Re: Joel gets a taste of reality

On 2025-01-01 15:58, Joel wrote:

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
 

So to exactly what "punch" did Samsung beat Apple?

>
I screwed up, actually, this phone isn't imitating Samsung.

>
Fixed the subject for you.

>
And yet, if I had first examined the article correctly, it would make
Apple showing *progress*, which is kind of funny since your defense is
that *I* was wrong, just some guy online who can wrap my mind around
why Apple does it the way it does.  I mean, not in the sense of
agreement, but in the sense of seeing that they are OK with being
weird.

>
"It would MAKE Apple showing progress"?

>
"It would mean that Apple was showing progress" is what I should have
edited it to say.

>
In what way would it mean that Apple was showing progress?
>
Literally, all there is in the article is a rumour that Apple will be
changing the NAME they use for a product.

>
I meant that if I had correctly read the article, the first time, I
thought that this phone was going to add buttons to the UI, like
Samsung has - how I came to that conclusion is a mystery, but I was
high on drugs.  However, as I suggested, if that were somehow true it
would mean Apple had come around, and admitted their design sucks
balls.

>
1. No, that is NOT what you said at any time. Let me elucidate (and I'll
wait a few minutes while you look that up):
>
You're now claiming that when you wrote, "And yet, if I had first
examined the article correctly, it would mean that Apple was showing
progress".
>
What you (apparently) meant to have said was:
>
"And yet, if the article had said what I thought it did, it would mean
that Apple was showing progress".
>
So...
>
2. If changing the UI is proof that the previous UI "sucks balls", then
you should examine the fact that Android has switched its default UI for
app switching to APPLE's UI for doing so: with gestures.

  You specify it's a "default", obviously they are giving people the
choice.  I know what choice I would make.

Way to miss the point!

 

I'm not going to bother with the rest of your gibberish.
>
Dude, try again, but this time in English.

>
Oh gibberish, huh, unlike Apple's UI, heh.  That's a great descriptor
for it, malformed functions, inferior, and yet the Apple name sells
these devices.

What function(s) in Apple's is/(are) "malformed"?
>
When you've put yourself in a huge hole...
>
...stop digging.

>
The lack of buttons.

Are you still high?
>
Because words have MEANINGS, and "malformed" doesn't match that.

  It's malformed *code* underlying the visible features on the screen -
crafting a UI sans real controls, wasting people's time.

It clearly has real controls, doofus.
You may not like them, but it clearly has controls.
So that's another failure for you.