That's the only way in which it beats those things, in particular keyboards. In most other aspects (e.g., usability) it falls far, far short.
176 karma · joined March 20, 2011
That's the only way in which it beats those things, in particular keyboards. In most other aspects (e.g., usability) it falls far, far short.
The parent seemed to be saying that this state (i.e., between the two extremes) was "not very satisfying", and that without strictly adhering to "The Best" philosophy you'd end up with all crap. That's primarily what I'm objecting to.
So unless you buy the absolute "best" of a given product, it's just crap and couldn't possibly be satisfying? There's no middle ground there at all?
That aside, as greyboy already points out, what is going to stop a competitor from creating a fake Google+ account to give that negative review? This move doesn't prevent that hypothetical from happening in any way.
You mean a client communicates with a server with information, then returns some information? How delightfully ingenious!
How so?
The desktop as a form factor will never go away. I know for me personally the day I need to turn in my machine (including keyboard/mouse/large monitors) for a smart phone or tablet is the day you can go ahead and just shoot me to put me out of my misery.
"And during that decade, almost every such developer I knew switched to the Mac if they weren't already there, partly because it was better for developing web apps."
This is the first time I've ever heard anyone make this claim, which seems dubious at best. How in the world is the Mac better for developing web apps?
Again, it's simply optimization where none is needed.
Plus then you have the benefit of not limiting the product to only those people who have an iPhone. :)
What about those who say nothing about it, yet still need to tolerate people like you calling them a "behavioral outlier"?
If that's how they operate then quite frankly they deserve to have "lost" that time.
This isn't double documentation -- it's complementary documentation. Code is the what, comments are the why. If one does not match the other, then again, that's on the programmer.
Sorry, that's just a failure of the programmer, same as any other coding mistake they may make. It is by no means a reason to not have comments.
In all but very specific circumstances, the "what" should be fairly obvious by reading the code, with small clues being sufficient to guide the reader.
However, without any comments then there is no way for the reader to understand why a particular approach was chosen. Worse, they may think it needs to be refactored, and then waste time pursuing that only to arrive at the all-too-familiar "oh, that's why they did it that way".