rhygar

Says the guy who thought "cooking recipes as Gantt charts" was a good idea: http://kangasbros.fi/visual-cookbook/

You can follow all 12 of these steps to the letter and still produce horrible code.

This seems like a poor argument for being cheap.

"Starbucks Coffee is a Trustable Experience" Not true - I've had mixed results depending on time of day and what barista is making my drink.

"Your $1 App is a Total Gamble" Nope. You have every opportunity to read the reviews, look at screenshots, use Google, etc.

"Starbucks Has No Free Alternative" and "Free Apps Are Often A Great Alternative" I'm not sure how this matters - if you're cheap, it doesn't matter how good the app is. Do you tip waiters? After all, the alternative to tipping is great - you get to keep your money!

"Starbucks Craftsmanship Is On Full Display" Not really. I don't think anyone would agree that "craftsmanship" goes into making a Starbucks drink.

"App Craftsmanship Is Hidden Away" Like I said before, you have ample opportunity to read the app description, check out app store rankings, read user reviews, and look at screenshots.

Fixed: Earth is known by most humans as the only planet to have Earth-like life.

Fixed: Earth is the only known planet to have life.

This is cool from a gee whiz/novelty standpoint, but in practice this will have very poor usability. Why? Good touch apps have terrible UI for keyboard & mouse interaction.

For example swiping, pinch to zoom, etc. Many apps use a swipe to the left or right to perform and action. How would this work with a mouse?

Admit it - you have no evidence other than anecdotes to prove that signs cause material harm, and therefore externalities.

This is government red tape that hurts the economy in that city.

What externalities? What material harm is caused by putting up a sign, beyond "I disapprove of it"?

Bzzzt! Wrong. This is not a technical innovation. This is government regulation of a market.

The cost of this is a loss of jobs for sign makers (and their suppliers), marketing agencies, and a loss of income for new businesses (and their suppliers) that want to make their presence known. Basically, the economy in that city is worse off overall as a result, and there are fewer jobs to go around.

A program like this is a great way to promote cheating.

We owe it to the dead to keep on living. For people like this, I say: "move on and stop living in the past". Life goes on and must go on.

Wow. Posting the textbook definition of MVP gets downvoted. The Redditization of Hacker News.

Unfortunately MVP is one of those terms like "pivot" that got out of control. An MVP is "the minimum viable product is that version of a new product which allows a team to collect the maximum amount of validated learning about customers with the least effort."

http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2009/08/minimum-viable-...

This is a great example of an MVP. If nobody signs up, he knows there is no demand for this product.

Ask any professional chef and they'll tell you about the long-term consequences of standing all day at work. Varicose veins are disgusting and unhealthy.

More importantly, your business needs to be hard to copy.

The majority of software on Windows boxes is pirated or free. Why would a developer write an app for Windows 8 if it's just going to be pirated endlessly?

http://www.windows8update.com/2011/04/28/windows-piracy-chin...

This is pretty good. And even better its free. How are you going to pay for this? Premium accounts or something?

Hipmunk.com says depart/return and Iflyswa.com says departing/returning. Your claim is 0/2 so far.

The whole thing has "designed by an engineer" all over it. From hidden UI that reveals itself by clicking/hovering on various elements, to the entire process being limited to one screen which various pop-out elements and transformations. There is little consistency in the design, and poor or no usage of contrast to separate information visually.

When clicking the large blue button to the right of a flight, several rows of return flights drop down below that. The only visual distinction between these specific sub-rows and the other departing flights below is a thin blue/gray border on the sides.

Going from A to B is called an "Outbound flight", while going from B to A is called a "Return flight". Copy is very important in UI design. It should be outbound/inbound or depart/return, not some mix of different terminology.

Durations are always "-- Xh -->". What is the point of the arrow if it is always pointing to the right? Why is the duration a lighter shade than the rest of the text?

The left column is a Gawker/Gizmodo style static column that locks in place when scrolling down. The Google search results page doesn't do that.

These are basics, and a company the size of Google with as many employees as it has should be able to get these things right.

It's a cool in a geeky sense that destinations drop off the map when I click back and forth. How does this solve my problem as a customer though? I know I need to get from A to B. How does the map help me choose which flight from which carrier on what day?

It looks like it was built quickly.

Why is there a giant search bar at the top of the screen? I came here to look for flights, not to search the web.

Why is there a giant map at the top of the screen? I already know where I want to go. I don't need to look at a map to decide which destination I want. This part seems like more of a tech demo than anything.

The whole UI looks like it was designed by an engineer. For example when I want to book the flight, I get a tiny left/right arrow box-thing to increase the passenger count. Very poor choice of UI.

That's some kind of logical fallacy... sort of like saying... "if you think that aircraft carrier is overpriced, you should build one and sell it yourself."

One can determine objectively whether something is overpriced based on comparisons with competing products.

This raises the question: Are the merchants giving poorer customer service to Groupon customers, because Grouponers are cheapskates, or are Groupon customers just jerks?

The truth that Apple produces most of the innovation in design that other companies then want to copy.

A. "Not a Samsung product": in a technical sense yes but in a practical sense no. It was made by the CEO's cousin and had Samsung's stamp of approval. Samsung only yanked approval after it was pointed out how blatant of a copy it was.

B. The Samsung clone and the Apple original both have "Smart" in the name, both have ridged covers, and both come in pastel colors. The advertising is even the same - each color case is fanned out in the picture. The evidence is blatantly clear here that Samsung is trying to copy Apple's design.