Thanks for the "correction" Dan. It was just a jibe at your expense, I momentarily forgot how humourless and insecure you are.
For the record I'm not contemptuous of you.
*snip*
I don't think for a second that you'll take this as constructive, you seem hypersensitive to any criticism, as the post history for the "Corrections" account is evidence of.
P.S. The fact that you hide behind a forum account called "Corrections" is worthy of contempt, or at the very least a healthy dose of mockery. If you're going to respond to critics then put your name on your comments.
Look. I know you get stalked by TS, have a long record here and all but...
Pot, kettle, black...is not a good look.
Where's your website of writing so we can all criticise it and see how good you feel?
Writing isn't my job. If I get criticised by a customer or colleague in my job (doesn't happen often, but it has happened) then I act professionally and try to be constructive, I don't snap back at the person criticising, and I certainly don't do so under cover of an alias.
No way DED is "Corrections" -- Dan actually has a history of replying to comments, although that may have been at Roughly Drafted, and not AI.
Anyhow, my point is that his responses were never anything like what Corrections is doing here. Basically, Dan wouldn't bother to reply your initial comments here, because they were not substantive, nor would he bother to tell you to be substantive. Whomever (whoever?) Corrections is, it's not Dan. You are just wrong about that and the fact you think you see a sock puppet says a lot about you.
I'll leave it to someone else to pick apart your actual substantive comment above in reply to Corrections. [EDIT: Scratch that -- with regard to Lord Amhran's supposedly substantive comment, I see it doesn't actually have much of anything useful to say about the assertions in this article, or really any other DED article -- just a couple of straw men.]
Writing isn't my job. If I get criticised by a customer or colleague in my job (doesn't happen often, but it has happened) then I act professionally and try to be constructive, I don't snap back at the person criticising, and I certainly don't do so under cover of an alias.
Well, if you are not a writer (or English professor, book reviewer, or at least a school teacher) then by definition your critique of his writing was an amateur one, so why does it deserve a professional reply?
No way DED is "Corrections" -- Dan actually has a history of replying to comments, although that may have been at Roughly Drafted, and not AI.
Anyhow, my point is that his responses were never anything like what Corrections is doing here. Basically, Dan wouldn't bother to reply your initial comments here, because they were not substantive, nor would he bother to tell you to be substantive. Whomever (whoever?) Corrections is, it's not Dan. You are just wrong about that and the fact you think you see a sock puppet says a lot about you.
I'll leave it to someone else to pick apart your actual substantive comment above in reply to Corrections.
Yes, DED is Corrections, as has been shown numerous times and all regulars here are aware of that despite the fact he talks about himself in the third person. Unfortunately you've been fooled by DED's dishonesty which is exactly how he wants it to be.
I don't get it, what is there to discuss? There was a security flaw, it was patched and distributed. Somehow I missed the article (thanks for the link), but lo and behold, the fix was delivered to me anyway. Yawn.
Quote:
I also find it amusing Daniel how you insinuated a couple months ago that "80% of the Android world was on Froyo" and then post a graph this week
You really don't want to bring that up. Have you checked the latest Google Play Store OS distribution numbers?
Froyo still has more active users than Lollipop. After the holidays. In fact, Lollipop has a whopping 0.1% of the user base... two months in.
This shows you how bad the fragmentation has gotten. Even MS the master of fragmentation can not make office product work on all the Android products in the market place. Yeah Free and open is good as long as you do not expect the product to work for you for the things that you need to depend on.
Yes, DED is Corrections, as has been shown numerous times and all regulars here are aware of that despite the fact he talks about himself in the third person. Unfortunately you've been fooled by DED's dishonesty which is exactly how he wants it to be.
Okay, I'll admit that the single comment or two early on does fit the pattern I remember from the old days at Roughly Drafted. Although this still doesn't seem like the kind of thing he would bother to correct -- precisely because there is nothing to correct -- internet forums are full of nattering empty vessels like Crowley, and Dan is a veteran observer who has been around a long time.
Are you calling him "dishonest" because of his supposed use of sock puppet? Even if true, for whatever reason, there's little else to base such a claim upon. His work is more accurate and has more historical perspective than most, and has been that way for much longer than most.
Well, if you are not a writer (or English professor, book reviewer, or at least a school teacher) then by definition your critique of his writing was an amateur one, so why does it deserve a professional reply?
This is a ridiculous stance. If DED wants to be taken seriously then he should act seriously. Same goes for any professional in any industry. Sniping under an pseudonym is not a reasonable (or particularly rational, it smacks of insecurity) method for a professional writer to respond to criticism, whether that criticism is amateur or professional, well founded or not. DED is acting like his own shill.
You really don't want to bring that up. Have you checked the latest Google Play Store OS distribution numbers?
Froyo still has more active users than Lollipop. After the holidays. In fact, Lollipop has a whopping 0.1% of the user base... two months in.
Even KitKat has less than 40% penetration.
In short, the narrative still holds.
Not that it matters all that much but for the sake of accuracy Android 5.0 was released slightly more than a month ago. You're probably confusing the official reveal which was a few weeks earlier.
No way DED is "Corrections" -- Dan actually has a history of replying to comments, although that may have been at Roughly Drafted, and not AI.
Anyhow, my point is that his responses were never anything like what Corrections is doing here.
Aside from speaking in the third person as Corrections, I'd say the responses on Roughly Drafted and AI are pretty close to exactly the same, he used to berate and call people liars on his own site too. I remember him angering some people because of his habit of editing their comments too.
This is a ridiculous stance. If DED wants to be taken seriously then he should act seriously. Same goes for any professional in any industry. Sniping under an pseudonym is not a reasonable (or particularly rational, it smacks of insecurity) method for a professional writer to respond to criticism, whether that criticism is amateur or professional, well founded or not. DED is acting like his own shill.
Well I guess you wouldn't have taken Steve Jobs seriously, because he used to say things like "Microsoft has no taste." Many of the smartest people in history were ruthless with their critics.
You should take writers seriously if there is evidence that they are doing their research and offering considered opinions. That is the standard by which to judge. Are they working things out or just making them up? Whether or not they are a robot with their critics is a minor point.
Well I guess you wouldn't have taken Steve Jobs seriously, because he used to say things like "Microsoft has no taste." Many of the smartest people in history were ruthless with their critics.
Did he do so wearing a fake moustache and sunglasses? No he didn't.
Did he call Microsoft liars and whiners? No he didn't.
Was he criticised when he told customers that they were "holding it wrong"? Yes he was.
Being snippy with your customers or ungracious as a public figure never serves you well. Tim Cook and his rhino skin is much better than Steve Jobs in that regard.
"Compute when, where, and how you want The Intel® Compute Stick is a new generation compute-on-a-stick device that’s ready-to-go out-of–the-box and offers the performance, quality, and value you expect from Intel. Pre-installed with Windows 8.1* or Linux, get a complete experience on an ultra-small, power-efficient device that is just four inches long, yet packs the power and reliability of a quad-core Intel® Atom™ processor, with built-in wireless connectivity, on-board storage, and a micro SD card slot for additional storage. It’s everything you love about your desktop computer in a device that fits in the palm of your hand."
Being snippy with your customers or ungracious as a public figure never serves you well. Tim Cook and his rhino skin is much better than Steve Jobs in that regard.
"This nonsense belongs with some of the other books I've read about Apple. It fails to capture Apple, Steve, or anyone else in the company."
"This nonsense belongs with some of the other books I've read about Apple. It fails to capture Apple, Steve, or anyone else in the company."
-- Tim Cook talking about Haunted Empire
No one said Tim Cook was perfect. I recall a number of commentators being surprised that Apple and Tim Cook were giving the book any recognition at all. Would have been better not to, in my onion.
Also, Tim Cook said that, not Slim Took on the Haunted Empire message board.
You should take writers seriously if there is evidence that they are doing their research and offering considered opinions. That is the standard by which to judge. Are they working things out or just making them up? Whether or not they are a robot with their critics is a minor point.
The reason that I can't take DED seriously is that his agenda means more to him that the truth. He's an APPL stockholder. Professional organisation don't allow their journalists (or bloggers) to hold stock in companies that they report on.
His articles are well researched but his objective is never to tell the truth. Data is cherry-picked, facts that don't fit his narrative are left out. Hell, he doesn't even correct articles (ironic given his choice of pseudonym) when factual errors are pointed out. He's not the only one in the industry who does it but I don't take the likes of Paul Thurrott seriously either. Ultimately, all of these technology zealots are damaging to tech journalism.
Comments
Look. I know you get stalked by TS, have a long record here and all but...
Pot, kettle, black...is not a good look.
You don't need MS office apps to edit Word, Excel or Power Point on an Android device. Plenty of other apps for that.
[Response to "Crowley" and "Lord Amhran"]
No way DED is "Corrections" -- Dan actually has a history of replying to comments, although that may have been at Roughly Drafted, and not AI.
Anyhow, my point is that his responses were never anything like what Corrections is doing here. Basically, Dan wouldn't bother to reply your initial comments here, because they were not substantive, nor would he bother to tell you to be substantive. Whomever (whoever?) Corrections is, it's not Dan. You are just wrong about that and the fact you think you see a sock puppet says a lot about you.
I'll leave it to someone else to pick apart your actual substantive comment above in reply to Corrections. [EDIT: Scratch that -- with regard to Lord Amhran's supposedly substantive comment, I see it doesn't actually have much of anything useful to say about the assertions in this article, or really any other DED article -- just a couple of straw men.]
Writing isn't my job. If I get criticised by a customer or colleague in my job (doesn't happen often, but it has happened) then I act professionally and try to be constructive, I don't snap back at the person criticising, and I certainly don't do so under cover of an alias.
Well, if you are not a writer (or English professor, book reviewer, or at least a school teacher) then by definition your critique of his writing was an amateur one, so why does it deserve a professional reply?
[Response to "Crowley"]
No way DED is "Corrections" -- Dan actually has a history of replying to comments, although that may have been at Roughly Drafted, and not AI.
Anyhow, my point is that his responses were never anything like what Corrections is doing here. Basically, Dan wouldn't bother to reply your initial comments here, because they were not substantive, nor would he bother to tell you to be substantive. Whomever (whoever?) Corrections is, it's not Dan. You are just wrong about that and the fact you think you see a sock puppet says a lot about you.
I'll leave it to someone else to pick apart your actual substantive comment above in reply to Corrections.
Yes, DED is Corrections, as has been shown numerous times and all regulars here are aware of that despite the fact he talks about himself in the third person. Unfortunately you've been fooled by DED's dishonesty which is exactly how he wants it to be.
Not that Corrections needs defending, but...
Quote:
After regurgitating the same anti-Android security slur pieces week after week, why have you thus far remained silent on this one:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/184021/apple-releases-critical-security-update-for-os-x-ntp-services-vulnerability
I don't get it, what is there to discuss? There was a security flaw, it was patched and distributed. Somehow I missed the article (thanks for the link), but lo and behold, the fix was delivered to me anyway. Yawn.
You really don't want to bring that up. Have you checked the latest Google Play Store OS distribution numbers?
Froyo still has more active users than Lollipop. After the holidays. In fact, Lollipop has a whopping 0.1% of the user base... two months in.
Even KitKat has less than 40% penetration.
In short, the narrative still holds.
Also, here's an example of a good, on-point criticism of the current article:
The article implies that Microsoft has no plans to support Atom on Android in the future. Isn't it a stretch to make that assumption?
This shows you how bad the fragmentation has gotten. Even MS the master of fragmentation can not make office product work on all the Android products in the market place. Yeah Free and open is good as long as you do not expect the product to work for you for the things that you need to depend on.
Yes, DED is Corrections, as has been shown numerous times and all regulars here are aware of that despite the fact he talks about himself in the third person. Unfortunately you've been fooled by DED's dishonesty which is exactly how he wants it to be.
Okay, I'll admit that the single comment or two early on does fit the pattern I remember from the old days at Roughly Drafted. Although this still doesn't seem like the kind of thing he would bother to correct -- precisely because there is nothing to correct -- internet forums are full of nattering empty vessels like Crowley, and Dan is a veteran observer who has been around a long time.
Are you calling him "dishonest" because of his supposed use of sock puppet? Even if true, for whatever reason, there's little else to base such a claim upon. His work is more accurate and has more historical perspective than most, and has been that way for much longer than most.
Example:
The reply to Rmaynard85 at http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2012/01/09/inside-ces-2012-the-copycat-electronics-shitshow/
This is a ridiculous stance. If DED wants to be taken seriously then he should act seriously. Same goes for any professional in any industry. Sniping under an pseudonym is not a reasonable (or particularly rational, it smacks of insecurity) method for a professional writer to respond to criticism, whether that criticism is amateur or professional, well founded or not. DED is acting like his own shill.
Well I guess you wouldn't have taken Steve Jobs seriously, because he used to say things like "Microsoft has no taste." Many of the smartest people in history were ruthless with their critics.
You should take writers seriously if there is evidence that they are doing their research and offering considered opinions. That is the standard by which to judge. Are they working things out or just making them up? Whether or not they are a robot with their critics is a minor point.
Did he call Microsoft liars and whiners? No he didn't.
Was he criticised when he told customers that they were "holding it wrong"? Yes he was.
Being snippy with your customers or ungracious as a public figure never serves you well. Tim Cook and his rhino skin is much better than Steve Jobs in that regard.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/compute-stick/intel-compute-stick.html
"Compute when, where, and how you want
The Intel® Compute Stick is a new generation compute-on-a-stick device that’s ready-to-go out-of–the-box and offers the performance, quality, and value you expect from Intel. Pre-installed with Windows 8.1* or Linux, get a complete experience on an ultra-small, power-efficient device that is just four inches long, yet packs the power and reliability of a quad-core Intel® Atom™ processor, with built-in wireless connectivity, on-board storage, and a micro SD card slot for additional storage. It’s everything you love about your desktop computer in a device that fits in the palm of your hand."
Being snippy with your customers or ungracious as a public figure never serves you well. Tim Cook and his rhino skin is much better than Steve Jobs in that regard.
"This nonsense belongs with some of the other books I've read about Apple. It fails to capture Apple, Steve, or anyone else in the company."
-- Tim Cook talking about Haunted Empire
Also, Tim Cook said that, not Slim Took on the Haunted Empire message board.
You should take writers seriously if there is evidence that they are doing their research and offering considered opinions. That is the standard by which to judge. Are they working things out or just making them up? Whether or not they are a robot with their critics is a minor point.
The reason that I can't take DED seriously is that his agenda means more to him that the truth. He's an APPL stockholder. Professional organisation don't allow their journalists (or bloggers) to hold stock in companies that they report on.
His articles are well researched but his objective is never to tell the truth. Data is cherry-picked, facts that don't fit his narrative are left out. Hell, he doesn't even correct articles (ironic given his choice of pseudonym) when factual errors are pointed out. He's not the only one in the industry who does it but I don't take the likes of Paul Thurrott seriously either. Ultimately, all of these technology zealots are damaging to tech journalism.