what the heck is rixstep
 

http://rixstep.com/1/
their little articles are very harsh but when i double check whats written there on my own machine it checks out. their software i have looked at is also pretty nice. all the other google results basically bash it (rixstep) does anybody know about it?

Rixstep is a pretty terrible site, honestly; they're practically the Fox News of the Mac world. I see sensationalist, extremely arrogant, negative Rixstep headlines on MacSurfer practically every day, and without fail, the articles are just as bad.

Avoid.

They really should get their facts straight. You don't need to reboot to trigger a system login item, the mechanism existed way before Tiger, and you hardly need to install XCode to whip up something to run with it.

But frankly, I agree completely with them being harshly critical of Apple ignoring these things. Their comparison of this to login hooks and StartupItems is bang on. After Opener, there is no excuse for this still existing, no excuse for the whole "repair permissions" crap that could be hit from so many different angles in Tiger -- everything that is made possible by making sensitive areas writable by "admin" group members without a password.

Since Apple only seems to fix security issues if they make slashdot or some other high profile site, I would grudgingly concede that a site like rixstep is doing a service by being negative and sensationalistic.

See, that's the thing. They're not "harshly critical", they're "mouthy, arrogant, and oftentimes flat-out wrong". They've also got you buying into the "Apple ignores all kinds of OMFG IMPORTANT things, GOD Mac OS X sucks so much" B.S. that they spin so much.

If one were only to read Rixstep, one would think Apple were staffed by retarded monkeys. Seeing as how that's not true, I'm pretty sure I'm not wrong here.

Which is also totally untrue.

Negativity and sensationalism exist to draw attention to yourself, not your cause. (Why do you think I compared them to Fox News?) They're doing themselves a service, not Apple, not the community, and not Mac OS X.

Other sites report on problems without the same degree of contemptuous derision toward extremely hard-working engineering teams. What makes Rixstep somehow better for the community or Mac OS X than anyone else? I posit that all they do is whip up users into a rabid frenzy, since they don't have any real pull on the processes that drive engineering at Apple.

Rixstep is self-serving, oft-inaccurate, shortsighted, hyperbolic noise.

Edit: Here you go, this is the perfect example of how batshit insane Rixstep is:

http://rixstep.com/2/20060403,00.shtml

John Gruber's one of the sharpest Mac/tech writers around, and Rixstep calls him "gay" and an "idiot". You decide if you want to take anything Rixstep says seriously.

...wow.

Seems like Rixstep is staffed by 13 year olds judging from that article on Gruber.

One thing I wonder--did Gruber ever write a piece of his own in response to that?

I hope not! Why even bother dignifying that with a response? The insults show the author to be immature. The incoherent rambling shows the author to be uninformed and incapable of producing a valid argument. There is no reason to respond to drivel like that.

Thanks for that. Wow, I see your point. Up to now, I had only seen malware related postings linked from other sites and had never really perused the whole site before. Cheap shots as in personal attacks directed against individuals represent a lack of class. Definitely uncalled for, and I will keep this in mind if I come across any more of their articles in the future.

I do think Apple needs some public shaming though (hopefully from a more credible source), or else we'll probably end up having to pay for "new security features" in 10.6 that should have been patches in 10.3.

Apple already provides critical security updates for free for Tiger, even though it's EOLed. You're confusing features with the resolution of severe defects, which is (no offense) something Rixstep has a habit of doing.

Apple works really hard to build and support their products. No software is perfect, no process is perfect, and no engineer is perfect. Why? Because they're all human things. Shaming is what you do to neighbourhood bullies and other people who act maliciously. Apple's not purposely doing bad work--but Rixstep would have us believe that they are.

Apple doesn't need "shaming", they simply need people that calmly, precisely, and civilly discuss security problems discovered after the products are released. This happens already; Rixstep is useless and perhaps even counter-productive in a way due to the negative, unappreciative, shortsighted attitudes it promotes. They're not adding to constructive discussions at all.

edit: I'm really glad this thread happened. No sarcasm. We need more Grubers and ArsTechnicas and far fewer Rixsteps.

...I read this line and was like "...wha?"

Uh. I've ran OS 8 AND OS 9 for days and days before ever experiencing a system crash. And Mac OS 8.x was pretty rock solid, in my experience.

If there's one site I wish Apple could knock down with a lawsuit, this has to be it.

Let's not go overboard here. Rixstep sucks, but there's no reason to sue them. (IANAL, but I doubt there would even be a solid argument.)

Those older OSes were pretty unstable; the lack of protected memory space and the ability for an application to talk directly to hardware meant that any app crash or malfunction could take the whole shebang down, but that wasn't really the point of the paragraph you quoted. No, the author's point was simply to pen a spiteful attack. See, the article has nothing to do with who's right and who's wrong about Some Specific Technology. Just like all Rixstep articles, it's about feeding the downright mean author's over-inflated ego. If he's going to ask what someone else's qualifications are, what are his qualifications for being a total douchebag?

In the end, strangely enough, my old Performa running System 7.5 seems more stable than Rixstep.

While we're at it, let's cover more bases you guys might not know about ol' Rix:

Rixstep steals content from respected NeXT and Mac OS X developers:

http://blog.infurious.com/2007/12/

Now, the link that post references doesn't work, but this one does:

http://www.stepwise.com/SpecialCover...C99/index.html

Daniel Jalkut of Red Sweater Software can be cocky at times (I'm guilty of that, too), but he's always got a good point to make and he's a damn fine developer. Rixstep again fails to understand the difference between constructive criticism and being a jerk:

http://rixstep.com/4/2/marsedit,01.shtml

Read it twice. Instead of talking about the SOFTWARE, Rixstep goes on an OCD rant about a few hundred kilobytes on a disk image and takes shots at the developer. He says not one thing about MarsEdit itself. Not one.

Toxic Software has a great write-up of Rixstep that you all should read:

http://toxicsoftware.com/a-special-kind-of-idiot/

alright thanks everyone for being knowledgeable about this before i fell into the rabbit hole
:o

I would agree, but being one who designs interfaces for a living, there is more to an OS than its underpinnings. Yes, the earlier OSes were indeed unstable, especially with unprotected memory. However, the interface was almost perfection. OSX brought in a reinvented wheel which changed from version to version. Now, it is inconsistent in many areas. Here are a couple...

Back button does not adhere to the DSStore settings, but maintains previous state. Using keyshortcuts work correctly.

Spotlight returns entire drive rather than folder inspected. In some windows, it is the opposite.

Global settings for folder views is inconsistent. A global setting is not a true global setting. Such as creating a new folder does not adhere to the desired "global" setting.

Keyboard shortcuts are available for some menu items, but not all. What is or is not comes at the whim of the developer with no control for the user.

Window design is inconsistent. GarageBand, for example, looks totally different than any other window.

In my job, such inconsistencies are immediately identified and promptly fixed. I do not know what Apple has been waiting for all these years.

You can assign a keyboard shortcut to anything that appears in a menu in the Keyboard & Mouse preference pane, under the Keyboard Shortcuts tab. I can't remember if this is a Leopard-only feature or not, though.

Sometimes inconsistencies are permissible when the context warrants it. I'm not sure that Garageband is the best example for making your point, since many of the so-called "inconsistencies" in Garageband are there to make it easier to use for the musician. I agree that there are definitely inconsistencies, I just don't necessarily think Garageband is the best example to cite.

point of thread -----> .




you ---------------> o|-<



(only messing around, don't kill me, just having some fun in an otherwise dreary thread ;))

Being consistent is good, but let's not get OCD about it. It isn't the key to good UI design. I prefer it when different apps look different. It makes it easy to see which one is in the foreground. ;)

Oh, just because I'm feeling like a jerk at the moment... GarageBand is different for a very good reason. A "Garage Band" is usually a rock thing, and most rockers identify with the whole wood decour and trimming (reminds me of a guitar or a really good old tube amp or perhaps the housing for my old record player.) It makes the whole program feel more intimate, approachable and (frankly) cool.

I also tend to think that since it's the only program that is really all the different, Apple must have done it on purpose.

Also, in regards to rixstep: I read his review of MarsEdit 2.1. Does this man speak English? I think he was making fun of someone for perceived errors in packing a .dmg, but I could be mistaken. For all I know he was discussing the mating habits of Rhesus monkeys.

After reading it thrice, I realized that he wasn't even going to review the software until they developer learned to pack the .dmg to his liking. Yeah, that makes sense. You know, I one saw a Bugatti Veyron being delivered on the back of something that looked like a modified garbage truck. Not the best packaging. Oddly enough, I'd still take the chance to drive that 1001 bhp beast in a heart beat.

Truly, there was never a greater idiot than rix.

Edit: I read the entry from toxicsoftware, and I'm afraid I might have mistyped, so I wanted to try it again:

THERE WAS NEVER A GREATER IDIOT THAN RIX!

As a side note, I'm in a fairly nasty mood right now. So perhaps I'm being a bit unfair...maybe take away the exclamation mark at the end of the sentence...I dunno. :)

:eek::eek::eek::confused::confused: I think zalister's having a midlife crisis *runs away screaming*

I certainly hope to live past 50, but I guess we never know...

i just really don't like the tone over at rixstep, there's really no reason to act like that. It's extremely divisive. None of that criticism will ever amount to better software, and I don't like that.

Never having visited Rixstep before, I can state categorically that I never will again. Regular readers of that tripe probably read the scandal sheets at supermarket checkouts too.

They're your basic fanboi nightmare alright but none of you dug deep enough. The Jalkut articles were in response to an arrogant and vicious attack by Jalkut on Ankur Kothari who'd written an impressive article on how Mac developers were bilking their customers; the Gruber articles were provoked by Gruber's arrogant attacks on several respected journalists and on Avie Tevanian; and as for Gruber being some kind of respected technical expert - forget it. He's an object of ridicule in the security industry. Rixstep have provided the free CLIX to undermine snake oil salesmen on the platform, have produced the only file management tools that get at everything, provide the free AWS web services, they've written software for Rob Griffiths - and if they want to take some people down a notch they're well entitled to it. No one needs that kind of "Mac blogging" anyway.

P.S. Most of the later comments in this thread are pure rubbish. Knock on wood they don't make a spectacle of you.

You last line was gibberish (though I'm assuming it refers to me). And the only thing I hate more than the fact that you insulted me is the fact that I just downloaded CLIX and it looks really useful. That pisses me right off! I've been trying to figure out UNIX for a while now, we'll have to see if this does the trick.

All the same, I don't appreciate the tone of the author of Rixstep, nor do I appreciate the ad hominum attacks he indulges in. I've never thought experience was an excuse to be a jerk, and I don't think CLIX will talk me out of that sentiment.

LOL! That's a major endorsement of the man.

wow zal just tore the newbie a new one :D

You registered under the name "Fairly" just to post this, and you sound exactly like Rixstep. Either you're drinking their kool-aid or you are Rixstep.

Either way, this thread has pretty much run its course at this point. We've demonstrated how awful Rixstep is, had a bit of discussion, and now we've had someone register just to post an incoherent, inflammatory response. What's left? Should I get some popcorn to watch the inevitable explosion?

Probably not, I was expecting that you were going to be the inevitable explosion. I'm already spent! :rolleyes:

BBBBBOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMM!!!!

....

done

I want some popcorn


Anyways isnt this the part of the thread where we talk about kittens or somthing

Mikey is the one who must invoke caturday.

Lies!!! Lieeesssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No matter what one's agenda is or how important the point, a negative presentation will do more to shoot it down than anything else.

You messed my quote up.

I try not to get caught up in the hype. I mean I know that OS X isn't bullet proof but these so called "exploits" that people publish I try to mess around with them to see what goes on. Mostly, I end up getting no where in the OS.

Plus I use things like mcx and casper to help administer my computers and from a security stand point it is very robust.

I think that there are some loop holes in OS X, but if they were so obvious why don't we see hackers claiming fame by hacking into OS X servers? Writing viruses and exploits to hack into the OS?

I mean if these so called obvious security holes were really there, then why aren't they being exploited?

What irony: the "toxic" guy complains how Rick got it wrong about him being from Texas... and then he proclaims that Rick is Swedish. :eek: Rick ain't Swedish folks... and i don't think he ever claimed to be. He may haved lived there, taught programming, worked and possibly wed there... but he was not born a Swede.

Anyway, what has all that silliness got to to with anything useful? If you ignore the flames, there is a lot of factual food at that site. And he's an equal-time basher... Microsoft gets roasted every bit as much. (If Rick seems to write more about Apple, perhaps it's due to his deep admiration of the now-defunct NeXT operating system).

If you just focus on the flames you'll miss the more useful content. (Whatever turns you on Mikey).

He's an idiot and reflects poorly on the community. You aren't going to change my mind.

Which Rick? This Rick?

http://www.motifake.com/demotivation...1230798458.jpg

I, for one, prefer to get my useful and factual information from a source which doesn't require "ignoring the flames", regardless of the target of said flames. I'm beyond tired of reading the same old Microsoft bashing threads as I am of reading the same old Apple bashing threads. And the "new" bashing threads are pretty much the same thing, perhaps with a bit of borrowing from the other side.

That said, anyone know a good, snarky site with a focus on BeOS?

HAHAH BeOS I vaguely remember that.

I agree too, there is just a lot of elitism with some people and technology. I have met people that hate apple because they try to look cool? I was like, well if you don't like the design then don't buy it, and he was like, no they look cool, but I don't like things that try to look cool?

Yeah, totally makes no sense.

I also don't like getting the info from Apple or from MS them self either. Since I work with Apple a lot and I do get certain things in advance and that I have full enterprise support subjects me to a number of NDAs. I think I have signed maybe 5 NDAs this year just for Apple. At least MS doesn't make me sign any NDA, the NDA is just implied in the EULA for their beta products and once its public they don't even care.

The good thing about this is though is that I get to input my personal thoughts into the products from these companies and sometimes get enough input and support for new feature requests.

What I hate is when someone gets off on a tangent and totally loses sight of anything constructive. While, I did enjoy reading MOABs, and I won't ever drink Apple's kool-aid, I do also think that some of these people just want to bash Apple.

Same thing goes for Microsoft. I mean yeah Windows is Windows and it has it's problems but it also has technology that is great for the end user that is not available on the Mac, mainly lots of APIs that allow developers direct robust access to hardware resources. Of course Apple is now throwing those bones, with things like Core Animation, but developers are still a bit reluctant to hop on board.

This is kind of a random off topic rant, my bad

Hey... no "rickrolling" please! :rolleyes:

Yes yes... but that's so obvious it doesn't even need to be said. What i find wasteful is spending 100% of the time discussing the 15% of the troll bait being served, while acting as if the other 85% has no technical merit at all. Whereas the other 85% does in fact have technical merit, often more so than many other (similar) sites.

Hey, i think Gruber is a bit of a bozo sometimes (versus others who seem to believe he's God's favorite nephew or something). But i'm not gonna start a thread devoted exclusively to Gruber's bozo-ness. I just take whatever useful info he has to offer and chuck the rest away.

We would all "prefer" people to be perfect and polite and all that... but the world seldom works that way.

Well when people start to get unilateral tunnel vision about something, how much accurate can it be?

I can agree with you that some of it has technical merit, but having worked directly with Apple engineers and bringing up such things a lot of these exploits or bugs do end up going no where, while some of them are also pretty damn valid.

I just wish there were more non partisan, non fanboy or anti-fanboy articles out there. I mean when I try to explain the benefits of running a Mac to one of my PC-centric friends they get caught up on some real non issues in my opinion because of that partisan bias people put out about platforms.

I don't think OS X is perfect and I don't think it is the best OS out there. I think it is a good OS and I think that Apple makes a great product but lacking in certain areas. I know that apple script exploit I saw first hand, and well, no more apple script access or automator for that matter either for students. They abuse it, rather than use it.

I do agree with you though that even some of these biased computer people can still put out good information. I do have to stop and think how much of it is egocentric and how much of it qualifies for media attention and how much of it is actually genuine, and then at that point I get bored and go onto something else.

And sometimes the reply to reported bugs is: "it works as expected".

I really can't get into my dealings with the engineering side of apple since I am under NDA, but I can tell you that with out proper support (pay for or tier 2 etc) I am pretty sure it is their standard practice to not show defects in a product.

I had so many problems with Work Group Manager and discovered a bug, a major bug, and it was filed for fixing down the road is the answer I got.