3 ms·

I guess I'll be the contrarian today, but honestly I found his writing to be needlessly long and meandering. I felt I already knew what he was going to say (ba

I guess I'll be the contrarian today, but honestly I found his writing to be needlessly long and meandering. I felt I already knew what he was going to say (based on the title alone), but it took dozens of paragraphs to get to the meat of it. The history with previous Apple devices didn't seem all that necessary to get to the real point at the end. Maybe I'm just more impatient as a reader?

jccalhoun 10y ago
I'm with you. when the title is "my mechanical keyboard" all I want to know is "what keyboard is it?" If the article is about "why I switched to a mechanical keyboard" or "How I came to use a mechanical keyboard" then call it that. It will be an accurate description of what the title is about and the reader will know what to expect.
somestag 10y ago
It's totally fine to have a different opinion. When you went into the article, you expected to read something about the author's mechanical keyboard. The article was instead about technology that diverged from the author's tastes. Even I—someone who really liked the style—found myself wondering halfway through when the mechanical keyboard would come into play. It was only relevant for a couple paragraphs at the end, despite being the title of the piece. Title considerations aside, I'd say the lead-up was more important than the conclusion. The article could be summed up in a single idea: Apple's keyboards are less enjoyable to type on than mechanical keyboards. However, the article isn't really about the superiority of mechanical keyboards; it's about how a loyalist can gradually become disillusioned with the decisions a company makes. Although Apple is ostensibly headed in the same direction as it was a decade ago, not everyone appreciates the trend of its technology. The issue is subtle, as each customer will have a different preferred feature mix. The meandering is important because it makes up the essence of the author's story.

jccalhoun 10y ago

I'm with you. when the title is "my mechanical keyboard" all I want to know is "what keyboard is it?" If the article is about "why I switched to a mechanical keyboard" or "How I came to use a mechanical keyboard" then call it that. It will be an accurate description of what the title is about and the reader will know what to expect.

somestag 10y ago

It's totally fine to have a different opinion. When you went into the article, you expected to read something about the author's mechanical keyboard. The article was instead about technology that diverged from the author's tastes. Even I—someone who really liked the style—found myself wondering halfway through when the mechanical keyboard would come into play. It was only relevant for a couple paragraphs at the end, despite being the title of the piece. Title considerations aside, I'd say the lead-up was more important than the conclusion. The article could be summed up in a single idea: Apple's keyboards are less enjoyable to type on than mechanical keyboards. However, the article isn't really about the superiority of mechanical keyboards; it's about how a loyalist can gradually become disillusioned with the decisions a company makes. Although Apple is ostensibly headed in the same direction as it was a decade ago, not everyone appreciates the trend of its technology. The issue is subtle, as each customer will have a different preferred feature mix. The meandering is important because it makes up the essence of the author's story.