>I'm sure people noticed this issue internally and brought it up but some thing by some designer was seen as biblically sacred and overruled all reason.
I disagree. Seems more like the group that implemented border radius at the OS UI implementation level did not work with the group that handles window sizing. Not everything is a conspiracy.
Of course it's not "a conspiracy", but it is a major, gigantic, huge, alarming failure by Apple. Resizing a window is just about the most basic and useful thing a window system can do after opening a window, and Apple totally messed it up. It's like they've never worked with a window before, but TBH though, their window system has always sucked.
My two cents on this topic is to create short term, superficial incentives to help create the practices that yield the long term incentives. For me this is paying extra for a gym with a hot tub, sauna, and cold plunge. Now I derive relaxation from the workout, but before that I also received a lot of support from the knowledge that the amenities afterwards were waiting for me.
My understanding is that a big appeal of sports gambling is that it adds stakes to entertainment. So instead of casually watching the game you're much more invested. Given this angle, I don't think the majority of casual sports betters are thinking about this in terms of getting rich. It just makes their frequent content more engaging.
That's funny - ride fares change, and only in an Uber have I been kicked out of the car "because the app crashed" in the middle of an abandoned road, or had a very intoxicated person pick me up, or try to drive recklessly in hazardous conditions.
I happily pay a premium for none of these things again.
If you cannot understand what made Apple successful then or today what makes you think you're not failing to grasp something? You head right on to making an argument when nakedly revealing that you can't comprehend the other side.
Not surprising, this site is made for the Woz's of the world (and that's fine!).
> This current iteration of Apple lacks the geniuses and visionaries that might have possibly justified their behavior at some point in the past, so you have a soulless corporate churn reinforcing the biggest walled garden in the history of humanity, with no apparent purpose except self perpetuation.
Except iPhone doesn't have a larger market share, and they aren't being used by 80% of the world's population. Where are you pulling these numbers from? iPhone only has a larger market share in the US, and not by much. Worldwide they are very small compared to android.
> they aren't being used by 80% of the world's population.
I said "iPhone is more appealing to 80%+ of world's population". I didn't say everyone who wants it can afford it.
It's pure speculation, of course, but given its current market share (27% of all devices sold) and its price point, I don't think it's too far fetched to say that its market share would be much higher if price wasn't an issue for people. This is somewhat hinted by the fact that it has a 78% market share in the $1,000+ segment [1], and most iPhone models are over $1K.
Also it still ships more phones than any other single vendor (unless you lump all Android phones into one bucket). In terms of revenue, it's by far the leader with 43% [2].
Overconfident in your numbers you are, just because they suit your narrative. Zero actual backing for those you provide. Not reflecting reality I can see they are.
Completely agree. General intelligence is a building block. By chaining things together you can achieve meta programming. The trick isn't to create one perfect block but to build a variety of blocks and make one of those blocks a block-builder.
reply