Hacker News Reader

Comment by daeken | Hacker News Reader

"It gets under my skin because it is a pompous, privileged, insulting, and myopic viewpoint which reeks of class warfare — and it is indicative of a growing sentiment I see amongst people in the tech community."

You know what I've seen an upward trend of? People taking themselves and everything they see entirely too seriously. "Class warfare"? Seriously? This is a phone review.

View on HN

I think it's a more cogent and more substantial point than it might seem at first glance.

Anecdotally, I honestly do notice a class axis between iPhone and Android (though there are other axes, too). Just like there was a class axis between Facebook and MySpace for a while.

http://www.danah.org/papers/essays/ClassDivisions.html

No one denies that consumer electronics can be status symbols. They can also be counter-status symbols.

And I think what Topolsky is reacting to here is the subtext of division. "You either see it or you don't," implies "I see this and you don't" which implies "I'm better than you." Which is an attitude in general that can exacerbate class differences.

And, as kenjackson has noted elsewhere, there's a distinct sense that some evangelists don't just observe the success of their chosen subject, but cheer them on and -- worse -- enjoy the failure of the others.

I think it's a good thing to expose. It's a better, more useful division that Topolsky is making here, I'd say: between advocates and observers, not between Android fans and iPhone fans.

In related news:

Snobby Robbers Only Steal iPhones, Refuse To Take Droids Or Blackberries

http://www.cultofmac.com/135564/snobby-robbers-only-steal-ip...

"Class warfare"? Seriously? This is a phone review.

Topolsky's point is that Sigeler's piece isn't just a phone review.

As technology becomes affordable to more income levels, people need to make sure they frame the debate correctly. I often hear people talk about those "too cheap to buy an iPad," not considering that the $300 difference between an iPad and a Kindle Fire represents two weeks of groceries for a family of four. [0]

This is similar to the occasional self-aggrandizement coming from white sports journalists covering black athletes, like the "I pay your salary so you'd better play hard every game!" meme that's halfway to plantation dialogue.

It's all about sports and phones until it isn't anymore.

[0] And let's not even discuss the hypothetical "why are they even buying tablets?!" counterargument, which is fraught with problems.

This is class warfare just not by standard definition.

It's not the proletariat vs the bourgeoisie. It's Apple vs. PC.

Sure the phones are the same price... but we all know that the perception is that the cool kids use Apple these days, and so the cool apps are only on iOS, and if you don't have a Mac you're just not a cool technologist. So that's the class warfare... cool vs blah.

I, for one, think it's ironic that just a decade ago Apple was for the noncoformist and today it's so mainstream it's boring.

I really do not understand why he spends so much of the article talking about "class warfare" and the difference between "expensive" and "cheaper" things. The iPhone 4S and Galaxy Nexus ARE THE SAME PRICE.

I don't believe that his argument is alluding to the objects' actual prices, but rather to the framework he perceives MG and Gruber using to further their arguments. Namely, an appeal to 'luxury', where luxury is a self-sufficient reason for something to be better than something else. And that people who haven't experienced this 'luxury' can't comprehend what makes it superior.

Honestly, I haven't read enough from MG and Gruber to form a meaningful opinion on their argumentative style, so I'll digress from staking out a position. But I agree with Topolsky in theory, that is that an argumentative appeal to luxury isn't sufficient in itself, considering luxury can be decomposed and explained at a more concrete level.

This is one of the problems with text-based communication. While I personally don't understand how Topolsky translates MG's automotive analogy into "class warfare," these types of misunderstandings are common when people aren't having a real-time conversation. If Topolsky were to talk about this on the phone with either MG or Gruber, he'd find his entire viewpoint changed within minutes. It's very possible that he is attributing "elitist" attitudes where they don't exist, but that's hard to know without a direct, real-time conversation.

I've seen this with my own co-workers on a daily basis. What seems like a contentious conversation via email/IM becomes a complete non-issue when discussed by phone or in person. The difference can be striking.

Perhaps, but people who make their living as writers, should be more of aware of the power and drawbacks of analogies they use.

What makes you think he isn't aware? He writes opinion pieces, so having a strong point-of-view is sort of required. And look how much attention he gets from it.

I'd rather an inflammatory strong opinion than a wishy-washy falsely "balanced" piece.

A similar claim could easily be made here regarding Topolsky's post, along the lines of: "For someone who makes his living as a journalist, Topolsky should be more aware of "checking in" regarding MG's viewpoint. For example: 'It seems like your review implies that iOS fans are somehow more sophisticated than Android fans. Is that what you meant?'" This concept of "checking in" is a core component of effective human interaction that is, sadly, altogether too infrequent.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com