If this is real, I don't think it's about release timing at all, but the technical complexity of implementing and integrating the specific new features they've chosen.
I don't have a list of specific examples to back up that claim, but I encourage other apple devs here to think about recent releases from that perspective.
"Grave error" implies something that a non-fool might blunder into. Fools don't blunder, per se, they simply exist.
One of the first jokes I ever heard at a startup was "We'll give the product away and make it up on volume!" Changing the joke to "We'll pay people to take the product and make it up on volume!" doesn't make it less obviously ridiculous.
I'm amazed they were able to hire employees, let alone find investors. Doesn't make the guy's death any less tragic though.
If you're wondering how to write thorough doc for an engineering audience, I highly recommend looking at IBM's doc for z/OS. The first thing you'll notice is: there's a lot of it.
My sense is that if you can regularly acquire and store thousands of vintage LPs for less than $3 per record, it doesn't matter where you advertise the yard sale.
Glad to hear Facebook ads resulted in greater than zero hits, but I'm guessing so would CL, posters in coffee shops, a sign taped to the back window of a car...
If you think McDonald's is liable for assaulting you, bring a suit. If you lack the resources to bring a suit, by all means complain and stop shopping at McDonald's.
Whenever I get the urge to write something like that, I ask myself: "Am I in the target market for this?"
A product built to these tolerances is not one that a rational person (even a competent one, with experience fixing computers) should want to crack open. Make the professionals worry about getting in and out of it, and enjoy the fact that they'll be liable for anything they break in the process.
"Not user serviceable by design" != "disposable by design." You're not wandering across a post-apocalyptic desert wasteland with this thing; take it to a f'ing Apple Store and grab a coffee while the infrastructure wrenches on it.
Social network != internet-connected social network. My statements are more about people (and the experience of living among them) than they are about Facebook or any other internet site. Graph visibility / searchability has increased, bandwidth has increased, latency has decreased. But the rules of human interaction and gaining perspective on the human condition have more or less (I suspect, not really my field) stayed relatively consistent since the days of parchment and ship transit.
This might be one of the rare cases where "you'll understand when you're older" is the most elegant and truthful response available.
But I'll understand if that's not very satisfying, so...
Interpersonal connections just do not exist in some sort of static and immutable categorical hierarchy, wherein all those that share in the Platonic ideal of WORTH KEEPING are definitely kept above some threshold of positive health and repair, and those that do not are just as destined to fade naturally. If you're "sure that" you would recognize and maintain any connection that is worth keeping, then you're only correct insofar as the connection might not be worth maintaining for the other person. :)
The reason for this is that, in short, you can't see as far into the future as you think you can.
As you get older, you (hopefully) gain some perspectives that retroactively change the past. You occasionally notice important, even semi-profound things about people you used to know; things you had never really noticed before, that you could not have possibly noticed before because circumstances had not yet unearthed those facets of their character. High school isn't life. College isn't life. The first ten years of your career aren't life.
"Life changing" experience can come at any time, and it doesn't just change your life after the experience, but also reaches back into your experience of things that occured before.
I was an outspoken Facebook-hater for a long time. Perhaps my most quotable moment on HN to date was saying "I have no love for their product or their business model, but their engineering is diesel."
My wife recently convinced me to give it another try. I didn't use my complete name, and was judicious about the information I associated with my profile. And yet, I proceeded to connect in a deep and healthy way with some people that I'd fallen out of touch with, and nurtured some newer relationships.
It's a tool that has a Tendency to be dangerous, prying, and abusive to its members. But even as a field of vast moral hazard, I've come to view it as "navigable and worth the risks."
Perhaps not the most glowing endorsement, but if they can convince me they're more valuable than they are dangerous, they've really done some things right in the last few years.
> The lack of response comes down to the fact that Google would rather make sure they get all bad actors and throw out some good than be more lenient and let some bad actors stay.
If that's indeed their attitude, then they deserve to burn long and hot over this shit. And nothing excuses a shutdown in communication, period.
The lesson (to me) is "don't rely on AdSense for any make/break percentage of your revenue."