>batista, I often find myself nodding in agreement when reading your posts on HN -- especially when you take a contrarian position. A, thanks. I mostly take a

>batista, I often find myself nodding in agreement when reading your posts on HN -- especially when you take a contrarian position. A, thanks. I mostly take a contrarian position when I comment, because at things I already agree with I don't feel the need to comment on (yeah, have the silly urge to correct "someone wrong on the internet" as my motivation). >This is not helpful at all. Does nobody at Google ever get a calendar request to their phone? The only way for me to respond to such a request is either to get to my computer and open it in web mail, or call back and ask what time the meeting is. Yes, that's a perfect example of what the article SHOULD BE talking about (far better than the examples in the article). With those kinds of things, I agree, you tend to see neglect like this in all apps. I just disagree with the particular examples given in the original article, which are far more complex and bug-like, and most of all with the notion of the article that because of those bugs (syncing, FCP crashing, etc) "everything is broken". Some of the "layers of shit" (e.g, a pet peeve of mine, the traditional UNIX application installation directories and standards such as /usr/bin etc instead of self-contained, versioned, app directories) have historical reasons, and not necessarily incompetence, and it's very difficult to remove them without major financial and time investment.