dieterrams

Jesus Christ.

Suppose he is being treated unfairly by the mods. Is that not worth complaining about?

I don't give a crap about some silly "downvote every comment complaining about downvotes" rule. Complaining about downvotes was frowned upon because people get inexplicably downvoted as a matter of course here, and the frequency of complaints was deemed sufficiently detracting to warrant being frowned upon. Being treated unfairly by the mods, however, is another matter entirely.

I haven't seen a preponderance of evidence suggesting the complaint was ill-founded, and the guy's tenure and comment history (what I looked through of it) do not suggest he's an ill-mannered troll, so I reserve judgement as to whether the complaint is in the wrong. Like any reasonable person would.

Well, someone's having a party.

PSA: one man's pedantry is another man's pro-tip.

One imagines they do. I'm not sure that's what's going on here, though.

I vouched for (undeaded) your comment, since I think the flagging/downvoting runs contrary to the principles of discourse we're (at least implicitly) celebrating here, smelling of tribalism/favoritism. Just because you view someone favorably, and someone else claims something negative about that person, doesn't mean you just get to flagbomb them into oblivion.

The right response here is simply to ask for further substantiation, as danso did. It's not clear to me that the mods are directly responsible for what you've experienced. If you haven't, I would contact them for clarification.

> Combine sugar and sugar and sprinkle with the sugar.

What is this quote from?

This is almost certainly the result of how popular articles/books by Malcolm Gladwell, etc. have been, which goes back a long ways (The Tipping Point was published in 2000), rather than a prevalence of journalists who were creative writing majors.

The tactic, though effective, has unfortunately become annoyingly common.

Source re: motivations?

I have a design background myself, and frankly, you're not going to do much better for flat screen-based UIs than buttons, scrubbers, tables, lists, scrollviews, etc. This has little to do with touch, and everything to do with 2D design for screens. Better/worse design will depend on how these idioms are used/organized, rather than a radical rethink of those idioms.

That's not to say there aren't good undiscovered idioms for 2D UIs, but there's no shortage of designers trying to find them, especially outside of their dayjob. Designers love trying to invent new and novel ways to interact.

It is, however, actually an advantage for touch UIs that they aren't radically different from WIMP, because users don't have to learn a completely different UI, at least in terms of visual organization/affordance.

You can also bet the Apple designers/engineers who were prototyping iOS UI idioms before the iPhone was released explored a range of different idioms, and they continue to do so.

I'm not sure why you'd expect a radical reimagining of UI for touch. Touch UIs look largely the same as WIMP UIs because there isn't a radically better way of presenting information and affordances on a screen.

Mobile OSes haven't been ready to accommodate desktop-level use cases. Apple is moving in that direction with iOS on iPad. Once they get there, convergence makes a lot more sense.

Agreed. I think it makes perfect sense to have a phone that can plug into a tablet or any other form factor. The thermals might not let you run an iPhone-in-tablet as fast as a dedicated iPad, but given how fast their chips are getting, it's probably just a matter of time.

...which was submitted by the same account.

There used to be. Not sure what happened to it.