If someone had told me 12 months ago what was going to happen this past year, I wouldn’t have believed them. Skipping swiftly past all the political, economic and social turmoil, I come to th…
Come on dude, please use your own brain. The article is not AI slop - it is an informed rant about an UI topic from someone who knows what they are talking about. Please read the fucking article before accusing it of being AI slop - I mean, your whole post is kind slop. Just writing “TL;DR” and then spitting wild accusations and pronouncing that something does not belong into the community after reading a misleading one-sentence summary is sloppy as fuck. You can do better, dude!
What are you talking about? Just click on the link and read the article. Like, well, you should do with every link that gets submitted here in this community.
Good question. I read the comments to find out if it is worth reading. Also much of the time, the comments are more interesting than the article, so I just have a discussion in the comments with the headline and other comments as the jumping off point.
I get where you’re going here and I do the same as far as reading, but before I post I make it a point to actually read the article. Otherwise I may be forming and asking questions clearly already addressed or are completely divorced from the actual topic because I lack the articles context.
I feel it is part of the mutual respect with other posters to not waste their time asking questions already answered (in the article) or derailing the conversation because I don’t know what conversation I’m in.
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree. Often times if I see an interesting question in the comments, I am glad for it, because that was the insight I needed to want to read the article and answer it.
I get what you’re saying about going over ground already answered in the article. For me that isn’t annoying unless the commenter is getting something wrong that is talked about in the article, and doubles down on it.
But plenty of interesting conversations can happen in the comments (like this one) that have almost nothing whatever to do with the article! I feel like each post is an invitation to discuss the general topic, but I don’t consider reading the article to be an absolute prerequisite. If you feel like that is disrespectful, I get where you’re coming from, but I don’t think it is that disrespectful.
I mean… it’s not slop. It’s a good, old-fashioned well-supported rant about how Apple has abandoned good user interface design.
<old man shakes fist at cloud> I do wish that anal-retentive, careful, thoughtful geeks would come back into power in place of flashy shallow thinkers.
But I can’t say I expect shaking fists at clouds is likely to accomplish much.
Looking back, I think it was a freak accident that the ARCTG crowd ended up calling the shots originally. Computer design was considered janitorial/secretarial style work by powerful people in the beginning, and it wasn’t until the late 90s that the “get rich quick by taking advantage of others” crowd realized there was a lot of money to be made.
I initially thought it was slop, and then I looked at who wrote it. This is someone I have a lot of respect for.
Personally, I’ve used every Mac UI from the original Twiggy interface, and prefer the UI of Mac OS 7.6.1 with Greg’s Browser, OtherMenu and DragThing. If I could get a macOS back-end with that user interface on the front end, I feel I could get stuff done faster with less frustration.
There was nothing wrong with the original Xerox PARC or Apple HIG documents; their findings still hold true today.
Ah thanks, so a slop article that barely belongs in the community here. Got it.
Come on dude, please use your own brain. The article is not AI slop - it is an informed rant about an UI topic from someone who knows what they are talking about. Please read the fucking article before accusing it of being AI slop - I mean, your whole post is kind slop. Just writing “TL;DR” and then spitting wild accusations and pronouncing that something does not belong into the community after reading a misleading one-sentence summary is sloppy as fuck. You can do better, dude!
Who’s talking about AI? And there is no article, not even a summary. It’s just a link dump.
What are you talking about? Just click on the link and read the article. Like, well, you should do with every link that gets submitted here in this community.
I will not read every article.
That’s ok - but why would you then want to discuss an article you don’t want to read on the internet?
Good question. I read the comments to find out if it is worth reading. Also much of the time, the comments are more interesting than the article, so I just have a discussion in the comments with the headline and other comments as the jumping off point.
I get where you’re going here and I do the same as far as reading, but before I post I make it a point to actually read the article. Otherwise I may be forming and asking questions clearly already addressed or are completely divorced from the actual topic because I lack the articles context.
I feel it is part of the mutual respect with other posters to not waste their time asking questions already answered (in the article) or derailing the conversation because I don’t know what conversation I’m in.
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree. Often times if I see an interesting question in the comments, I am glad for it, because that was the insight I needed to want to read the article and answer it.
I get what you’re saying about going over ground already answered in the article. For me that isn’t annoying unless the commenter is getting something wrong that is talked about in the article, and doubles down on it.
But plenty of interesting conversations can happen in the comments (like this one) that have almost nothing whatever to do with the article! I feel like each post is an invitation to discuss the general topic, but I don’t consider reading the article to be an absolute prerequisite. If you feel like that is disrespectful, I get where you’re coming from, but I don’t think it is that disrespectful.
Let’s just agree to disagree, I personally don’t like to be reliant on external sources when there is no good reason to not post the article directly.
I mean… it’s not slop. It’s a good, old-fashioned well-supported rant about how Apple has abandoned good user interface design.
<old man shakes fist at cloud> I do wish that anal-retentive, careful, thoughtful geeks would come back into power in place of flashy shallow thinkers.
But I can’t say I expect shaking fists at clouds is likely to accomplish much.
Looking back, I think it was a freak accident that the ARCTG crowd ended up calling the shots originally. Computer design was considered janitorial/secretarial style work by powerful people in the beginning, and it wasn’t until the late 90s that the “get rich quick by taking advantage of others” crowd realized there was a lot of money to be made.
Arctg? (Anal-retentive, careful, thoughtful geek).
I initially thought it was slop, and then I looked at who wrote it. This is someone I have a lot of respect for.
Personally, I’ve used every Mac UI from the original Twiggy interface, and prefer the UI of Mac OS 7.6.1 with Greg’s Browser, OtherMenu and DragThing. If I could get a macOS back-end with that user interface on the front end, I feel I could get stuff done faster with less frustration.
There was nothing wrong with the original Xerox PARC or Apple HIG documents; their findings still hold true today.