To clarify, to me, each particular statement was condescending to the developers of those products. The comments are condescending because you imply that there

To clarify, to me, each particular statement was condescending to the developers of those products. The comments are condescending because you imply that there is no difference between them and the technologies you listed. In reality, most advances are made incrementally, and if one wants to make such an advance then one often needs to reimplement some, or all, aspects of what has been done before. "What" a tool does is often irrelevant. Often advances occur in "How". And "How" is often either hard to communicate, not desirable to communicate (I.e. for competitive advantage), or not particularly interesting, but vitally important. Indeed, often existing technologies need to be trimmed back to provide a more useful subset - asm.js comes to mind. However, obviously the person you replied to was using those as _examples_. Your reply completely missed the point he was trying to make that new things, I.e. things that are not the same as other things, are used by people regardless of how similar they may be to other things.