willimholte

There's a lot to like in this, but the intro is gimmicky. "Why are diamonds more expensive than water?" is a classic question for super early economics lessons, but not really appropriate for the more complicated piece that this is.

It's a commonly suggested thought from people that like both companies. In a happy-go-lucky sort of way it is a fun thought experiment, but I've never heard anyone seriously suggest it.

This is purely anecdotal: every time I have lost one card I have lost all of my cards (because it's when I lose my wallet or the bag my wallet is in). In this case I'd be able to go home and grab my 'originals' and use those as my backup cards.

>() The obvious issue of losing Coin and losing everything. People like backups. It's a mindset.

I fail to see how Coin is a lack of backups. If having two copies of a card isn't 'having a backup' what is?

I don't understand what this is linking to. Why not link directly to the WSJ?

There are no social requirements in the app—you can use it to get your record from multiple doctors and never add any friends in Prime.

The target market of the app is people who have close friends and family members that they want to keep in the know about their health. This might not be you, which is totally okay.

We're fully HIPAA-compliant, as Tyler mentioned in another comment. Data is encrypted, and isn't stored on the device. HIPAA (and specifically MU Stage 2) is actually more helpful for what we are doing than anything else; letting patients get access to their records electronically is a hugely important step towards solving major problems in the health industry.

My memories of the iPad 1 might be hazy—though I had friends in education that purchased them well after the iPad 2 was available. Perhaps they were getting bulk orders of refurbished (or third party refurbished) units.

The main point is that it's not unreasonable to think Apple would keep products around for enterprise/education markets without selling them publicly, or at the very least without mentioning them during a high profile keynote.

IIRC it was not legal to install on multiple machines (perhaps it was legal for multiple personal machines?).

Apple has continued sales of old devices to corporate/educational buyers without making them publicly available in the past. The eMac and original iPad were both available to education markets far longer than public markets.

Good news: loaded in ~2 seconds. Bad news: interface seems to not work at all. (I'm using iPad 2, with iOS 7.0.2)

Makes sense, thanks.

I use iTunes Match and have quite a bit of music on my computer and my phone, so it doesn't often occur to me to listen on my iPad. However, when I do, I exclusively stream, so this might actually be the perfect fit for me. Will let you know when I try it out.

Took the first code, am excited to try it out.

Why go iPad first?

I didn't really connect with this piece until the end.

>Remind yourself, that you are not that thing. This will help you to see the other person’s point of view, instead of lashing out irrationally.

I'm pretty sure the entire reason I went to art school was to learn how to do this. I disagree with the post's description of 'who/what you are' but this point holds.

PSD > PDF is easier than DOC > PDF.

Perhaps deactivate Pressy if the phone is locked? Does that kill all useful actions?

It's probably closer to whiteboard coding than relevant work. Designers need support and can't work in a vacuum. Without a deep understanding of the specific requirements designers will make generic (though perhaps beautiful) work.

> a) I've found that lots of design applicants will put stuff in their portfolio that they contributed to, rather than built end-to-end. This solves that problem.

Effective designers (and effective hiring managers) have already solved this problem by describing their role in projects (or asking about specific roles in the interview process). Don't hire designers that have a portfolio full of nothing but sex-shots.

> "what is your process to build the right UX."

I agree that is the intention of this sort of application requirement, but I'd be surprised if it consistently worked. These sorts of requirements force designers to work in a vacuum. It is impossible to make an effective solution without having a deep understanding of the product—the hiring company will get a tepid/run of the mill/boring design. (Though perhaps a beautiful design, which often works for these sorts of interviews)

> But on the other end it makes them a lot more likely to find an awesome candidate who actually wants to work there, and has the talent to deliver the goods.

It's maybe likely to find them someone that wants to work with them (especially if we define "wants to work here" as "willing to do spec work" which may be fair) but in my experience, talented designers are busy working on cool projects and students/young designers are the ones with time to dedicate to this sort of application.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I am interested in what behavior you expect from the app vs the behavior you are observing.

(I've used iBart a few times, but not in a few months and not to route trips in Oakland.)

Are you saying that your train arrives at 12th Street at noon and iBart tells you to board a train leaving 12th Street at 12:01? Would you prefer iBart tell you to board the next train? (Not sure about schedules, is that about 15 minutes later?)

> I can certainly see that. Do you count "main body text" as 'content' in your designs?

I make an effort to never use placeholder text that doesn't at least closely resemble the real (or intended) content. This might just be me, but I'm pretty sure it's common amongst better designers: building something around fake data is much harder than building something 'real'.

> You think such a phenomenon happens with web designers?

Absolutely.

> brainwave analysis on rats (or users :-)

If Art and HCI are on opposing ends of a spectrum of interface design I've always been a bit closer to art—so my experience with testing ends at formal user interviews and guerrilla-coffee-shop tests. It's not a stretch to imagine the big tech companies doing brainwave analysis (and I'd be thrilled to participate at any level, it's seriously cool stuff).

> design community just cargoculted it?

Like any community, designers react to the trends of their peers, but a competent designer can defend pretty much any decision, which makes it hard to tell the difference between 'doing something familiar but wrong' and 'following trends that are right'.

I can't speak for every designer, and it is possible that the shift is entirely a visual trend based on rebelling from the past trends.

My justification for keeping the interface low contrast is to emphasize content. Keep in mind that getbootstrap.com is designed for web designers and developers—most of whom will be familiar with traditional web design. Menus are in obvious places and don't need to be called out.

Take the alternative to the extreme: if we need color to show us clickable elements should we have flashing underlines? Gifs that move arrows back and forth?

There is plenty of criticism of San Francisco coming from people inside, and outside, of the startup/tech scene.

His post was misogynistic and hypocritical, which encouraged the pitchfork mob. (I don't intend to make a value judgement regarding the response his post got.)

I'm not sure this is fair—doesn't the author admit that the value of the good is based on scarcity? That it became valuable when it could be shipped to places that didn't have two foot tall piles of lobster washing up on the beach?

I'm curious to learn more about the decision to keep it invite only. I can only provide personal insight, but I lost interest as soon as there was a link I wanted to comment on and couldn't.