12 ms·

Horseshit - Joshua Topolsky responds to MG & Gruber

241 points by divy 15y ago

showdog 15y ago
National Enquirer, meet Hacker News.
- evmar 15y ago
  Truly. The saddest thing about these posts is that some segment of the HN population thinks they are worth reading.
  - realize 15y ago
    And yet you not only clicked on the post, you read at least some of the comments and contributed yourself. Hmm.
droob 15y ago
The fact that MG chose a Mercedes and not, say, a stretch Hummer, is important -- a Mercedes is (mostly) expensive because it's made with care and precision, not because it's an abstract status symbol.
- rfrey 15y ago
  I agree it's important, but maybe for different reasons. I think the awe inspiring marketing and brand machine created by Jobs has many similarities and parallels in the "German Engineering" brand machine created by Mercedes and Porsche.
- jonhendry 15y ago
  Or even a Hummer H2: based on a pickup truck, and without the ground clearance and other off road capabilities of the original Hummer, but still cashing in on the reputation of the original with a premium price.
- Shivetya 15y ago
  I think its more to do with the fact that he is trying to convince himself he paid as much as he did because it was for quality. As in, the same reason people call them smart phones, because who in their right mind thinks paying that much to own and use a phone is intelligent...
realize 15y ago
MG's point is completely valid. The world is divided into two groups: those for whom the little details like UI responsiveness are supremely important, and those who don't notice it or don't care so much. I'd also note that gadget sites like The Verge are incentivised to make Android seem interesting and competitive, even when it doesn't live up, because their business model is based on churning out large numbers of announcements and reviews. If they acknowledge that the devices are second-rate then why would their readers care to click their pages?
- bradleyland 15y ago
  Josh's problem is with the way MG put it. He framed it as "Mercedes vs Honda". There's a strong, implicit class implication there. If you took price out of the equation and just looked at the two products, the comparison may be apt, but Josh is staring the price matter in the face and calling foul. I can't say I blame him. I drive a luxury brand car, but I cringe a little bit when people ask me what I drive because I'm concious of the fact that people associate brand, value, and quality. A better analogy might have been artwork. Some people will look at the Mona Lisa and see a painting of a plain woman. Others look at it and see one of the greatest paintings ever created. But like Josh points out, the world is not black & white. Some will see the quality of the Mona Lisa, but will not care. They may like other styles better. They may prefer work from an entirely generation. Josh is opposed creating class warfare out of device functionality. In my view, MG's assessment of iOS as "more polished" is true, and I happen to place a high value on that polish, but I understand that I trade other aspects of the device in order to obtain that polish. Others won't make that same choice. Others won't see the polish at all. That doesn't make those people better or worse than me. It only makes them different.
  - sunchild 15y ago
    Even the most rudimentary trolls use car analogies to summon little tempests. It's right up there with religion and Hitler.
    - bradleyland 15y ago
jemka 15y ago
>Let's not let our preferences (and that's all they are, preferences, not empirical facts) dictate how we think about and relate to other people. I don't understand why people get so caught up in something they literally had nothing to do with other than giving their money away to achieve. While the products we buy have value, the consumer played no role in that value. You didn't invent it. You didn't make it better. You didn't do anything but buy it. I guess the fact that people put value where no value exists is a testament to the power of marketing.
- Hikari 15y ago
  amen
- ryanbraganza 15y ago
  This is the entire point of branding.
- misfo 15y ago
  They are, however, building some amazing bikesheds around those products
- potch 15y ago
  > I don't understand why people get so caught up in something they literally had nothing to do with other than giving their money away to achieve. They get caught up because they gave away their money. It's a matter of opportunity cost and rationalization at some level. Because these platforms are usually non-cross-compatible, "buying into" a specific platform entails a commitment of irreplaceable capital. When I was a kid, my parents got me a Super NES. Regardless of where you stand on Sega Genesis -vs- SNES, you were sure to defend the system you had, because, well, it's the one you have. If you've invested years upon years of time and money in a particular pursuit, it seems natural to want to defend it.
  - jemka 15y ago
    Defending your preference is not the same as letting your preference "dictate how we think about and relate to other people."
sunkencity 15y ago
On one side, apple evil, on the other side google evil. No wonder people are getting so worked up when they choose sides.
- realize 15y ago
  Or, more reasonably: One one side, apple not evil but a capitalist corporation, on the other side, google not evil but a capitalist corporation. I can't think of a good argument why either company is "evil".
  - mladenkovacevic 15y ago
    Some would argue that 'capitalist corporation'='evil'. Having the same rights as an individual (and in some cases more) corporations often exhibit traits that, if observed in an individual, would result in that individual being diagnosed as a psychopath. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Corporation_(film) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Corporation_(film)
    - realize 15y ago
      "Evil" isn't really a useful term, it can be taken too many different ways. How exactly would you define "evil"? And how does that definition relate to capitalist corporations?
      - sunkencity 15y ago
        http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22evil%22 http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22evil%22
        realize 15y ago
        How does that answer my question? I know how to type something in Google, but that doesn't narrow down the definition being discussed here.
danko 15y ago
People like to put their mouth where their money is more than they like to put their money where their mouth is. Tech partisanship is largely because of this -- if you dropped a serious chuck of both your time and money on a product, and there's a competing product, you want to defend your critical thinking skills by asserting that the product you bought is better than the other. The more insecure about it you are, the harder you defend. Also, if you're in the media, it always pays to stir the pot. Always.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
kenjackson 15y ago
As I once wrote here, Gruber and MG are not columnists or even pundits. They are simply Apple evangelists. They preach a faith-based approach to Apple's superiority where no amount of evidence can sway them. Josh's description is dead accurate, but those of us who have been paying attention have known this for a long time. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3068516 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3068516
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- realize 15y ago
  This is a common response, attacking the people who write nice things about Apple as "evangelists" rather than refuting their specific arguments. Perhaps they write nice things about Apple because Apple have been making really great products for a few years now. And if you actually read them you'll know that they do criticise Apple when they don't perform or do bad things.
  - kenjackson 15y ago
    A lot of people write nice things about Apple (I even think they've executed exceptionally well with great products). Walt Mossberg, for example (even Josh Topolsky is generally 90% positive on Apple -- but also likes Android). But there are many evangelists who write almost exclusively positive things about Apple and furthermore attack things that threaten Apple. These evangelists maybe cordial to WP or WebOS, because they're no threat, but ICS -- they'll save their best faith-based sermons for it.
    - realize 15y ago
      I dont think its because they think it threatens Apple (let's be honest, Apple is going from strength to strength). I think it's because they've been making this same criticism since Android first came out, and its UI is still laggy and stutters. It's starting to look like that is just a permanent feature of Android, rather than something which should be fixed "soon". All their criticism boils down to this one thing: that Android doesn't have the same level of quality when it comes to UI interaction. They readily say nice things about the features, but the interaction model is still broken, and they keep pointing it out because its important to them. Its important to lots of people, and thats probably why the iphone is selling so well. Its obviously not important to people who prefer android, and thats fine. But since its not important to them they don't understand the criticism and ascribe people's love of the iphone to "faith" and "evangelism".
davidw 15y ago
I read the cited quote, "Unfortunately, the system still lacks much of the fine polish that iOS users enjoy. The majority of Android users will probably think such criticism is bullshit, but that has always been the case. I imagine it’s probably hard for a Mercedes owner to describe to a Honda owner how attention to detail makes their driving experience better when both machines get them from point A to point B. As a Honda owner myself, I’m not sure I would buy it — I’d have to experience it to understand it, I imagine. And most Android lovers are not going to spend enough time with iOS to fully appreciate the differences." And realized it sounded best when read with the Comic Book Guy voice, and anything that sounds appropriate with that voice is a bit snooty.
- angersock 15y ago
  I'm going back and re-reading some of the rest of the DF blog with that voiceover... brilliant.
daeken 15y ago
"It gets under my skin because it is a pompous, privileged, insulting, and myopic viewpoint which reeks of class warfare — and it is indicative of a growing sentiment I see amongst people in the tech community." You know what I've seen an upward trend of? People taking themselves and everything they see entirely too seriously. "Class warfare"? Seriously? This is a phone review.
- SnowLprd 15y ago
  This is one of the problems with text-based communication. While I personally don't understand how Topolsky translates MG's automotive analogy into "class warfare," these types of misunderstandings are common when people aren't having a real-time conversation. If Topolsky were to talk about this on the phone with either MG or Gruber, he'd find his entire viewpoint changed within minutes. It's very possible that he is attributing "elitist" attitudes where they don't exist, but that's hard to know without a direct, real-time conversation. I've seen this with my own co-workers on a daily basis. What seems like a contentious conversation via email/IM becomes a complete non-issue when discussed by phone or in person. The difference can be striking.
  - doron 15y ago
    Perhaps, but people who make their living as writers, should be more of aware of the power and drawbacks of analogies they use.
    - realize 15y ago
      What makes you think he isn't aware? He writes opinion pieces, so having a strong point-of-view is sort of required. And look how much attention he gets from it. I'd rather an inflammatory strong opinion than a wishy-washy falsely "balanced" piece.
    - SnowLprd 15y ago
      A similar claim could easily be made here regarding Topolsky's post, along the lines of: "For someone who makes his living as a journalist, Topolsky should be more aware of "checking in" regarding MG's viewpoint. For example: 'It seems like your review implies that iOS fans are somehow more sophisticated than Android fans. Is that what you meant?'" This concept of "checking in" is a core component of effective human interaction that is, sadly, altogether too infrequent.
w1ntermute 15y ago
On a related note, I was rather disappointed by the second episode of On The Verge. Bringing an Apple sycophant like Gruber on the show doesn't seem to have any practical value, as far as I can tell. From the production values, it's clear that they put a lot of effort into putting together a professional, cable-quality program. Kind of sad to see all that work go to waste.
- realize 15y ago
  "Practical value"? How does any of this stuff have any "practical value"? Gruber has one of the most popular tech-related sites on the internet, and a huge readership that overlaps with The Verge's. Seems relevant to me.
revscat 15y ago
This is Hacker News. Can we please eschew blog posts like these? Yes, it gets the blood boiling in a satisfying manner. But it is also shallow, plays on predispositions, and always -- always -- leads to more heat than light.
- mladenkovacevic 15y ago
  Give it a few more moments... perhaps an engaging discussion on brand loyalty and tribe-based consumerism will ensue somewhere in the troll pit
- EtienneJohnred 15y ago
  OMG, THIS IS HACKER NEWS!!!111 What I've actually grown to hate about Hacker News over the years is this particular "holier-than-thou" attitude like yours. It just seems like there are so many people on here that are offended by the slightest amount of conflict or controversy that they'd be much better-off living in a plastic bubble than in the real world.
  - libraryatnight 15y ago
    I'd argue we're fine with controversy and conflict where it's warranted, but phone wars are easy to get into and are about as interesting and useful as arguing about game consoles.
    - viraptor 15y ago
      It's a fine tradition it seems... Atari vs Commodore, Amiga vs PC, Sega vs Gameboy, Mac vs PC, PS vs Saturn, Dreamcast vs PS2, and so on... These days it's iOS vs Android. In some bizarre way, if these are the "controversies" we're having, then we're doing quite well in general ;)
CubicleNinjas 15y ago
Details do matter. On this we can all agree. So why is this quote so hard to understand? Oh, it was said by people you don't agree with, on a polarized topic, and responded to with class. Shades of gray indeed.
amartya916 15y ago
I do think Josh Toposkly overreacted. MG's analogy was not great either, it needed a couple of caveats (see next para). But, Just because a Mercedes is being compared to a Honda doesn't mean that there's some sort of a class issue at stake. Honda is a fantastic engineering company. In terms of drivetrain technology they are right up there with the very best (for lower capacity engines, I'd say they are better than Mercedes, but I digress). However, Mercedes (especially till the early nineties) was about attention to detail, not just the drivetrain, but each and every part that went in, was famously "over-engineered". If I may, my interpretation of the analogy: a. Honda's focus is on the engineering (drivetrain to be specific), they are willing to do an average (nothing special, but not bad) job for the rest of the package. That includes average interiors, average ride quality, average styling etc. b. Mercedes tries (or did try) to do a stellar job in each of those categories listed above. So, if Android is Google's engineering, Google let's Samsung get away with a plasticky phone (I have used the Galaxy nexus for an hour and a half today). Yes, even now the feel of the phone in one's hand is not even comparable to the iPhone 4. But the analogy falls flat because the Galaxy Nexus is more expensive on contract than the iPhone. Price matters, the pricing helps Mercedes devote resources to develop the products the way they do. Gruber, got this wrong too. His own quote "You either see it or you don’t. If you don’t, that’s cool, enjoy your Nexus. " is correct, but it's correct on it's own, not with MGs quote.
- atourgates 15y ago
  I saw the Mercedes / Honda analogy falling flat in a very different place. If you sit in a $50,000 Mercedes, and can't instantly tell that it's a more refined and luxurious experience than a $20,000 Honda - why the fuck would you buy the Mercedes?
  - andrewfelix 15y ago
    Exactly. The Mercedes is not $30,000 better than the Honda. You're paying for status. Why would you do that unless you were making a statement about your salary, position etc?
    - 15y ago
achompas 15y ago
tl;dr: Gruber is too smart to pull shit like this, which makes his pundit-like editorializing even more disappointing. Gruber recently addressed criticisms about his lack of "objectivity" on The Talk Show [0]. He substituted the word "fair" for "objective," then demolished a straw man where people want "$FAIR coverage" from him, where $FAIR = "don't pick on the short kid." Here's the problem: "objective" doesn't mean "fair." Like Dictionary.com, [1] I use "objective" as in "report the whole story, and stop spinning everything to accommodate your world view." This is what Fox News does, and I've started noticing that Gruber does the same thing. Consider that his "linked list" articles take two forms: positive links on Apple performance [2], or negative links on Apple's competitors with snarky commentary [3]. Take the Galaxy Nexus: if someone wants one, they just don't get it! [4] Or...they're like my brother, a graphic designer who wants to do more with his phone. Or they're a coder like me, worried about a future where closed systems dominate. Or they're like my friend, who hates the elitist Apple attitude--the one where people who don't buy Apple products "just don't get it." Or they want a cheap feature phone, and don't have the $99 for a iPhone 4 right now. Gruber is too smart to make generalizations like this. Hell, he likes David Foster Wallace -- whose books aren't exactly high-school reading -- and posted this a few weeks ago: That’s why Wallace’s work serves as a beacon, a yardstick, for my own. As incisive as his writing could be, DFW almost always eschewed cynicism in favor of humanism and emotional sincerity. In a way, Gruber's recent stuff provides the opposite: an unyielding pro-Apple view, a scoop of cynicism and disdain for Apple's competitors, and a black-or-white view of the mobile scene that doesn't reflect reality. Seeing this from someone as smart as Gruber is really a disappointment. [0] http://5by5.tv/talkshow/71 http://5by5.tv/talkshow/71 [1] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/objective http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/objective [2] http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/13/nielsen http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/13/nielsen [3] http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/verizon-google-wallet http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/verizon-google-w... [4] http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/14/siegler http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/14/siegler
- Steko 15y ago
  "Unyielding pro Apple view"? You decide: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/14/hollington http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/14/hollington http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/13/ios-5-photo-stre.. http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/13/ios-5-photo-stre.... http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/browse-vs-search http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/browse-vs-search http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/linen-underneath http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/linen-underneath http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/01/apple-carrier-iq http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/01/apple-carrier-iq {mistakenly put in the wrong box earlier}
dr_ 15y ago
"For starters, it assumes a childish, simplistic, and pedantic worldview: expensive things or those that are ascribed more value by a segment of the population are inherently "better" than other things. Obviously everyone wants and needs the more expensive thing if they have an opportunity to get it. The Mercedes really is better than the Honda." Hold your horses - isn't the Galaxy Nexus the same price as the 32GB iPhone 4S? How does the expensive argument come into play here?
- andrewfelix 15y ago
  I mentioned this in a reply to another post, but I think Siegler's point was that he believes there's a select portion of society that can appreciate the difference between the Mercedes and Honda (price aside). That's why Topolsky interprets it(correctly IMO) as a class thing. The riff raff according to Seigler and Gruber 'don't get it' < insert snooty tone.
andrewfelix 15y ago
"You either see it or you don't." was surprisingly bad, even by Gruber's standards. It's not an argument. It's dismissive and incredibly conceited. What does he even mean when he says that? I honestly don't think he knew while writing it, and I doubt he can rationalize it. It's actually a great opportunity to expose Gruber's arrogance.
- jaylevitt 15y ago
  Of course Gruber is dismissive; he's always dismissive. (Yet I read him every day.) He thinks he's objective because he criticizes both Apple and Google's missteps; he's wrong because he smartly and analytically criticizes Apple, while he sticks his tongue out at Google. John Gruber will be a great blogger when he grows up.
  - officemonkey 15y ago
    >John Gruber will be a great blogger when he grows up. You read him every day. Achievement unlocked.
  - hundingi 15y ago
    I've been reading the guy since about 2004 I think and I feel he's become more combative and biased over the past few years. Or maybe he just wasn't very motivated to go after the opposition when it was Microsoft. From what I understand of the guy I guess he might have felt that pointing out Ms's many missteps a few years ago was like shooting fish in a barrel, why take them seriously, hell the vibe I get from him nowadays regarding Microsoft is one of encouragement. Still, the guy is damn insightful, you can't take that away from him. If you wish to understand Apple you have to read him, which is why I still do, despite his flaws.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
podman 15y ago
I think Topolsky's analysis of MG Siegler's and Gruber's comments are absurd. Sure, I don't know exactly what they were thinking when they wrote what they wrote, but it's hard to imagine that Siegler and Gruber would implicitly or explicitly make it about class. I saw a special the other day on CNBC called BMW: A Driving Obsession and it really opened my eyes as to the incredible attention to detail that a car maker like BMW has when building a car. Just check out how much effort they spend just on getting the little sounds the car makes just right at 16:00 and 20:55 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OPSCh3Ys_B8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=O... If that's how much time they spend on just the sounds, it's not difficult to imagine how much effort they put into everything else. Heck, at 29:03 one of the BMW designers even says they use Apple products as inspiration. Now, if you agree that iOS is that much more polished than Android, I think this is a pretty accurate metaphor and any class distinction Topolsky inferred from Siegler's Gruber's comments are of his own creation. I doubt Gruber and Siegler would ever admit to it even if it were the case so I guess we'll never know.
rglover 15y ago
I'm all for opinionated content and debating on topics, but this essentially boils down to a nerdy slap fight over fucking cell phones. Class warfare, eh?
bascule 15y ago
I could understand where this guy was coming from better if this article had a less condescending tone. Instead this just sounds like he's whining that MG and Gruber are Apple hipsters that think they're better than everyone who owns a non-Apple device. He then proceeds to evoke "class warfare" without about as much relevance to the actual subject matter as Fox News.
5teev 15y ago
When Gruber says, "You either see it or you don't,"he means, "If this is important to you, you will notice and value it," not, "If you don't see this, you are an unsophisticated yokel who should stick to pay-phones." JT hears Gruber with a tone of dismissiveness that just isn't there.
- jrockway 15y ago
  Gruber has spent his whole life writing articles with the tone of your second interpretation. Why did he suddenly change styles today?
  - 5teev 15y ago
    Seriously, "his whole life"?
cwilson 15y ago
I'm sorry, but Joshua Topolsky is turning this into class warfare on his own. I can understand how one might make the jump to class warfare when comparing a Honda and Mercedes in a different context, but in this case the reviewer was talking about the quality and attention to detail put into the car (which of course means it costs more, they put more time and effort into creating it). When I read MG's statement out loud, it made perfect sense to me. When I read Topolsky's immediate jump to class warfare, my gut reaction was that HE was the one who sounded absurd and should be embarrassed. I do not disagree that Gruber and MG are most definitely flying Apple flags, but I think this article is a complete overreaction.
aresant 15y ago
There's no "class warfare" here Josh. The only people that read either of your words are just us nerds of a feather fretting over which miracle of technology is more perfectly refined. So give us all a break. But I clicked dammit, and that means you got paid, and get positive reinforcement to engineer more drama.
zmmmmm 15y ago
I'm routinely offended by things MG Siegler says about Android but I actually found his article refreshingly open about his biases (not that he ever really hides them). In this piece he's at least very open that he's talking about perception and the war over "tangible" issues is pretty much over (in that both platforms are sufficiently good). My main problem is that just as the intangibles matter on the iOS side they also matter on the Android side, but the Android ones don't seem to get any merit. The fact that I'm free to use my device how I want, write an app for a friend, give it to them for their birthday, share it by email. The fact that the Android ecosystem lets me choose the kind of device I want, how much I want to pay for it, how it should look and feel and behave. Those things are in many ways intangible because many of them are just potential things that I don't actually do but the ability to do them is important to me. So sure, "you either see it or you don't" is a fine statement, but it goes both ways: you either value your freedom or you don't.
- realize 15y ago
  That response repeats the party line about Android being "open", but part of the narrative that MG and Gruber keep pointing out is that it's just not true. The carriers lock things down and fill your phone up with unwanted junk far more than Apple does. "Open" means open for the carriers to do what they want, not for you to do what you want.
  - zmmmmm 15y ago
    > The carriers lock things down I don't believe there are any carriers any more that stop the user installing from non-market sources. Many offer ways to unlock the boot loader so you can completely control the device. You can always buy a Nexus device. These are all forms of openness (although I would tend to call it "freedom" since that more accurately describes it). > it's just not true As I point out above, it's very true. What I think iOS advocates point out is that it's not practical: no regular consumer uses these things in practice (although the Amazon Appstore might be an example). What matters in practice is how the device comes out of the box because 99% of people just use it like that. I acknowledge this, which is why I say it's an intangible feature of Android. You only value it and benefit from it indirectly. I guess my only point is, if the Sieglers and Gruber's of the world want to claim intangible things as assets for iOS then they should be acknowledged for Android too.
abbott 15y ago
wow, who cares.
- uptown 15y ago
  exactly
cmcewen 15y ago
To sum it up: http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/08/21/the-illusion-of-asymmetric-insight/ http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/08/21/the-illusion-of-asymm...
- buff-a 15y ago
  Ha! All those people who don't understand this are ignorant fools!
realize 15y ago
MG responds... http://parislemon.com/post/14286785030/horseshit http://parislemon.com/post/14286785030/horseshit
robenkleene 15y ago
tl;dr: Believes poor attention to detail is imagined, doesn't properly set HTML list. That's the poor attention to detail we're talking about. Which sounds snarky, but if you are going to be a blogger publishing on the web and want other people to take the time to read your stuff, to not properly use (or understand?) the basic building blocks of your craft is disrespectful to your audience.
loso 15y ago
I like tech and I really don't care who it comes from. I love Windows 7 but routinely use Ubuntu in a VM. I think the Mac Air and the IPad are some of the most revolutionary products in my lifetime. C# is my favorite language but always find myself using Python first. I like to read a lot of tech reviews and I understand that each reviewer has their own set of biases. I used to find myself getting upset with commentary from MG & Gruber. Even Scoble for that matter. And yes honestly, their style of writing came off to me as almost a bit classist some of the time. Now, I just don't care. I realize that I was getting upset by their writing because they are such good writers. Its the same way that the democrats get mad at Rush Limbaugh. You may know that he said something wrong and on the border of crackpot but he is just so damn good at doing it. If someone else said it, you would write them off as a lunatic. His style is partly meant to convince but it is also partly meant to incite as well. So yes, MG and Gruber are bias and when it comes to tech reviews I just don't trust them. Whether it is pro Apple or anti another product. And in the case of Scoble, his silicon valley tunnel vision turns me off. But I will still read their articles because they are good at what they do. And if I start to get a "WTF?!" moment then I will just calm down and realize that it is part of the entertainment package that comes along with reading them. P.S. If you're a sports fan, Grubers sports tweets are way more maddening than his Apple lust.
jroseattle 15y ago
Joshua, dude -- relax. It's MG and Gruber. Nobody (and I mean nobody) who values straight commentary listens to these guys. Of course they're Apple shills. It's what got them notoriety and made their reputation. They're not going to turn on the hand that feeds them.

241 points by divy 15y ago

showdog 15y ago

National Enquirer, meet Hacker News.

evmar 15y ago
Truly. The saddest thing about these posts is that some segment of the HN population thinks they are worth reading.
- realize 15y ago
  And yet you not only clicked on the post, you read at least some of the comments and contributed yourself. Hmm.

droob 15y ago

The fact that MG chose a Mercedes and not, say, a stretch Hummer, is important -- a Mercedes is (mostly) expensive because it's made with care and precision, not because it's an abstract status symbol.

rfrey 15y ago
I agree it's important, but maybe for different reasons. I think the awe inspiring marketing and brand machine created by Jobs has many similarities and parallels in the "German Engineering" brand machine created by Mercedes and Porsche.
jonhendry 15y ago
Or even a Hummer H2: based on a pickup truck, and without the ground clearance and other off road capabilities of the original Hummer, but still cashing in on the reputation of the original with a premium price.
Shivetya 15y ago
I think its more to do with the fact that he is trying to convince himself he paid as much as he did because it was for quality. As in, the same reason people call them smart phones, because who in their right mind thinks paying that much to own and use a phone is intelligent...

realize 15y ago

MG's point is completely valid. The world is divided into two groups: those for whom the little details like UI responsiveness are supremely important, and those who don't notice it or don't care so much. I'd also note that gadget sites like The Verge are incentivised to make Android seem interesting and competitive, even when it doesn't live up, because their business model is based on churning out large numbers of announcements and reviews. If they acknowledge that the devices are second-rate then why would their readers care to click their pages?

bradleyland 15y ago
Josh's problem is with the way MG put it. He framed it as "Mercedes vs Honda". There's a strong, implicit class implication there. If you took price out of the equation and just looked at the two products, the comparison may be apt, but Josh is staring the price matter in the face and calling foul. I can't say I blame him. I drive a luxury brand car, but I cringe a little bit when people ask me what I drive because I'm concious of the fact that people associate brand, value, and quality. A better analogy might have been artwork. Some people will look at the Mona Lisa and see a painting of a plain woman. Others look at it and see one of the greatest paintings ever created. But like Josh points out, the world is not black & white. Some will see the quality of the Mona Lisa, but will not care. They may like other styles better. They may prefer work from an entirely generation. Josh is opposed creating class warfare out of device functionality. In my view, MG's assessment of iOS as "more polished" is true, and I happen to place a high value on that polish, but I understand that I trade other aspects of the device in order to obtain that polish. Others won't make that same choice. Others won't see the polish at all. That doesn't make those people better or worse than me. It only makes them different.
- sunchild 15y ago
  Even the most rudimentary trolls use car analogies to summon little tempests. It's right up there with religion and Hitler.
  - bradleyland 15y ago

jemka 15y ago

>Let's not let our preferences (and that's all they are, preferences, not empirical facts) dictate how we think about and relate to other people. I don't understand why people get so caught up in something they literally had nothing to do with other than giving their money away to achieve. While the products we buy have value, the consumer played no role in that value. You didn't invent it. You didn't make it better. You didn't do anything but buy it. I guess the fact that people put value where no value exists is a testament to the power of marketing.

Hikari 15y ago
amen
ryanbraganza 15y ago
This is the entire point of branding.
misfo 15y ago
They are, however, building some amazing bikesheds around those products
potch 15y ago
> I don't understand why people get so caught up in something they literally had nothing to do with other than giving their money away to achieve. They get caught up because they gave away their money. It's a matter of opportunity cost and rationalization at some level. Because these platforms are usually non-cross-compatible, "buying into" a specific platform entails a commitment of irreplaceable capital. When I was a kid, my parents got me a Super NES. Regardless of where you stand on Sega Genesis -vs- SNES, you were sure to defend the system you had, because, well, it's the one you have. If you've invested years upon years of time and money in a particular pursuit, it seems natural to want to defend it.
- jemka 15y ago
  Defending your preference is not the same as letting your preference "dictate how we think about and relate to other people."

sunkencity 15y ago

On one side, apple evil, on the other side google evil. No wonder people are getting so worked up when they choose sides.

realize 15y ago
Or, more reasonably: One one side, apple not evil but a capitalist corporation, on the other side, google not evil but a capitalist corporation. I can't think of a good argument why either company is "evil".
- mladenkovacevic 15y ago
  Some would argue that 'capitalist corporation'='evil'. Having the same rights as an individual (and in some cases more) corporations often exhibit traits that, if observed in an individual, would result in that individual being diagnosed as a psychopath. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Corporation_(film) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Corporation_(film)
  - realize 15y ago
    "Evil" isn't really a useful term, it can be taken too many different ways. How exactly would you define "evil"? And how does that definition relate to capitalist corporations?
    - sunkencity 15y ago
      http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22evil%22 http://lmgtfy.com/?q=%22evil%22
      - realize 15y ago
        How does that answer my question? I know how to type something in Google, but that doesn't narrow down the definition being discussed here.

danko 15y ago

People like to put their mouth where their money is more than they like to put their money where their mouth is. Tech partisanship is largely because of this -- if you dropped a serious chuck of both your time and money on a product, and there's a competing product, you want to defend your critical thinking skills by asserting that the product you bought is better than the other. The more insecure about it you are, the harder you defend. Also, if you're in the media, it always pays to stir the pot. Always.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

kenjackson 15y ago

As I once wrote here, Gruber and MG are not columnists or even pundits. They are simply Apple evangelists. They preach a faith-based approach to Apple's superiority where no amount of evidence can sway them. Josh's description is dead accurate, but those of us who have been paying attention have known this for a long time. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3068516 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3068516

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
realize 15y ago
This is a common response, attacking the people who write nice things about Apple as "evangelists" rather than refuting their specific arguments. Perhaps they write nice things about Apple because Apple have been making really great products for a few years now. And if you actually read them you'll know that they do criticise Apple when they don't perform or do bad things.
- kenjackson 15y ago
  A lot of people write nice things about Apple (I even think they've executed exceptionally well with great products). Walt Mossberg, for example (even Josh Topolsky is generally 90% positive on Apple -- but also likes Android). But there are many evangelists who write almost exclusively positive things about Apple and furthermore attack things that threaten Apple. These evangelists maybe cordial to WP or WebOS, because they're no threat, but ICS -- they'll save their best faith-based sermons for it.
  - realize 15y ago
    I dont think its because they think it threatens Apple (let's be honest, Apple is going from strength to strength). I think it's because they've been making this same criticism since Android first came out, and its UI is still laggy and stutters. It's starting to look like that is just a permanent feature of Android, rather than something which should be fixed "soon". All their criticism boils down to this one thing: that Android doesn't have the same level of quality when it comes to UI interaction. They readily say nice things about the features, but the interaction model is still broken, and they keep pointing it out because its important to them. Its important to lots of people, and thats probably why the iphone is selling so well. Its obviously not important to people who prefer android, and thats fine. But since its not important to them they don't understand the criticism and ascribe people's love of the iphone to "faith" and "evangelism".

davidw 15y ago

I read the cited quote, "Unfortunately, the system still lacks much of the fine polish that iOS users enjoy. The majority of Android users will probably think such criticism is bullshit, but that has always been the case. I imagine it’s probably hard for a Mercedes owner to describe to a Honda owner how attention to detail makes their driving experience better when both machines get them from point A to point B. As a Honda owner myself, I’m not sure I would buy it — I’d have to experience it to understand it, I imagine. And most Android lovers are not going to spend enough time with iOS to fully appreciate the differences." And realized it sounded best when read with the Comic Book Guy voice, and anything that sounds appropriate with that voice is a bit snooty.

angersock 15y ago
I'm going back and re-reading some of the rest of the DF blog with that voiceover... brilliant.

daeken 15y ago

"It gets under my skin because it is a pompous, privileged, insulting, and myopic viewpoint which reeks of class warfare — and it is indicative of a growing sentiment I see amongst people in the tech community." You know what I've seen an upward trend of? People taking themselves and everything they see entirely too seriously. "Class warfare"? Seriously? This is a phone review.

SnowLprd 15y ago
This is one of the problems with text-based communication. While I personally don't understand how Topolsky translates MG's automotive analogy into "class warfare," these types of misunderstandings are common when people aren't having a real-time conversation. If Topolsky were to talk about this on the phone with either MG or Gruber, he'd find his entire viewpoint changed within minutes. It's very possible that he is attributing "elitist" attitudes where they don't exist, but that's hard to know without a direct, real-time conversation. I've seen this with my own co-workers on a daily basis. What seems like a contentious conversation via email/IM becomes a complete non-issue when discussed by phone or in person. The difference can be striking.
- doron 15y ago
  Perhaps, but people who make their living as writers, should be more of aware of the power and drawbacks of analogies they use.
  - realize 15y ago
    What makes you think he isn't aware? He writes opinion pieces, so having a strong point-of-view is sort of required. And look how much attention he gets from it. I'd rather an inflammatory strong opinion than a wishy-washy falsely "balanced" piece.
  - SnowLprd 15y ago
    A similar claim could easily be made here regarding Topolsky's post, along the lines of: "For someone who makes his living as a journalist, Topolsky should be more aware of "checking in" regarding MG's viewpoint. For example: 'It seems like your review implies that iOS fans are somehow more sophisticated than Android fans. Is that what you meant?'" This concept of "checking in" is a core component of effective human interaction that is, sadly, altogether too infrequent.

w1ntermute 15y ago

On a related note, I was rather disappointed by the second episode of On The Verge. Bringing an Apple sycophant like Gruber on the show doesn't seem to have any practical value, as far as I can tell. From the production values, it's clear that they put a lot of effort into putting together a professional, cable-quality program. Kind of sad to see all that work go to waste.

realize 15y ago
"Practical value"? How does any of this stuff have any "practical value"? Gruber has one of the most popular tech-related sites on the internet, and a huge readership that overlaps with The Verge's. Seems relevant to me.

revscat 15y ago

This is Hacker News. Can we please eschew blog posts like these? Yes, it gets the blood boiling in a satisfying manner. But it is also shallow, plays on predispositions, and always -- always -- leads to more heat than light.

mladenkovacevic 15y ago
Give it a few more moments... perhaps an engaging discussion on brand loyalty and tribe-based consumerism will ensue somewhere in the troll pit
EtienneJohnred 15y ago
OMG, THIS IS HACKER NEWS!!!111 What I've actually grown to hate about Hacker News over the years is this particular "holier-than-thou" attitude like yours. It just seems like there are so many people on here that are offended by the slightest amount of conflict or controversy that they'd be much better-off living in a plastic bubble than in the real world.
- libraryatnight 15y ago
  I'd argue we're fine with controversy and conflict where it's warranted, but phone wars are easy to get into and are about as interesting and useful as arguing about game consoles.
  - viraptor 15y ago
    It's a fine tradition it seems... Atari vs Commodore, Amiga vs PC, Sega vs Gameboy, Mac vs PC, PS vs Saturn, Dreamcast vs PS2, and so on... These days it's iOS vs Android. In some bizarre way, if these are the "controversies" we're having, then we're doing quite well in general ;)

CubicleNinjas 15y ago

Details do matter. On this we can all agree. So why is this quote so hard to understand? Oh, it was said by people you don't agree with, on a polarized topic, and responded to with class. Shades of gray indeed.

amartya916 15y ago

I do think Josh Toposkly overreacted. MG's analogy was not great either, it needed a couple of caveats (see next para). But, Just because a Mercedes is being compared to a Honda doesn't mean that there's some sort of a class issue at stake. Honda is a fantastic engineering company. In terms of drivetrain technology they are right up there with the very best (for lower capacity engines, I'd say they are better than Mercedes, but I digress). However, Mercedes (especially till the early nineties) was about attention to detail, not just the drivetrain, but each and every part that went in, was famously "over-engineered". If I may, my interpretation of the analogy: a. Honda's focus is on the engineering (drivetrain to be specific), they are willing to do an average (nothing special, but not bad) job for the rest of the package. That includes average interiors, average ride quality, average styling etc. b. Mercedes tries (or did try) to do a stellar job in each of those categories listed above. So, if Android is Google's engineering, Google let's Samsung get away with a plasticky phone (I have used the Galaxy nexus for an hour and a half today). Yes, even now the feel of the phone in one's hand is not even comparable to the iPhone 4. But the analogy falls flat because the Galaxy Nexus is more expensive on contract than the iPhone. Price matters, the pricing helps Mercedes devote resources to develop the products the way they do. Gruber, got this wrong too. His own quote "You either see it or you don’t. If you don’t, that’s cool, enjoy your Nexus. " is correct, but it's correct on it's own, not with MGs quote.

atourgates 15y ago
I saw the Mercedes / Honda analogy falling flat in a very different place. If you sit in a $50,000 Mercedes, and can't instantly tell that it's a more refined and luxurious experience than a $20,000 Honda - why the fuck would you buy the Mercedes?
- andrewfelix 15y ago
  Exactly. The Mercedes is not $30,000 better than the Honda. You're paying for status. Why would you do that unless you were making a statement about your salary, position etc?
  - 15y ago

achompas 15y ago

tl;dr: Gruber is too smart to pull shit like this, which makes his pundit-like editorializing even more disappointing. Gruber recently addressed criticisms about his lack of "objectivity" on The Talk Show [0]. He substituted the word "fair" for "objective," then demolished a straw man where people want "$FAIR coverage" from him, where $FAIR = "don't pick on the short kid." Here's the problem: "objective" doesn't mean "fair." Like Dictionary.com, [1] I use "objective" as in "report the whole story, and stop spinning everything to accommodate your world view." This is what Fox News does, and I've started noticing that Gruber does the same thing. Consider that his "linked list" articles take two forms: positive links on Apple performance [2], or negative links on Apple's competitors with snarky commentary [3]. Take the Galaxy Nexus: if someone wants one, they just don't get it! [4] Or...they're like my brother, a graphic designer who wants to do more with his phone. Or they're a coder like me, worried about a future where closed systems dominate. Or they're like my friend, who hates the elitist Apple attitude--the one where people who don't buy Apple products "just don't get it." Or they want a cheap feature phone, and don't have the $99 for a iPhone 4 right now. Gruber is too smart to make generalizations like this. Hell, he likes David Foster Wallace -- whose books aren't exactly high-school reading -- and posted this a few weeks ago: That’s why Wallace’s work serves as a beacon, a yardstick, for my own. As incisive as his writing could be, DFW almost always eschewed cynicism in favor of humanism and emotional sincerity. In a way, Gruber's recent stuff provides the opposite: an unyielding pro-Apple view, a scoop of cynicism and disdain for Apple's competitors, and a black-or-white view of the mobile scene that doesn't reflect reality. Seeing this from someone as smart as Gruber is really a disappointment. [0] http://5by5.tv/talkshow/71 http://5by5.tv/talkshow/71 [1] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/objective http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/objective [2] http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/13/nielsen http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/13/nielsen [3] http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/verizon-google-wallet http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/verizon-google-w... [4] http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/14/siegler http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/14/siegler

Steko 15y ago
"Unyielding pro Apple view"? You decide: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/14/hollington http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/14/hollington http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/13/ios-5-photo-stre.. http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/13/ios-5-photo-stre.... http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/browse-vs-search http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/browse-vs-search http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/linen-underneath http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/linen-underneath http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/01/apple-carrier-iq http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/01/apple-carrier-iq {mistakenly put in the wrong box earlier}

dr_ 15y ago

"For starters, it assumes a childish, simplistic, and pedantic worldview: expensive things or those that are ascribed more value by a segment of the population are inherently "better" than other things. Obviously everyone wants and needs the more expensive thing if they have an opportunity to get it. The Mercedes really is better than the Honda." Hold your horses - isn't the Galaxy Nexus the same price as the 32GB iPhone 4S? How does the expensive argument come into play here?

andrewfelix 15y ago
I mentioned this in a reply to another post, but I think Siegler's point was that he believes there's a select portion of society that can appreciate the difference between the Mercedes and Honda (price aside). That's why Topolsky interprets it(correctly IMO) as a class thing. The riff raff according to Seigler and Gruber 'don't get it' < insert snooty tone.

andrewfelix 15y ago

"You either see it or you don't." was surprisingly bad, even by Gruber's standards. It's not an argument. It's dismissive and incredibly conceited. What does he even mean when he says that? I honestly don't think he knew while writing it, and I doubt he can rationalize it. It's actually a great opportunity to expose Gruber's arrogance.

jaylevitt 15y ago
Of course Gruber is dismissive; he's always dismissive. (Yet I read him every day.) He thinks he's objective because he criticizes both Apple and Google's missteps; he's wrong because he smartly and analytically criticizes Apple, while he sticks his tongue out at Google. John Gruber will be a great blogger when he grows up.
- officemonkey 15y ago
  >John Gruber will be a great blogger when he grows up. You read him every day. Achievement unlocked.
- hundingi 15y ago
  I've been reading the guy since about 2004 I think and I feel he's become more combative and biased over the past few years. Or maybe he just wasn't very motivated to go after the opposition when it was Microsoft. From what I understand of the guy I guess he might have felt that pointing out Ms's many missteps a few years ago was like shooting fish in a barrel, why take them seriously, hell the vibe I get from him nowadays regarding Microsoft is one of encouragement. Still, the guy is damn insightful, you can't take that away from him. If you wish to understand Apple you have to read him, which is why I still do, despite his flaws.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

podman 15y ago

I think Topolsky's analysis of MG Siegler's and Gruber's comments are absurd. Sure, I don't know exactly what they were thinking when they wrote what they wrote, but it's hard to imagine that Siegler and Gruber would implicitly or explicitly make it about class. I saw a special the other day on CNBC called BMW: A Driving Obsession and it really opened my eyes as to the incredible attention to detail that a car maker like BMW has when building a car. Just check out how much effort they spend just on getting the little sounds the car makes just right at 16:00 and 20:55 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OPSCh3Ys_B8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=O... If that's how much time they spend on just the sounds, it's not difficult to imagine how much effort they put into everything else. Heck, at 29:03 one of the BMW designers even says they use Apple products as inspiration. Now, if you agree that iOS is that much more polished than Android, I think this is a pretty accurate metaphor and any class distinction Topolsky inferred from Siegler's Gruber's comments are of his own creation. I doubt Gruber and Siegler would ever admit to it even if it were the case so I guess we'll never know.

rglover 15y ago

I'm all for opinionated content and debating on topics, but this essentially boils down to a nerdy slap fight over fucking cell phones. Class warfare, eh?

bascule 15y ago

I could understand where this guy was coming from better if this article had a less condescending tone. Instead this just sounds like he's whining that MG and Gruber are Apple hipsters that think they're better than everyone who owns a non-Apple device. He then proceeds to evoke "class warfare" without about as much relevance to the actual subject matter as Fox News.

5teev 15y ago

When Gruber says, "You either see it or you don't,"he means, "If this is important to you, you will notice and value it," not, "If you don't see this, you are an unsophisticated yokel who should stick to pay-phones." JT hears Gruber with a tone of dismissiveness that just isn't there.

jrockway 15y ago
Gruber has spent his whole life writing articles with the tone of your second interpretation. Why did he suddenly change styles today?
- 5teev 15y ago
  Seriously, "his whole life"?

cwilson 15y ago

I'm sorry, but Joshua Topolsky is turning this into class warfare on his own. I can understand how one might make the jump to class warfare when comparing a Honda and Mercedes in a different context, but in this case the reviewer was talking about the quality and attention to detail put into the car (which of course means it costs more, they put more time and effort into creating it). When I read MG's statement out loud, it made perfect sense to me. When I read Topolsky's immediate jump to class warfare, my gut reaction was that HE was the one who sounded absurd and should be embarrassed. I do not disagree that Gruber and MG are most definitely flying Apple flags, but I think this article is a complete overreaction.

aresant 15y ago

There's no "class warfare" here Josh. The only people that read either of your words are just us nerds of a feather fretting over which miracle of technology is more perfectly refined. So give us all a break. But I clicked dammit, and that means you got paid, and get positive reinforcement to engineer more drama.

zmmmmm 15y ago

I'm routinely offended by things MG Siegler says about Android but I actually found his article refreshingly open about his biases (not that he ever really hides them). In this piece he's at least very open that he's talking about perception and the war over "tangible" issues is pretty much over (in that both platforms are sufficiently good). My main problem is that just as the intangibles matter on the iOS side they also matter on the Android side, but the Android ones don't seem to get any merit. The fact that I'm free to use my device how I want, write an app for a friend, give it to them for their birthday, share it by email. The fact that the Android ecosystem lets me choose the kind of device I want, how much I want to pay for it, how it should look and feel and behave. Those things are in many ways intangible because many of them are just potential things that I don't actually do but the ability to do them is important to me. So sure, "you either see it or you don't" is a fine statement, but it goes both ways: you either value your freedom or you don't.

realize 15y ago
That response repeats the party line about Android being "open", but part of the narrative that MG and Gruber keep pointing out is that it's just not true. The carriers lock things down and fill your phone up with unwanted junk far more than Apple does. "Open" means open for the carriers to do what they want, not for you to do what you want.
- zmmmmm 15y ago
  > The carriers lock things down I don't believe there are any carriers any more that stop the user installing from non-market sources. Many offer ways to unlock the boot loader so you can completely control the device. You can always buy a Nexus device. These are all forms of openness (although I would tend to call it "freedom" since that more accurately describes it). > it's just not true As I point out above, it's very true. What I think iOS advocates point out is that it's not practical: no regular consumer uses these things in practice (although the Amazon Appstore might be an example). What matters in practice is how the device comes out of the box because 99% of people just use it like that. I acknowledge this, which is why I say it's an intangible feature of Android. You only value it and benefit from it indirectly. I guess my only point is, if the Sieglers and Gruber's of the world want to claim intangible things as assets for iOS then they should be acknowledged for Android too.

abbott 15y ago

wow, who cares.

uptown 15y ago
exactly

cmcewen 15y ago

To sum it up: http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/08/21/the-illusion-of-asymmetric-insight/ http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/08/21/the-illusion-of-asymm...

buff-a 15y ago
Ha! All those people who don't understand this are ignorant fools!

realize 15y ago

MG responds... http://parislemon.com/post/14286785030/horseshit http://parislemon.com/post/14286785030/horseshit

robenkleene 15y ago

tl;dr: Believes poor attention to detail is imagined, doesn't properly set HTML list. That's the poor attention to detail we're talking about. Which sounds snarky, but if you are going to be a blogger publishing on the web and want other people to take the time to read your stuff, to not properly use (or understand?) the basic building blocks of your craft is disrespectful to your audience.

loso 15y ago

I like tech and I really don't care who it comes from. I love Windows 7 but routinely use Ubuntu in a VM. I think the Mac Air and the IPad are some of the most revolutionary products in my lifetime. C# is my favorite language but always find myself using Python first. I like to read a lot of tech reviews and I understand that each reviewer has their own set of biases. I used to find myself getting upset with commentary from MG & Gruber. Even Scoble for that matter. And yes honestly, their style of writing came off to me as almost a bit classist some of the time. Now, I just don't care. I realize that I was getting upset by their writing because they are such good writers. Its the same way that the democrats get mad at Rush Limbaugh. You may know that he said something wrong and on the border of crackpot but he is just so damn good at doing it. If someone else said it, you would write them off as a lunatic. His style is partly meant to convince but it is also partly meant to incite as well. So yes, MG and Gruber are bias and when it comes to tech reviews I just don't trust them. Whether it is pro Apple or anti another product. And in the case of Scoble, his silicon valley tunnel vision turns me off. But I will still read their articles because they are good at what they do. And if I start to get a "WTF?!" moment then I will just calm down and realize that it is part of the entertainment package that comes along with reading them. P.S. If you're a sports fan, Grubers sports tweets are way more maddening than his Apple lust.

jroseattle 15y ago

Joshua, dude -- relax. It's MG and Gruber. Nobody (and I mean nobody) who values straight commentary listens to these guys. Of course they're Apple shills. It's what got them notoriety and made their reputation. They're not going to turn on the hand that feeds them.