rotten.apple
Preemptive edit for people that see haters everywhere:
Geez, lighten up: Not a commentary against Apple, just a joke in continuation of the fruit names.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Applies for '.apple' Domain Name Suffix
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
rotten.apple
Preemptive edit for people that see haters everywhere:
Geez, lighten up: Not a commentary against Apple, just a joke in continuation of the fruit names.
This.
Apple is just protecting the Apple name so nobody else grabs it.
I would prefer it to be 'apple.ipad' or 'apple.mac' etc instead, just think it goes better that way.
Hahaha, I guess Id like daddywhereismy.apple with a locator service in iCloud for fresh fruit.
My 4 year old has become obsessed with eating whole apples, but we find them abandoned all over the house, in strange places, partially eaten.
Not anymore. That'll break now that there are unlimited root domains available.
This is purely to make money, not to keep any sort of order on the DNS system. Which is what I thought the naming organizations were supposed to do: Keep some semblance of order in the naming structure of the internet.
Well, that's not entirely true.
Based on your comment, then I guess you know about name servers and IP addresses.
A name server translates any DNS name to an IP address. When you type a URL like http://www.apple.com into your browser, the browser contacts its default name server and asks, "Have you ever heard of www.apple.com?" If this is the first time the name server has heard of www.apple.com, it finds the .com TLD name server and asks if it knows of the name server handling apple.com.
If so, your name server connects to the name server for apple.com and asks it about www.apple.com. If the Apple name server has a listing for the www prefix, it returns the IP address for "www.apple.com" and your browser connects to that IP address.
The network administrator for the domain "apple.com" is in charge of mapping the names in the apple.com domain to specific machines and their IP addresses. In many large companies, there will be different machines (with different IP addresses) handling WWW, FTP, Telnet and other traffic. On smaller sites, the same machine can handle everything.
The network administrator makes a list of names and IP addresses,
www.apple.com - 184.85.205.15
IPhone.apple.com - 17.172.224.28 and 17.149.160.28
Support.apple.com -184.85.200.143
The* administrator can put anything in that list, because the name servers don't care. The administrator could put in ilovemicrosoft.apple.com, iLove.google.apple.com, or I.love.microsoft.and.google.com, and when someone types in those names the name server will return the IP addresses associated with them.
In the case of Web sites that happen to work without the "www" prefix, it simply means that the administrator has decided that if there is no prefix, the IP address returned should be the IP address for the Web server.
Therefore, iPhone.apple is valid and would be able to return a valid IP.
With this system, since Apple gets controlled over the tld, they can very much point it to an A record without issue. Just like it's possible now with http://apple.com/ without adding a sub-domain
----------
Nope, IPv6 doesn't change anything in the actual hierarchy of DNS. It simply adds a few record types for IPv6 address resolution.
This is an ICANN money grab. It breaks DNS in a bad way.
----------
Apple is not to blame for anything here.
It seems to me that Apple could be doing this as a way to mitigate the possibility of people squatting on future site names. Thus, "iphone7.com" wouldn't matter to them anymore because all of their sites would be in the .apple domain. No porn or malware redirects to worry about because everyone will be instructed that only .apple sites are legit.
Would you prefer them?
http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-applies-for-windows-and-xbox-top-level-domains
How does it break DNS?
It's no different to when they added the .XXX and many other TLD's. There is already well over 250 TLD's, even bumping that number up 10 fold isn't going to cause that much of an additional overhead.
The whole naming thing is black hole
There is no value in these new naming standards, except to those who selling something of no inherent value.
Apple and every company wil have to buy any name that might be used by them or would confuse the public. There is then no net increase in the number of names.
An analogy would be like allowing every company or entity to create their own currency (or what it is like now, where the market is allowed to determine the value of each currency).
Just like the Onion News said, we have to invent the next bubble economy to get out of the previous bubble economy.
There is no value in these new naming standards, except to those who selling something of no inherent value.
Apple and every company wil have to buy any name that might be used by them or would confuse the public. There is then no net increase in the number of names.
An analogy would be like allowing every company or entity to create their own currency (or what it is like now, where the market is allowed to determine the value of each currency).
Just like the Onion News said, we have to invent the next bubble economy to get out of the previous bubble economy.
That's because bundle identifiers are backwards from URLs. You start with the biggest category (com vs. org or net etc.), this is followed by the entity (apple in this case), then followed by more specific information.
You're so funny. Insulting people and then saying "joke" doesn't make it a joke.
Simplifying? Yeah, right. Anyone that thinks Apple marketing would be stupid enough to actually use a .apple suffix is as high as a kite.
In fact, no one in their right mind would use any of these new gTLDs in any wide marketing or advertising. It's taken forever to get your average human to even the "blahblah.com" and "blahblah.net" point –most still just use Google to find whatever they're looking for instead of typing in a URL – that introducing something new like ".apple" or ".google" is simply nuts.
10 fold increase in request on the root-servers cannot be bad right ?
You do have an idea of the infrastructure required by the current a.root-servers.net "server" (server is in quotes, because we're talking about a whole distributed database over many nodes running at different geographical locations).Yes, it breaks DNS in a bad way, moving a whole lot of load up to the root instead of where it belongs down in the hierarchy. It also makes the whole hierarchy system obsolete, turning DNS into a "keyword" system. It's a big cash grab.
----------
He's not insulting anyone, he's continuing the fruit metaphors started in the post he replied to. His edit was aimed at people that would reply just like you did. Seems you still weren't getting it when he explained it though.
Some people just like to see hate where there is none I guess.
Well lets see...
www.apple.com/iphone
or
apple.com/iphone
or
iphone.apple.com
or
iphone.apple
Seems pretty clear to me which one is shorter.
Yes. It will make MS lose more money, which I want. If Apple tries to do this, they will lose money, which I don't want (I hold AAPL).
Bing.com is really an antitrust website: Microsoft makes it the default homepage and search engine of IE, using their dominance in the PC market to gain viewers on their horrible, ad-filled site, and they get money from the ads. People who don't know better stick with IE and accidentally install the Bing Bar, free with every MS software update.
----------
Hey hey watch it! .info is the new .com! I use it for my site because it's waaaaay cheaper.
$185k just to apply for the domain. A porn company wouldn't even bother, like they'd have that kind of money anyway.