Agreed, especially as with images it does the opposite. It waits until the image is finalised, then tests it for suitability, and decides whether or not to show it. It would be interesting to see the intermediate steps, but they're not shown.
It's nice to use software, or anything really, where effort has been made to make it beautiful as well as functional. Also it's good to support and highlight good photography.
I met him on this bridge once, he was polishing an old work. He told us that he had the blessing of the owners of the bridge. Other places where he worked, he didn’t have permission.
Yes! English isn't always a great language... I do like the meaning behind it though. You are a brother, even if not in biology, we'll embrace you. It just doesn't work well for genealogists.
Agreed. If things look good then I enjoy looking at them more, and life is to be enjoyed. But more importantly, it's wrong that plain text is always the best way to communicate. A picture is worth a thousand words (often), and a good layout can make things easier to read.
Speaking from a user point of view, I find arguments like this are often disingenuous (I'm not saying that yours is). "Tailoring for the user" normally actually means "tracking the user". Specifically, the passing of UTM parameters from my website session to my app session is something that normally has no benefit to me and I find it repugnant that developers feel entitled to do it.
I clicked to look at the highres version... and I really don't understand why websites feel the need to put PDFs behind an interface. Every common browser has a perfectly good PDF viewer built-in, in fact it's normally better than anything website-provided.