UIZealot

> Guess there's no accounting for taste,

That's exactly it. Taste, you either have it or you don't.

NeXTSTEP was good enough to pass the Steve Jobs taste test. Outside of Apple products, I double anything you consider "aesthetically pleasing" could say the same.

>> IMO, this is an indictment of the structure, more so than the individual.

> 1000% agree.

So you agree that it's the structure of the organization that's at fault, not Andrew Yang?

> Andrew eventually stole the pac's name and branding - Humanity Forward - put everyone out of a job

"Not left, not right, forward" had been Andrew's slogan throughout his presidential campaign. The PAC may have come up with it (I have no knowledge either way), but it is as much Andrew's branding as it is the PAC's.

As to putting everyone out of a job, I had no idea that Andrew, or any candidate, could guarantee someone a lifetime job once they joined his PAC.

Andrew's presidential bid ultimately failed. There's bound to be disappointments all around. But your allegations ring hollow base on this comment alone.

> He clearly doesn’t have a record of success as an executive, either in private or public sectors.

You could say the same thing about Obama in 2008.

> He seems like a nice guy. If he wants to get into politics, why not start as a city councilor or something?

Nice job damning with faint praise there, well done!

Guess what, he's already in politics. He ran a wildly influential campaign for the Democratic presidential candidacy, and was a top contender in the NYC mayoral race. How many people "wanting to get into" politics could claim to have done that?

> I can't think of much I would trade from now for something in the Jobs era. I can do without

> the rich Corinthian leather

Taste, you either have it or you don't. Steve certainly did.

> the PowerPC,

The Mac switched to Intel in the Jobs era.

> and the colored plastic

Again, all Mac laptops and desktops switched to Aluminum in the Jobs era.

It seems to me you're going out of your way to not give credit whom (Steve Jobs) it's due, why is that?

Maybe XML could be the right tool for some jobs, it's just that the entire industry have searched for these jobs for the past two decades, and very few have turned up.

In other words, it's a solution looking for a problem, and it's still looking.

GUI construction? XML is the wrong tool here again, but not for lack of trying. Tech powerhouses Google and Microsoft got caught up in the hype as well. The results, the Android API and XAML, speak for themselves, negatively.

> XML is like democracy

No it's not. Please don't bring politics into technical discussions, it clouds your judgement.

> android.R.layout.simple_list_item_1

The Android API is primarily geared towards constructing GUIs declaratively in XML, and as with anything infected with the XML plague, it's a huge bloated mess half of which is braindead useless.

I honestly can't blame anyone for screaming in horror and running away to ReactJS, or just anything else.

> Tabs that look like real-world tabs aren’t just a decorative style. They’re a visual metaphor. My brain likes visual metaphors. It craves them.

As the preeminent Apple commentator at the time, Gruber said nothing when iOS 7 dumped rich visual metaphors for a barren flatness.

So waxing poetic now about one minor change in one app is just comical.

Realistically, this specific change, from tabs to buttons, is not that big of a deal.

He's simply delusional if he thinks the tabs before Safari 15 looked like tabs, or that the active tab was unambiguous.

Apple is just polishing a turd, how much damage could it have done?

Just as I suspected, you did know the history, you were just feigning ignorance.

So I suspect you do know the relevant internation laws as well. But allow me to quote myself:

> The UK recognizes the PRC as the successor regime of China, and thus the rightful owner of all that's due of the UK to China under the various treaties between them.

You are free to live in your make-believe world in which Kowloon and HK island were never part of China. The rest of us? We live in the real world.

Have you been to, read about, or seen any news about China in the last, oh I don't know, 50 years?

Or did you make up your mind about China during the height of the Cold War era and you're never going to change it no matter what?

> It is called handover in English, but somehow in Chinese it is return to china or hand back to china.

The UK recognizes the PRC as the successor regime of China, and thus the rightful owner of all that's due of the UK to China under the various treaties between them.

Somehow? That's how.

> Only New Territories belongs to the them, not Kowloon or HK Island

Kowloon and HK Island had always been Chinese territory. The British defeated China in a series of wars, mostly for the right to sell opium in China, and took them as spoils.

When China became strong enough to defeat the British, they wanted them back, and there's nothing the British could do except handing them back.

Funny how that worked out, wasn't it?

My advice? Read up a little on history.

I think you're being downvoted because the title of the post is The "Granny Knot", and your wording sounds like you're saying Ian claims he invented the "Granny Knot".

But obviously you're talking about the "Ian knot". My wife taught me this knot about 20 years ago. She grew up in China and had been tying her shoelaces this way since primary school.

Ian claims to have invented the knot in 1982. Now it's conceivable that the "Ian knot" took the world by storm and spreaded to China quickly, but seeing it's the pre-Internet era, I highly doubt it. I myself had never heard of it until I saw her do it.

So it's likely Ian independently discovered the knot, more so than him being the first person to ever come up with it.

Did you come up with this knot yourself 45 years ago, or did you learn it from someone else?

BTW I upvoted you.

I do the same, don't even need a shoe horn, and my heel tabs hold up just fine.

Seriously, who has time to tie their shoelaces everytime they put on their shoes?