This sounds like a complaint from a guy who is basically saying "Development is hard, and I don't want to work to make things good". Just as well he's calling it quits, shape up or ship out I say.

Actually, what I think he is saying is that he makes 95% of his revenue from iOS yet spends 20% of his development time bug fixing Android versions, so he is dropping support for Android because it represents an insignificant market for his software. That's a financially reasonable position to take.

Even if his position were, "I'm a shitty developer who doesn't know Linux, but I know iOS, and I make 95% of my money from iOS so I'm dropping Android, that would still be a financially reasonable position to take.

I'm sure you didn't buy his software anyway, though I did on iOS, and quite enjoy it, so what's your bitch?

And put it in a netbook with a Thinkpad-style trackpoint... I'd buy that right away.

No you wouldn't because it would cost several million dollars to have Lenovo specially develop and build it for a market consisting only of you.

Because if you actually read the chart in TFA, Programmers are 7th, not 5th.

FTFAS:

Shepherd compared three digital music files, including a Red Hot Chili Peppers song downloaded in the Mastered for iTunes format with a CD version of the same song, and said there were no differences.

If there are no differences between a Mastered for iTunes format song and a CD version of the same song, what's the bitch? Does he want better quality from a downloadable version?

This seems like a typical suck attack. Adobe sucks, Amazon sucks, RIM sucks, so instead of trying to fix the problem, they just all stand around in a circle pointing at one another, sucking hickies on one another's spotty bottoms, and blaming Apple.

It may not be very effective, but its a hell of a lot easier than actually making products that work. Leave the toil and sweat up to Apple. Bottom feeders can always make a few bucks off cheap, knock-off lookalikes.

Woah, this is Slashdot, bitch! You don't talk down Google here. Google has a "don't be evil" policy, don'tcha know. Are you a heathen? Are you a non-believer, a Google-kafir?

Seriously, though, you are absolutely right. What reason at all do people have for trusting Google? Google has demonstrated a consistent disregard for their own "principles" much less users' privacy. Google's entire business model is based on collecting, knowingly or not, information about users and selling it. Now that they are facing stiff competition from Facebook who has actually done an even better job of mining personal information, Google has even more incentive to trawl deeper.

You probably do want to prepare your asbestos underwear, though, because the butthurt Google fanboys will send a flaming shit-storm your way for pointing this out.

In the real world, a contractor damages $244,000,000.00 of someone's shit, the contractor is paying $244,000,000.00 plus loss of use costs until replacement.

In the government run world, everyone will have a laugh and the taxpayers will pick up the tab.

Personally I think tablets are a solution looking for a problem that doesnt exist.

Which either explains why, in some alternate dimension, tablets aren't selling like hotcakes but netbooks are or, more likely, why you aren't an analyst.

EXACTLY! And for a number of technical reasons under specific provisions of Oregon statutes dealing with libel and slander.

Someone mod the parent up for actually reading the opinion.

You know, when you hear that some TV star from your childhood dies and you immediately think, "I didn't know he was still alive." Well, that's the same reaction I have every time I hear that Google has killed a product: "I didn't even know that product existed."

Surely,I can't be the only one who has this reaction.

Let's make a couple of assumptions and see where they lead.

1) The Earth is heating up.

2) The heating is bad for human life.

3) Actions that can be taken by humans can reverse, or at least retard, this trend.

Now, given these assumptions, regardless of whether human action is causing the heating or not, should we take action to reverse or retard the trend?

If the answer is "yes," it becomes an engineering problem. If the answer is "no," we do nothing a let the bad consequences come.

150,000 other people I hadn't met died that day too, but nobody gave a shit about them.

Yeah, but those 150,000 people didn't co-found Apple, they didn't midwife the birth of the Macintosh or the iPod or iPhone or the iPad; they didn't resurrect Apple from the dead; they didn't get rid of those damnable buttons; they didn't change the world.

Let's face it, some people actually do more than others. It's nice when those folks' passings are mourned.

Clearly, the premises of the article are wrong.

P1: Flash sucks.

P2: Adobe has an outdated business model.

P3: Developers are abandoning Flash.

------

C: It's all Steve Jobs's fault.

Having been a long time /. reader, I know that the conclusion is supposed to be that it's all Steve Job's fault, but I'm having a hard time reaching that conclusion from the stated premises. Therefore, I conclude that the premises are wrong.

LOL. Maybe if there was one or two transactions, you might argue entrapment. Sixty-two transactions suggest he was not an innocent victim.

Not to mention, according to the Jerusalem Post, Court filings show Doxer e-mailed the Israeli consulate in Boston to offer assistance, saying that he is a Jewish American who wants "to help our homeland and our war against our enemies," therefore, it is likely that Doxer thought he was helping Israel.

The idea didn't originate with the Feds, it originated with Doxer.

I always thought Akamai was an Israeli company. I guess it's an "American company" co-founded by an Israeli.

According to the Jerusalem Post, Doxer e-mailed the Israeli consulate in Boston to offer assistance, saying that he is a Jewish American who wants "to help our homeland and our war against our enemies," therefore, it is likely that Doxer thought he was helping Israel.

The poor schmuck probably just thought he was carrying out company policy and making a quick buck on the side.