John Gruber has taken on The Omni Group. He’s called OmniFocus vaporware and reiterated his point after Omni denied that OmniFocus was vaporware. I admit that Gruber is technically right by the terms of the definitions of vaporware that he presents. I don’t, however, feel that he is right. I think that vaporware, like, porn is a bit harder to define. I can’t offer a definition but I know it when I see it.

What I dislike most about Gruber’s article is that it appears to take a stance against pre-announcing anything at all. Is pre-announcing really a bad idea? Gruber points to Apple’s iTV as vaporware simply because it was pre-announced but not yet shipping. I have to step back and be a bit incredulous. The iTV was shown in actual physical form. Apple is obviously working on it and going to get it out. If I don’t see it in a year or so, then I’ll be willing to call it vaporware. Until then, it’s just pre-announced.

I think that’s the problem with Gruber’s (and everyone else’s) concept of vaporware. Unless it’s being sold and in the hands of consumers, it doesn’t exist. This strikes me as somewhat like a movie poster being displayed or a film trailer being shown and someone saying “That movie is vaporware.” There’s proof that something exists and that something is likely to be available soon. It isn’t vapor.

And really, what’s wrong with a software developer asking a few questions on its blog? I’ve certainly speculated about areas where I’d like to explore, programming-wise. I’ve dropped ideas for applications that I’ll probably never develop. But I’ve also dropped ideas for some that I do. Does mere speculation mean that I’ve engaged in vaporware? I’ve certainly never promised anything, just tossed a few ideas around. I’m not really tossing this into the argument, I’m just curious where the line is drawn. I think this could go either way depending on definition.

Back to the problem, there’s a lot of Mac-apps that could be considered vaporware. Delicious Library was certainly announced well ahead of its availability. Disco was announced ahead of time. These, however, have shipped. Are they lumped in the same category as Duke Nukem Forever or is their vaporware status revoked on launch?

I think that Gruber is missing a significant potion of the definitions of vaporware. In what he provides, many have a part along the lines of: * “because it is only a concept” * “has not been produced” * “may never be produced” * “which may or may not actually take place”, * “has not and may never become available” * “technology that may be impossible, but is sold or promised as possible”.

Gruber avoids this part of the definition. Something isn’t vaporware merely because it is pre-announced. It is vaporware because it won’t be released. Pre-announcing may just be good marketing (see Apple’s iTV) or it could be for marketing reasons like seeing who’d buy it (see Omni Group’s OmniFocus). Vaporware won’t see the light of day. If OmniFocus fails to ship, then it’s vaporware. Until then, it’s merely being developed.