market. I find it very amusing to read article after article about the latest iPod Killer being introduced. Every one of these products just like Thurrott’s predictions DO NOT have any traction and continued iPod domination is an unassailable fact for now and the future.
The most hilarious part is Thurrott statement; “I’m tired of this style of journalism. People like Kahney just demean my profession.” I simply can’t see how this has any relationship to Thurrott’s profession as a pathological liar or as a mindless Microsoft apologist, he has mastered both of these categories and is the undisputed leader of both.
It appears that Ed Bott is attempting to get some shine while crawling up Thurrott’s butt. You can always tell when Microsoft is terrified because the same crew is alerted and given their “journalistic talking points” and the liars being their lies as usual. I look at sights like this as be best kind of humour, especially when someone even stupider than the authors seems to think there is some validity or truth in their mindless protestations.
Kevin, the article at http://www.divisiontwo.com/articles/MacMini2.html is a joke, a funny one at that. If you don’t believe me, read the other articles on the sight.
Loved the Wired article! Now I get to laugh here and still go laugh some more over Thurrott. A great day. Thanks!
Ed,
Are you going to keep changing your story? First, you claimed Wired failed to do any “reporting” work to attempt to verify the source’s statements. Then we showed that was wrong. Now, your claiming Wired or the source failed to provide “substantiation” for various points.
You seem to have a very odd concept of journalism. Journalists are not limited to reporting what can be proven definitively or “substantiated.” Journalists do have an obligation to make sure that something is not wrong – e.g., this source didn’t work at Microsoft, etc. That’s it. This was a high level Microsoft source who made statements of fact (mainly that Microsoft manangement is concerned about iPod use among Microsoft employees.) Those statements are news. They may not be true, but Wired did what it could to check them and Microsoft declined comment.
You have no basis for claiming that the source wasn’t real, or that he made up what he told Wired. As someone else pointed out, it’s not hard to believe: (1) a lot of MS employees have iPods and (2) MS management might not be too happy about it and would express that to employees.
It’s entirely plausible and a real source reported it to Wired. That’s called a news story.
Save your arguments about “proof” and “substantiation” for a different medium (like the courtroom).
For bad journalism, check out this site
http://www.divisiontwo.com/articles/Macmini2.html. He confuses the shuffle with the mini; he thinks 40GB hard drives, CD writers, and video cards with 32MB vram were available in circa 1995; he calls OS X a stripped-down Windows CE OS; he doesn’t realize that weather programs on the Mac exist all over the place; and he rails against the mini for not having anti-virus, virus/malware removal software.
And he’s certified as an MSCE.
This is a joke article dummy. Read some of the other stuff on the same site. Here’s a sample from “Ask Armelda Teen Advice”:
Almerda,
I am 13 years old from connecticut and i have a boyfriend i met on AOL who is 46. We haven’t ever met each other in real life yet, but he wants me to fly to come see him in floreda soon. problem is, i don’t have enough money to fly to see him, i don’t know how to explain to my parents that i’ll be gone for a week, and i’m 30 miles from the airport with nobody to give me a ride. Please help! I can’t tell my parents about Dan because they wouldn’t understand our love.
Paula
Dear Paula,
Something is fishy about this; I don’t like it one bit. You’re 13 and this man is 46 years old and he didn’t offer to pay for your plane ticket to Florida? What does he expect you to do, sell lemonade for the money? If he can’t cough up the dough to buy you a ticket to come see him, he’s not worth it, honey, and you should drop the bum this second. If, however, he does buy you an e-ticket, the best way to get to an airport is Interstate hitchhiking. There are a lot of lonely truckers on I-95 at night who would love someone to talk to.
Armelda
Man, Mac zealots sure do have a hard time with humor! For those who didn’t quite get it, the Division Two site is absolutely a parody. Try this on for size:
Mac Mini: The Emperor’s New Computer
By leaving out a USB keyboard and monitor, two things you may already have if you have an old Mac, Apple can shave some money off the price of its system components and the size and weight of its packaging. By using cheap Asian child labor to assemble the units, costs have been reduced even further. I would like to see them continue this trend, possibly strike a deal with China to use inmates to assemble the Mini for even less, like Lenovo does.
And Cliff, call me old-fashioned, but I still think that when you write something for a “news service,” that your “statements” should be accompanied by “proof” and “substantiation.” Not the kind of evidence that you need to send someone to prison, but enough for a reasonable person to think that you’ve made a compelling, well-supported argument.
Of course, I suppose you could have been writing a very clever parody. I may have temporarily lost my ability to distinguish actual argument from parody. In fact, maybe the whole original article was a parody. I mean, the author does have a blog called “The Cult of Mac” …
Actually, limiting news reporting to what can be supported by proof or substantiation would not serve any useful purpose and would in many ways be harmful.
For example, if the Wall Street Journal finds a high level Bush administration official that wants to remain anonymous but is willing to state for the record that the Bush administration is writing memos telling Treasury Dep’t employees not to talk about the dangers of the deficit, should the Wall Street Journal only report that if it can find another source that says the same thing, or “substantiation” of such memos can be found?
Obviously not, because the public interest is served by this information getting out. Requiring “substantiation” just limits information dissemination and debate, which is contrary to the public interest.
Sure, which mp3 player to buy is not as important as the deficit, but technology reporting is important to our economic welfare. It’s important that people understand the merits or demerits of products and companies that make products. It guides good economic decisionmaking, which helps our economy.
Another thing wrong with limiting reporting is that it’s paternalistic – it assumes that people would be better off not having this information, because it might be wrong or they can’t figure out that it’s wrong. But it’s better to let the information get out and people can judge it for themselves. Wired made clear that one source was reporting this – so the reader know that. They can attribute as much or little belief to it as the want.
If you want to argue what Wired reported is wrong, that’s fine (although I don’t hear you arguing that MS management is not concerned about its employees using iPods).
The problem is your claims that Wired violated some norms of journalism. In fact, what you’re proposing would actually be a disservice to the public.
Seems to me the problem is a propensity to believe the worst about Gates/Microsoft FIRST, then worry about facts later, if at all. Of the two dozen professional programmers I know, only two of them listen to music while coding. The rest tend to get in, get the job done, test it, and compile. Maybe the author could get a job at FoxNews next.
re: iPods
Does it really hurt that much to realize the digital music game is over for MSFT? Does it?
Well, then use Vaseline.
Yes, this was clearly an example of shoddy journalism. NO newspaper would ever publish a story so thinly sourced as this, with such obvious exaggeration (80% use iPODs? Come on). The writer could have spent an hour calling people at Microsoft and easily gotten a dozen folks who said this wasn’t true, but they didn’t.
That said, please don’t let this poor journalism make you think ALL journalism is bad. yes, there are some some journalists out there, like this one and a few who used to be at CBS, who aren’t very responsible, but in general, most of the reporters I know are very responsible. Unfortunately a few bad apples tarnish the whole profession.
The writer called MS and didn’t get an answer. He called Scoble and didn’t get an answer. He was supposed to keep calling people at MS and expect an answer?
80 percent was his estimate. Since iPods have 65 to 70 percent of the hard disk mp3 player market in the U.S., is that so hard to believe?
Newspapers do publish single-source stories, all the time.
The main thing the source was saying was that MS management is upset about the fact that lots of MS employees are buying iPods. How many MS sources would be willing to say this? Wired found one person, who attested to something completely plausible (MS management upset about iPod usage of MS employees).
I guess you didn’t get my attempt at trying not to take everything so seriously.
“Regarding the whole article, I didn’t take it all that seriously. It read more like a fun article that started from a single fact/source.
For bad journalism, check out this site…”
And to refer to me as a Mac zealot having a hard time with humor!!! Whose calling the kettle black? First, I am not a Mac zealot since I work with a Windows PC everyday. But regardless, maybe Windows PC zealots are feeling a bit under siege these days.
And I was serious about those two “contradictory” statements both possibly being true.
Please corrects the author on quite a few mistakes.
Example: “They can’t both be true.”
Yes they can.
I can give anecdotal evidence: I have witnessed senior Microsoft employees walk out of a meeting when an otherwise completely qualified vendor made the mistake of demoing some work using a competitor’s product.
This article is not surprising, and not obviously a stretch. Some people just can’t take it when the shoe’s on the other foot.
The way I read the figures was:
80% of MS employees have an MP3 player.
80% of MS employees with MP3 players have an iPod
You seem able to ridicule those figures and dismiss them out of hand.
Lets see now.
16000 out of 25000 is 64%
80% of 80% is 64%
iPod marketshare is 65% to 70%
Seems like a pretty good match to me. There have to be a few more musical dunces on the MS camp than the average population.
Please: your defense of the journalistic merits of this article amuses me. Out of a company of 25,000 employees the thesis of the article is primarily backed by the statements from one “high-level” employee. I don’t know about you, but I have a hard time believing that a single employee of known limited influence within the company can accurately represent the personal comsumer habits entire company’s employees.
As an example, I personally know a guy who is fairly “high level” employee at IBM as a Senior IT Analyst. If I told you that he told me that 64% of the employees in his multi-national company use Verizon cell phones, how accurate would you expect that statement to be? Would you expect that I would be able to call up IBM, ask to speak to a senior executive (who might be able to possibly verify such information or direct me to somebody who could), and not get rejected immediately, thus recieving ‘no comment’. I think even a New York Times journalist would have trouble with that one.
You’ve got a problem with this kind of reporting (just heard it from a single undisclosed source at ms) and then you say Paul Thurrot (the king in this kind of ‘journalism’) agrees with you…
although I agree with the initial statement you’re trying te make, it proves that you’re not serious about your statement and you’re as biased as the article on wired you hate so much.
“The pot calling the kettle black”
Looks like your karma is turning on you….
Note to the MS apologists:
Why don’t you go beyond the 80 percent estimate provided by the source? That seems to be all you can talk about. Yet that was not the biggest part of what the source said. The biggest part was probably that memos have been issued reflecting concern by MS management.
This is a typical lame debate technique you use when you don’t have much to work with – go after the weakest or most easily challenged part of what the opponent is saying and then ignore the rest . LAME
Apple zealots will always like to hear lies from tabloids like wired magazine, and wired magazine will produce news apple zealots like to read. I don’t see the problem. Certainly Wired is not a serious magazine and certainly it has never been one. I don’t see the problem here. This is not the first time Wired produced such false articles. Look to other online tabloids, they all produce such “news” from time to time. I particularly know that some of them produce deliberately just to get more hits from slashdot. Wired is not different.
Apple zealots are insecure people. They want to feel important and to do that, they continously bash others. The world ignores them though.
“Apple zealots are insecure people. They want to feel important and to do that, they continously bash others. The world ignores them though”
Yes, that’s why everyone constantly talks about how low apple’s market share is but how much press they get? Or that practically every tech news source in the world has run stories on the ipod, and more recently the mac mini.
Yep, we are starved for attention and seek it out constantly.
As for the response given to Leander’s article I think everyone knows how shoddy and opinionated Paul Thurott’s supposed journalism is (he’s like a walking microsoft billboard, or you could say he’s the microsoft equivalent of an apple zealot), and linking to him doesn’t do much for your own opinion on the article Ed.
Oh My Gosh! I thought this was a free country. Shouldn’t anyone have the right to buy the player of their choice regardless who they work for? I’m sure when the Sony Walkman came out plenty of people from competing consumer electronics companies bought them as well. I’m sure that Bill Gates would even agree that there is nothing wrong with buying using and owning an Apple iPod. So what that it doesn’t use WMA. The point is that it plays the music that the owner wishes to play and stores their contact and to-do list as well as notes. What’s not to like? There are probably plenty of Apple employees that own XBOXes too. Should they be fired for that???? I say, let them eat cake!
Correction—
Doesn’t play protected WMA, iTunes gladly converts unprotected WMA files. So there! Lastly, an iPod is a great accessory for Mac Mini’s. Especially since it can be used as a backup bootable drive. As well as general purpose firewire drive. How many competing players have bootable firewire, autosyncing contact and to-do capability and can easily switch between it’s native OS and Linux??? Not too many!
The iPod, a peripheral that is also a platform. For that alone, it deserves all the props. Microsoft doesn’t make mp3 player so it’s really no skin off their teeth. They have there high demand Xbox and Apple has their high demand iPod. Everybody wins except the suckers that try to make competing hardware against the iPod while relying on Microsoft’s cheesy slopware. Microsoft should make joysticks, mice and Xboxes and leave the software to the professionals in Cupertino.
Huh, look at all the feedback this entry got relative to the other entries… you should cover Apple-related news more often.
Hmm. Bad Journalism meets bad journalism. Can Bott or Scoble come up with accurate figures to debunk Kahney? At least bloggers actually tracked down the fake CBS memos.
I think the real is where does Wired come off telling us that 20% of MSers don’t own MP3 players! Or perhaps, they are just ashamed to admit that they actually own a playsanywhere device..
One thing that bothers me is that people read an article like this and believe it outright. First of all why would you believe it? Is there some agenda on your part to believe such tripe? I mean it’s really tripe. For the poeple that say “come up with alternate proof”. I wonder if that’s what they said durring the Salem witch trials???? Lame journalism and this isn’t a mac or windows zealot. I use a mac , windows,and linux pc. Wanting to believe a lame story just because it’s about Microsoft is in itself lame…