Get over yourself. 1) I have been reading this site for a while, certainly since 2010 and have read the guidelines. Since your account is only 150 days older than mine, it hardly puts you in a position to lord it over me. 2) I absolutely would say everything that I have said to your faces. 3) I haven't been uncivil, my 'crime' is at worst misreading a post, however I don't think I did. Rereading the OP, he was looking to troll and I fed him. My bad, I will be more diligent in the future. You, on the other hand attacked me. Would you be so damned patronising to my face? Reading your history (how utterly childish) it looks like you are generally a bit of a patronising know it all. I won't respond further. Just waiting in anticipation for you to attack my spelling, grammar or punctuation, which seems to be the modus operandi of a HN troll.
How dare I? Who are you!? My question was a legitimate one, I was being serious, not fucking fatuous like the OP. As I explained, the post came across to me as if the OP didn't have much day to day experience using Xcode, hence the question. The OP initial comment was aggressive to begin with! How dare I? Wow.
Apologies for the following rant, but these topics annoy the absolute hell out of me.
That list isn't a list "...as to why Android is REALLY better than the iPhone." at all. It's a list of why you think it is better. I have iPhone and a Nexus S. I despise Android device. It's a Nexus S running Jelly Bean, and I find it to be clunky as hell. I found it to be clunky as hell with Gingerbread too. Why the hell should I have to simply to have a satisfactorily functioning device? Reading into it, there is no guarantee that installing Cyanogenmod will improve things for me either. Of course, these are my opinions and they are worth little to anyone other than me, much like your list of 'facts'. What happened to live and let live? What happened to use the tool that works for you? Why do we have to endure the endless and meaningless pissing contests?
No. The issue isn't that the end use couldn't install a browser, the issue was that Microsoft forbade OEMs with the threat of removing their distribution license from pre-installing other browsers, thus preventing competition at point of sale. This is anti-trust. It's not a 'stupid' law, it extremely sound. Microsoft, in all reality, should have been broken up as a result, but because the judge mouthed-off (and some heavy lobbying), they were treated more leaniently.
I see this a lot here and I feel that I should point it out; industrial design is an engineering discipline. It is similar to architecture in many respects.
Users don't think like that. They generally don't know what redirect means, let alone recognise when it happens. I'll add that more and more attacks seem to come from trusted sources recently. This only goes to further the issue.
I must have missed the part where you tried another browser... (EDIT: I did genuinely miss it! Still, there are at least 2 other browsers that, as a web developer, you should have installed.)
I must ask, why are you still using the platform if it's so bad? Use something else, problem solved! No, it is that simple.
This can be explained away with Cognitive bias, which is something we see a lot in these sorts of discussions. I find both protagonist in this case to be economic with facts.
I'm well aware that I'm as guilty of it as anyone.
Wow. Arrogant much? The truth is that you are not really interested in actually discussing the facts. Ed Bott was paid by Microsoft to promote Windows 7 in his blog back in 2008. His views are not partisan and his articles as a result are meritless. He, in simple words just for you, is biased in favor of Microsoft. ZDNet, much like other online IT tabloids like The Register, habitually publish nothing but trash that is designed for the sole purpose of advertising views. That this and other similar stories have recently featured so prominently has set alarm bells ringing.
To be honest, I really don't care what you think because so far you've done nothing but troll me. Using "sloppy" spelling as a reason to discredit what I said as well as calling me a liar? Come on, you surely can do better than that!
Calm down. He has been paid by Microsoft in the past so his opinions are hardly partisan and being economic with facts means that he often tells half a story, generally Microsofts. Like I said, I don't care either way, what I do care about is needless name calling and veiled ad hominems.
I've no skin in this. To be honest its an article by someone that has a track record for being economic with facts and it's on ZDnet, which is good enough reason to ignore it. However I don't see so much "fanboys" (please don't, it's childish), as people desperately trying to prove the authors point. I'd suggest at this stage and as a neutral the exact opposite is the case.
fact that serves as conclusive evidence of a crime or similar act...
The fact that I'm asserting is that men do not suffer these kinds of attacks suggest the individual was motivated by sexism. I can't say anymore other than to say that you are wrong. I don't think it means what you clearly think it means. Sorry, no snark intended.
Good design is hard. Apple are one of the very few hardware manufacturers in the world that understand the value of good industrial design beyond spit and polish. If there are other companies, they certainly don't work in the computing/mobile computing sector.
Smoking gun is "...a reference to an object or fact that serves as conclusive evidence of a crime or similar act."
I'm suggesting that these sort of attacks on men are extremely limited is enough evidence to suggest the perpetrator is likely to be sexist and/or a mysoginist, which is pretty much the definition of a smoking gun as illustrated.
Describing the title as "quite inaccurate" is very generous. "deliberately inflammatory in order to generate page views" is much closer to the mark given that the article came from the register.
Not really. That this doesn't happen to men with the same frequency or degree of severity is enough of a smoking gun to suggest that this is indeed the case.
Why 'open'? Is that the issue that you have with Facebook? If not, why not Skype? It's available on more platforms that the two specific examples that you mention. The thing that you are dismissing is the convenience. Like it or not, literally millions of people find it extremely convenient to stay in touch with friends and acquaintances easily.