2 ms·
Key difference here is that Ryan Paul doesn't go on a hyperbole, make numbers up, show poor logic and clear bias in advocating against what he doesn't subscribe
by blinkingled 16y ago
Key difference here is that Ryan Paul doesn't go on a hyperbole, make numbers up, show poor logic and clear bias in advocating against what he doesn't subscribe to. That is why you don't stop reading his articles. It is because DF/Arment/Asymco do outrageously illogical, facts-be-damned, bigotry-without-fail that I stopped reading their articles. If even once they offered a balanced view point I will reconsider.
To make it clear - If for example Paul went and started telling people on a daily basis that don't use Windows as it gives too much hardware choice, kills puppies, gives your data to NSA, Windows will never succeed and what not - that is totally different than what he does currently - covers open source and may be hints at "you should try this" which is way more reasonable. As far as I know he hasn't done the former.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- MrScruff 16y agoAn alternative view would be that DF etc wear their bias on their sleeve, leaving the viewer in no doubt that they are reading a partisan view on the subject. They're the Keith Olbermann of tech punditry. Entertaining and occasionally informative if you take it all with a pinch of salt. Ryan Paul is much less obvious about it, sure, but nevertheless continually presents his area of interest in a positive light. Typically he'll put open source software under very little scrutiny compared to the regular trashing handed out by the Apple & MS writers on Arstechnica.