[Note: My analysis of Apple Computer, and why I will not give a "pep talk"
to certain Apple Macintosh folks, is contained at the _end_ of this piece.
Skip forward if you like, or read my response to Bob H. to get the
background on why I am posting this.]
At 4:20 AM 8/6/96, Robert Hettinga wrote:
[much stuff elided]
>All of which brings up the *real* point of this rant. I mean, who *cares* if
>you can do crypto on the Mac or not? Why not stand back and watch the
>MacRubble bounce?
>
>My thinking about all of this started because I've been reading Vinnie's
>mail over his shoulder. (Yes. I'm shameless. When we're working on stuff
>together, we trade our mail about it. As they say in the Mac biz, "Sosumi".)
>That is, Vinnie's been out there scaring up speakers for this shindig that
>he "borrowed" the grenades for, and, well, in his tree-shaking (God help you
>if Vinnie shakes a tree you're in), he invites (if you could call what
>Vinnie sent an invitation :-)) Yet *Another* Nameless Cypherpunk (YANC) to
>come and give us what we hope would be a Patented Colorful Cypherpunk
>crypto-Peptalk, with Vinnie saying to him (YANC), in effect, we need him
>(YANC) for a proper Laying-On of Hands, him being a Piece of the True Crypto
>Cross, and all.
I have to assume you are referring to me, as I had an exchange with Vinnie
which resembles this. As you were given "over the shoulder" access to mail
I sent to Vinnie, by all accounts, I certainly will have no qualms
forwarding my correspondence on this issue to this list.
>Of course, Vinnie didn't stand a chance. If we *could* consider Vinnie for
>it, (which we can't, because he's on the selection committee) he might have
>earned the coveted 1996 Black Rhino "Mr. Kevlar" award (for courage in the
Oh, he "had a chance." He just wasn't very persuasive. And given that I
don' think crypto needs to be tied to the Macintosh platform (which is
dead, even though it hasn't yet topped over, and even though people like me
continue to use it), more is needed than "We need you." I'm not big on
charity, and Apple is truly a charity case.
>face of imaginary gunfire) for his efforts. Actually, considering the, heh,
>caliber, of last year's winner, it's just as well. A, uh, bang-up job Mr.
>Weinstein of Netscape did last year. A hard one to top. And so, the search
>continues. Both for this year's "Mr. Kevlar", and, of course, for some other
>Piece of the True Cross. Or so we think. I'll get to that in a moment.
>
>What Vinnie got from Yet Another Nameless Cypherpunk, instead of "Yes, I'll
>come talk about crypto, the universe, and everything.", was Yet Another
>Rendition of the Apple Macintosh Massacree. In six-part ;-) harmony, of
>course. And, no, I won't sing it here in its 21-minute (not even 17 for
Clever writing, to some, but empty of calories. My "Massacree" will be
included at the end of this message. Judge for yourself.
>radio) entirety. However, I should really note here that no matter how
>reasoned and cogent YANC's arguments were (and cogent they were, too: upon
>reading them, I was halfway to the dumpster with my trusty old PB180,
>tears in my eyes, before I came to my senses), in general, one of the *big*
>reasons that Vinnie got the $0$AD ($ame Old $ong And Dance) Re the Future of
>the Mac as a Viable Platform was probably more because the aforementioned
>YANC has eschewed speaking opportunities like this for years anyway, and
>Vinnie probably didn't ask him with the Proper Deference Necessary for a
>Cypherpunk of That Stature. In fact, I *know* Vinnie didn't, because I read
>his mail ;-). However, that, of course, wasn't why YANC gave Vinnie the
>aforementioned Massacree in particular.
Your future as a mind reader, Bob, is limited. It is true that I avoid some
speaking engagements which appear to be "hype" and "pep talks." But I also
have elected to give a few talks, incuding one in Monte Carlo which took me
several weeks to prepare for, and one at CFP '95, arranged by our own Prof.
Michael Froomkin.
>YANC Massacreed Vinnie because there's a lot of *very* disappointed Mac
>users out there, YANC being a prominent example thereof. Love the computer.
>Hate the company. Hell hath no fury like a Mac user (not to mention
>shareholder) scorned. Heck. I understand *that*. I did the *same* thing just
>over a year ago this week. "Platforms are Meat", and all that. For what it's
>worth, YANC, I *feel* your pain... :-).
I'm not sure what you're drinking, but you might want to lay off for a few
hours before sitting down to write.
>So, I repeat, why *not* stand back and let the MacRubble bounce? No, this is
>not a segue for me to stand up in my chair and start singing the Apple
>Company Song at the top of my lungs, complete with a QuickDraw-VR DOOM
>environment file of One Infinite Loop right up there on the screen for y'all
>to marvel at and play with using your very own Newtons, all while I sing 100
>Company Song verses with a six-part MIDI chorus of my own voice (Yechhh!).
>Nope. Not me. Indeed, I really *do* say, "Why not?". That is, let's look at
>what happens if people *don't* develop crypto for the Mac.
>
>The truth is folks, not much.
I agree. Not much to be done about Apple. Too bad, but it's not something I
can do much about. I've known some of the early Apple folks since 1977, and
first invested in them in 1984. (Though I sold 90% of my stock in Apple a
year or so ago, at $45, well above its current level.) In 1986, upon my
departure from Intel, I bought a Macintosh Plus, the closest thing I could
afford to a Symbolics 3600. (Interesting note: a friend of mine said she
just saw an ad for a Symbolics: $100 takes it away. Except for the
likelihood that it would cost far more per month to run it, I'd buy it.
Maybe I still will....) Then I bought a Mac IIci, a Powebook 100, a
Powerbook 170, and then a Power Macintosh 7100av. Mostly I've been happy,
as I had access to a windows environment (before Microsoft tried to patent
the name "windows"), visual metaphor (a la my Symbolics), and an adequate
supply of programs, including: Excel, Photoshop, Painter, Eudora, etc., all
of which made their appearance on Macs before on Windows.
However, the same windows/Lisp machine/Xerox/Smalltalk appearance which
Apple stole from the Xerox and MIT machines is now available in robust form
in the form of Windows NT machines, with huge market share and incredible
performance. (I am "loyal" to the computing metaphor, not to the current
market Apple has.)
>First of all, we all think it'll be Real Bad News for Apple Real Soon
>if real-live strong cryptography isn't shoved as far down as it's possible
>to make it go into the Mac's operating system, and right now, dammit. But,
As my message to Vinnie (below) points out, Apple blew a couple of chances
it has to incorporate crypto and security. For one, it announced some sort
of System 7 signature system...like a lot of Apple announcements, nothing
more was heard of it and it today merits not even the slightest footnote.
Second, Apple could've _owned_ the "Internet telephony" market which Intel
(!!!!!) is now touting so highly: Macintosh AC models (660av. 640av, all
PowerMacs) had extensive audio in/out capabilities, with DSP or CPU powers
sufficient to implement secure teleconferencing.
Instead, we got me-too products like "E-World," a now-defunct proprietary
version of Prodigy, and countless other "detour" products, including
OpenTransport, GeoPort, speech recognition (which doesn't really work, at
least not on my $5K Mac), the Newton, and endless catchily-named Apple
products.
>so *what*? The Mac's only, say, 5-7% of the computer market anyway, and the
>only possibly new, cool, stuff Apple's involved in, say, OpenDoc/Cyberdog,
>has 5%, maybe 10%, of *that*, so, who *cares*? Potential Mac crypto
>developers aren't effecting that many people at *all*. They would better
>spend their time doing CryptoJava++ or something, because there's *much*
>more market penetration *there*. Or, even better, developers should go do
>CAPI for Windows. I mean, that's where the *real* money is, right? So
>fergadaboudit, go write CAPI-code, I mean, Microsoft Gets The Internet Now,
>right? At least there'll be *active* developer support from the MotherShip,
>which is better than whatcha get from Apple ferchrissakes <He said, ducking
>a mysteriously appearing grenade fusilade from Vinnie's general direction.
>Can someone tell me *how* he pulls the pins and throws them all at once
>like that?>.
Bob, your rants lose effect when mixed with this Hunter S. Thompsonesque
writing style (" <He said, ducking a mysteriously appearing grenade
fusilade ..."). Maybe this comes from too much time spent in front of a
Macintosh?
[much more stuff elided]
>That's why Vinnie's going to fill that room in Cupertino. (On the 5th and
>6th of September, remember?) First of all, the developers who are left in
>the Mac market are there because they love it. The old guys, who, like me,
>can't get it up anymore, still hack Macs because they love them. The *new*
>developers hack Macs because they can't get leave it *alone* and don't know
>from market share anyway. They just love what they're doing.
Well, if you "can't get it up anymore," to use your words, maybe it's time
for you to move on to something else?
>Well, it looks like Vinnie, and all those room-filling Chuck-E-Cheese-
>Gopher-Banging Mac crypto developers will have to use their ears (or what's
>between them, anyway) to fly instead.
>
>Only this time, Dumbo's got a sack of grenades.
Well, good luck. For me, giving a pep talk to a bunch of tired old Mac
developers at a Chuck-E-Cheese--especially when I went to the first one, in
San Jose, in 1977-78--does not excite me in the slightest. After all, it's
not as if Apple people cannot come to the Bay Area Cypherpunks meetings (I
know of only one current Apple employee on our mailing list, actively, or
who attends meetings: Martin Minow).
I refuse to accept any burden of guilt for not volunteering to speak for 30
minutes at a conference which is poorly-defined to me and which would cover
material the attendees could get by subscribing to our list for a few days
or weeks or by attending a physical Cypherpunks meeting in the Valley.
I'm sorry (for Vinnie, never for me) that Vinnie is pissed off at me for
not helping out at his Let's Save Apple conference, and that Bob feels it
necessary to rant about this Mysterious Cypherpunk who won't Help the
Cause.
Life is tough. I'm available as a consultant, of course, and Apple is, as
always, free to hire me as a consultant.
Attached below is my major response to Vinnie. I would not have raised the
issue here on this list, except for Bob's post. Take it or leave it.
--Tim
At 9:52 PM 7/23/96, Vinnie Moscaritolo wrote:
>Cut the Bullshit, Tim;
I normally don't respond to anyone who tells me to "Cut the Bullshit,"
"Knock it off," etc. In fact, I deleted your message as soon as I saw
this....then a few minutes later I elected to retrieve it from Eudora's
trash folder before I had emptied the Trash.
I'll respond here, but not to "dammits" and "Knock it offs." If you want to
calmly discuss things, fine. Otherwise, I'll just add you to my filter
file. No harm done.
>I am having to pull teeth and do this a guerilla effort, but dammit If I
>have to do it alone I will. SO DONT GIVE ME THIS "I was not welcome on the
>list" crap, what I am trying to avoid is folks like dave weiner. who
>just bitch and dont offer any solutions. Most of what you say IS EDUCATED
>and needs to be heard. Tim if you sent me a message saying you want to be
>on the list, I would stop what I was doing and put you on in a second..
I'm not surprised you are having trouble pulling this together, for several
good reasons:
1. Apple is struggling, developers are focussing on Windows.
2. Crypto for the Mac is really dependent on a couple of main apps: mail
programs (Eudora, Claris E-Mailer, Lotus Notes, etc.) and Web browsers
(obvious name here). If you want Apple to be "in the game" on crypto, as it
clearly is not now, ask Claris why they are not supporting PGP or S/MIME.
3. And crypto is not really a "Macintosh" issue. The best programs are now
platform-neutral.
4. A "guerilla" program, absent a compelling need, is likely to generate
little support.
5. "Internet commerce" is indeed a Big Issue (and of course a massively
hyped issue). But it is unlikely in the extreme that the Mac could ever be
a central player...the focus is on Web browsers and other tools that
represent 95% of what Web users have. (Don't tell me about CyberDog...less
than 10% of the market has Macs, and probably less than 10% of them have
installed CyberDog. I don't personally know any Mac users planning to use
it. This may change, of course, but at this point its prospects are not too
bright.)
My point is simple: if your conference is the effective realization of the
goals of your Mac-Crypto mailing list, as appears to be the case (at least
to me), then I can't see how my discussion of political issues would be
consistent with your insistence that Mac-Crypto avoid issues that don't
involve coding.
(And I would not welcome the attention I might get at Apple if I were to
discuss what I know of "information liberation," including the NuPrometheus
League.) Friends of mine have been called by P.I.s investigating this
case.)
>>No "solution" predominantly on the Mac is a solution for the masses, who
>>are overwhelmingly using Windows today. (You surely know this...your
>>company is struggling to hold 5-7% of the new sales figure; you haven't
>>been above 10% for several years.)
>>
>
>so why do YOU use a mac? or do you.
I use a Mac, primarily these days to run Netscape, Eudora Pro, and a
handful of related tools. None of these are Mac-specific anymore, and in
fact the Mac is way behind in a lot of ways (e.g., automatic signing of
messages).
The Mac has perhaps 8-10% of the installed base, and something less than
this in terms of new sales. Of this 10% (charitably), I doubt more than 10%
has installed and used "CyberDog." So, perhaps 1% of users have access to
this (at least at this time).
(I don't know the % of Web sites hosted on Macs, but I know the Mac is
coming under fire there, too. Lack of "multi-homing," lack of Unix-type
robustness, and the power of NT servers, from what I read. In any case, Web
site hosting is not a major point of confluence with crypto issues. I know
Sameer Parekh and folks like him would laugh if anyone suggested they host
their sites on a Mac.)
I've watched with growing incredulity and confusion as Apple has gone off
on tangents which seem to have little value to its core customers. Sure,
some of these have succeeeded (QuickTime for one), but many are just
tangents, at least for the dozen or so home Mac users I know. For example,
OpenTransport, GeoPort, Publish and Subscribe, OpenDoc, Interactive Music
Toolkit, the Speech recognition stuff, and so on. Not to mention expensive
detours into the Newton.
(I don't fault Apple for pursuing these things; it's hard to know what will
be the Next Big Thing and all. What I fault them for is having a confusing
array of add-ons to the basic OS, with lots of confusion about what the
advantages are. I, for example, use plain old System 7.1.2, an external
28.8 modem, and fairly standard apps and tools. I see no need for GeoPorts,
OpenTransport, or any of that stuff. And when Apple stopped bundling the
System software with machines, and making upgrades free, and generating
multiple versions of System 7.5x, well, this all made my glad to just sit
all this confusion out.)
Can Apple do anything to "help crypto"? Not a thing, as near as I can tell.
Eudora is _still_ not putting PGP or S/MIME in in Eudora Pro 3.0, and
Netscape is doing whatever it is doing (as you know). Thus, all I care
about is what Qualcomm does with Eudora and what Netscape does with
Navigator. I don't care about what Apple puts in CyberDog, as I have no
immediate plans to use it as my browser or my mailer. I think I represent
about 80% or more of all Macintosh users, too.
>>I just don't see the point of trying to educate Apple people on something
>>so far from what they need to be doing.
>>
>
>Point is put up or shut up, I am giving you a chance to be heard, I dont
>give a flying hoot what you say, except that you make people aware of the
>issues. Tim dont you know that outside of cp very little is known about
>crypto-anarchy. and what it mean.. hey even if you hate the very essence of
>apple, (and I know your don't) you can helpbe part of the solution instead
>of part of the problem...
>
>
>so whats it gonna be.
I don't buy this notion that I have to choose to be part of the problem or
part of the solution. Nothing Apple can do really matters at this point, as
they've lost the leadership role they once had and are increasingly
"marginalized."
Crypto tools are platform-independent, ideally. Unless crypto tools and
algorithms are "built in" in some very usable way to Copland, say, there
just is no role for Apple. Sure, you lean on Steve Dorner at Qualcomm to
get crypto into Eudora in a more central way, and work with Netscape in
some way, but not much else is to be done.
(And Apple dropped the ball a couple of years ago with the "digital
signature" stuff they announced...I forget the name, but it was some kind
of certificate-based system, probably called something typically Apple-ish
like "OpenCertification" or somesuch. I think it was introduced in 1994 or
so, about the time the 660av and 840av were rolled out. Nothing more has
ever come of it, not too surprisingly.)
And speaking of the av-series machines, and the later PPC machines (of
course), Apple blew it by not developing this as an "Internet phone" sort
of thing. Here they have had av-compatible machines (speakers, microphones,
DSP functionality) for a few years, and yet Microsoft and Intel are
grabbing the headlines with "Internet phone" systems! Jeesh.
(This is not something that talking to the bottom-level troops at a
"crypto" meeting can do, this indicates the complete lack of vision at
higher levels.)
Apple consistently blows its lead, and is now becoming irrelevant. (I don't
plan to switch, so long as my Web-centric apps continue to run and updates
are provided. And I have too many thousands of dollars tied up in Mac
hardware, including the usuals several gigs of disk, CD-R, laser printer,
Powerbooks, etc. So, it'll be several years before I have to switch.
But that sure doesn't mean I have to be a cheerleader for a probably doomed
system. I first bought Apple stock the day after the Mac was unveiled, on
January 25th, 1984, and added to my holdings over the years. I finally
dumped 90% of my shares last fall, for $45. And I'm glad I did.
There is nothing Apple people can do to "help crypto" at this time. And the
only thing they can do to help Apple survive is to do just that, help it
survive. As for what that might be, at this late date, I'm fresh out of
ideas.
You may think this is Apple-bashing. I avoid bashing Apple in public, as
the issues and themes are well-known to all. But you have framed your note
to me as a call for me to "put up or shut up," implying I have some duty to
help Apple and the Macintosh succeed. I do not.
I am available as a consultant, of course. I doubt Apple needs more more
consultant advising it on corporate strategies, but this option is open to
you.
--Tim
Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
