lapcat

7 ms·

121.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> Its much-vaunted "checks and balances" have been shown to be paper tigers, and the constitution it heralds far and wide doesn't seem to be worth the paper its written on. The Constitution was oligarchic by design of the
122.
by lapcat 2mo ago
I think this is correct, and I've now added addendums to the blog post.
123.
by lapcat 2mo ago
I'd also be the author of the submitted article.
124.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> while using Gmail and drive for everything I don't.
125.
by lapcat 2mo ago
I've disabled Handoff. Also, why would Handoff be triggered by sending an email rather than composing an email? Mail app uses IMAP for syncing mailboxes.
126.
by lapcat 2mo ago
No, I don't use Private Relay or subscribe to iCloud+
127.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> 10.6.3 (the second disc pressing IIRC) and onward were very stable. 10.6.3 actually introduced a CFNetwork/NSURLConnection crash with HTTP 301 redirects that plagued many people including me and lasted way too many OS X updates
128.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> So, if you are comparing the most stable polished/fixed/stagnant last major version with the brand new 1.0 major version branch, the newer major is going to be buggier. That would be the case with every y.0 vs x.8. Thank you
129.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> I don’t necessarily agree with Jeff Johnson’s conclusion that major software upgrades are impossible on an annual schedule. I'm not sure this is a good place to debate my article when the author of the submitted article merely lin
130.
by lapcat 2mo ago
I can't comment on Chrome bugs, but I can comment on Safari bugs. According to a search of the WebKit Bugzilla, I'm the most prolific filer of web inspector bugs outside of the WebKit team itself. Recently I noticed an unusually h
131.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> Are you against Apple removing apps with dark patterns from the App Store because 'Everyone does it'? Are you in favor of Apple removing everyone from the App Store? > Adding requirements for apps to remain on the App Stor
132.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> Advocating to silence voices you don't like is just shit. > I wouldn't want Apple start removing reviews based on arbitrary fuzzy feelings or logic. That's not what I'm talking about. And actually, Apple already
133.
by lapcat 2mo ago
So... you want Apple to remove practically every app from the App Store? Or how exactly do you think my app is unique in the this way?
134.
by lapcat 2mo ago
Not really. It's a red herring. Suppose for the sake of argument that every review in the App Store for every app was like the one in the screenshot, a complaint about ratings requests. How would that be helpful? How would anyone know
135.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> If you write a blog post over a negative review accusing you of nagging, I would expect you to say “actually I’m not really nagging This is itself a misunderstanding of the blog post. There's a whole setup where I talk about my ot
136.
by lapcat 2mo ago
The App Store review in the screenshot used the phrase "ratings nag on the app interface." It did not say "nag screen". My app does have a ratings request on the app interface, which does not interface with the other con
137.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> But your paid for app does request a rating when using it? Yes. > That’s what people call a nag screen No. Where do you get "screen from? Ironically, there are some comments here that suggest I do the something that I'm in
138.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> Yeah, like every public rating system. My opinion is low of them all. > Google reviews on restaurants wouldn’t directly go into a Michelin guide either One important difference is that Google does not review restaurants before the
139.
by lapcat 2mo ago
I said, "Some of the comments are making baseless speculations about my software, without having used it." Have you used my software? If not, then your speculation about the design of my review request is indeed baselesss. I did n
140.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> Developer replies I would note that it took Apple 9 years just to add this feature to the App Store.
141.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> The system has to address the needs of a wide variety of mes and yous. I don't think the system serves anyone, not users or developers. Like I said, the system was primarily an afterthought, a product of quickly cloning the iTunes
142.
by lapcat 2mo ago
The post is not about me. The purpose of the post is not to defend myself. The purpose was to critique the system . The problem is that the HN comments want to make it all personal. Certainly the review I received was an inspiration for th
143.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> Not “that would be ethically abhorrent”, or even “that would be wrong”, instead “if we did this it would cost me a lot of money to fraudulently boost my ratings”. Of course I think it's wrong and ethically abhorrent. Sigh. In the
144.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> The one star nag review is accurate to me. As a potential user, I know not to buy the app. I despise ads and nag screens are in the same boat. How do you know it's accurate, when you haven't used my app? That's actually
145.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> Top of settings. A banner that shows up after a while. Let me permanently say no; none of the passive-aggressive "maybe later" shit. This is precisely what my app does. It does not interrupt. You haven't used my app.
146.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> People One person.
147.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> As for trying to get Apple in on the “screw what the user wants to do, there’s STARVING INDY DEVELOPRS that need ratings!”, I don’t think I’ve come across anything so self-serving recently.. Wow. I think you misunderstood the post. I w
148.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> I don't think the fix to "users don't want nags to review apps" is to email users nags to review apps. That's why I said "mitigate" rather than "solve". I personally would abolish the whole
149.
by lapcat 2mo ago
Author here. A few things to keep in mind: 1) I'm criticizing the system because crowdsourced song reviews are a very poor fit for software. Although I personally get frustrated with some dumb reviews, overall my software is highly r
150.
by lapcat 2mo ago
> Why are we instead witnessing a 996 phenomenon. Why is there a sudden urge to ship 4,500 PRs per day? This is the natural continuation of "90 hours a week and loving it!" https://www.folklore.org/90_Hours_A_We

More ›