The register is popular because of its sarcastic wit and tries to position itself as s ring through the fog. This is just a writer confusing sarcasm and ridiculing apple fans as analysis and opinion. The fact he calls people discussing how much they love the packaging "sickening" tells everything we need to know.
You can go back and find posts that aggressively argue that any new technology will succeed or fail.
Right now, you can find people saying that Tesla has a bright future or that it's going down the toilet. Extreme viewpoints get clicks, especially when they're contrary to popular opinion (like OP).
The more wrong the article is, the more likely it will be remembered and pointed to through time. This means an article like this will continue to make more ad revenue than a peer that was correct in its predictions.
Journalists and pundits are never punished for getting stuff wrong. (Look at the 90% percent of them that didn't see the housing crash coming in 2008.)
The lesson seems to be to make the most outrageous and wrong claims possible to be click-bait for both the short term and long haul.
The article got a lot right, but also got a lot wrong. IMO here's what he (and many other pundits) got the most wrong:
Mobile phones are not complex to use because
of bad interface design, they are complex to
use because they are complex devices with
a myriad of features.
No, it really was "bad interface design". In spades.
Comments
The register is popular because of its sarcastic wit and tries to position itself as s ring through the fog. This is just a writer confusing sarcasm and ridiculing apple fans as analysis and opinion. The fact he calls people discussing how much they love the packaging "sickening" tells everything we need to know.
You can go back and find posts that aggressively argue that any new technology will succeed or fail.
Right now, you can find people saying that Tesla has a bright future or that it's going down the toilet. Extreme viewpoints get clicks, especially when they're contrary to popular opinion (like OP).
Yeah, it's almost like it's a complete waste of time to even enter the debate. Still we do it every day all over the Internet.
There's an irony or perverse incentive here.
The more wrong the article is, the more likely it will be remembered and pointed to through time. This means an article like this will continue to make more ad revenue than a peer that was correct in its predictions.
Journalists and pundits are never punished for getting stuff wrong. (Look at the 90% percent of them that didn't see the housing crash coming in 2008.)
The lesson seems to be to make the most outrageous and wrong claims possible to be click-bait for both the short term and long haul.
The article got a lot right, but also got a lot wrong. IMO here's what he (and many other pundits) got the most wrong:
No, it really was "bad interface design". In spades.