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.<p>Josh's description is dead accurate, but those of us who have been paying attention have known this for a long time.<p><a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3068516" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3068516</a>
"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."<p>You know what I've seen an upward trend of? People taking themselves and everything they see <i>entirely</i> too seriously. "Class warfare"? Seriously? This is a <i>phone review</i>.
>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.<p>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.<p>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.<p>I guess the fact that people put value where no value exists is a testament to the power of marketing.
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.<p>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:<p>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.<p>b. Mercedes tries (or did try) to do a stellar job in each of those categories listed above.<p>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.<p>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.<p>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.
<i>tl;dr</i>: Gruber is too smart to pull shit like this, which makes his pundit-like editorializing even more disappointing.<p>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."<p>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.<p>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]<p>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.<p>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:<p><i>That’s why Wallace’s work serves as a beacon, a yardstick, for my own.</i><p>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 <i>opposite</i>: 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.<p>Seeing this from someone as smart as Gruber is really a disappointment.<p>[0] <a href="http://5by5.tv/talkshow/71" rel="nofollow">http://5by5.tv/talkshow/71</a><p>[1] <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/objective" rel="nofollow">http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/objective</a><p>[2] <a href="http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/13/nielsen" rel="nofollow">http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/13/nielsen</a><p>[3] <a href="http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/verizon-google-wallet" rel="nofollow">http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/05/verizon-google-w...</a><p>[4] <a href="http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/14/siegler" rel="nofollow">http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/12/14/siegler</a>
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.<p>I'd also note that gadget sites like The Verge are incentivised to make Android <i>seem</i> 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?
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."<p>And realized it sounded best when read with the Comic Book Guy voice, and anything that sounds appropriate with that voice <i>is</i> a bit snooty.
<i>"You either see it or you don't."</i> 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.<p>It's actually a great opportunity to expose Gruber's arrogance.
"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."<p>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?
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).<p>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 <i>me</i> 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.
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.<p>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 <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OPSCh3Ys_B8" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=O...</a> 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.<p>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.
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.
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.
On a related note, I was rather disappointed by the second episode of <i>On The Verge</i>. 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.
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).<p>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.<p>I do not disagree that Gruber and MG are most definitely flying Apple flags, but I think this article is a complete overreaction.
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.<p>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.<p>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>P.S. If you're a sports fan, Grubers sports tweets are way more maddening than his Apple lust.
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.<p>Also, if you're in the media, it always pays to stir the pot. Always.
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.<p>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.
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.
There's no "class warfare" here Josh.<p>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.<p>So give us all a break.<p>But I clicked dammit, and that means you got paid, and get positive reinforcement to engineer more drama.
Joshua, dude -- relax.<p>It's MG and Gruber. Nobody (and I mean nobody) who values straight commentary listens to these guys.<p>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.
To sum it up:<p><a href="http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/08/21/the-illusion-of-asymmetric-insight/" rel="nofollow">http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/08/21/the-illusion-of-asymm...</a>
I'm all for opinionated content and debating on topics, but this essentially boils down to a nerdy slap fight over fucking <i>cell phones</i>. Class warfare, eh?
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.
Details do matter. On this we can all agree. So why is this quote so hard to understand?<p>Oh, it was said by people you don't agree with, on a polarized topic, and responded to with class. Shades of gray indeed.