Yeah. 75 million people per quarter buy Apple products because they're shiny and flashy.

It couldn't possibly be because they're also solidly designed and functional.

Loss of information is not a human-created concept, it is an expression of what is (as far as we know) a fundamental law of thermodynamics. You may have heard of them.

Some people think that every problem can be fixed by adding more guns. Why not this one?

Well, thank you for contributing so highly to the tone of this debate.

And here's a good place to start: http://i.imgur.com/71l5luv.png

To be fair, he's written and podcasted (atp.fm) about a bunch of examples in the last few months. They aren't directly referenced in this article, but I don't think he would necessarily have expected it to be picked up on slashdot in isolation. Things that come to mind include:

  * iWork wasn't updated for years, then when a new version was released it seemed like a rush job as it was missing many features from previous versions. Some (not all) have been added back since, but the latest update removes some backward compatibility capability - it no longer can read some files which the previous version could. (Since the old version may at some point stop working on new OS versions, this is Apple saying to its customers "we don't care about your data, and you shouldn't trust us with it").

  * The iOS update which stopped some users from making phone calls.

  * The App store provides almost useless search results

  * Some kind of iOS API bug to do with the parseing of resources by the App store caused his app Overcast to run as iPad-native, when it wasn't intended (or tested) to be.

I don't know if statistics bear that idea out, but mechanically it's very plausible. This is worthy of comment.

You're right about the ambiguity of the phrase "compressed to hell", but since the GGP then stated talking about "at least cd quality loss-less" I think he really was talking about the lossy file-size compression.

To the GGP: Try testing yourself at mp3ornot.com if you think you can hear the difference.

I think the reason he called them irresponsible, is that the code is formatted as though their reallocater were an optional feature, but in fact they've only tested with it switched on. If you switch it off, you're running a bitrotted code path which doesn't work.

Biblical? "An eye for an eye" was a limitation, not an entitlement.

You don't use your Android tablet that often, and this spells doom for the iPad?

Admittedly I'm only guessing you bought Android, but you don't sound like an mass-market Apple user. You think the iPad is niche? I'll tell you what's niche: owning four different computing devices, when just one will do 90% of the things that 90% of people want to do.

I never trusted Bitcoin.

You think Apple funded almost the entire development of a new open source compiler, in order to hurt Linux through hoping that GCC support would get worse. That's what you're seriously claiming?

I'm unfamiliar with the U.S. legal system, but surely the fact that King were not the first people to use the word "Candy" in a computer game title must weaken their claim to it? For example "Candy Crisis" from about 1997.