Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | Andrewski's comments login

SEO is killing the internet. Seriously, guys, even though you can fuck with search engines, you should not.

Google is shutting you guys down already, and will be doing more soon to eliminate this spam.

-----


SEO spam has no actual users bro.

-----


I mean Google. They'll lose users if they don't do something about the SEO spam.

-----


I completely agree. They must improve (or at least) maintain the quality of their search results to keep users. The fact that it is the most popular search engine is what brings in advertising dollars in the first place. So, the users are the key. SEO spam hurts them, just like it annoys us, so this is one of the attempts to fight it.

-----


Mondo 2000 is restarting their magazine for the iPad and the first issue will also cover this.

-----


Are there really adults reading hacker news with skins thin enough to be offended by his post? Perhaps e have a lot of web-monkeys who have a business plan to deep-link?

Sheesh.

-----


Antagonises means "in opposition to" or more commonly "to incur the dislike of." Offends means something else entirely. Writing can easily incur people's dislike without offending them personally. For example, on most forums, excessive use of all caps will antagonise people even if they agree with what is written.

And with that, I'm done with this thread.

-----


Nobody cares dude.

-----


It needs to have higher specs, as it is running a knocked off Java. And as good as honeycomb cereal is, Android is pretty sluggish and ugly compared to iOS. iOS is <I><b>gorgeous.</b></I>

Nobody bought the iPad because of specs, aside from the battery life. If you think they did, you still do not understand the market, and are probably baffled that people are not buying Intel based tablets.

-----


> It needs to have higher specs, as it is running a knocked off Java

What? This makes no sense at all. How are those two thoughts related at all? And Android runs real Java, not "knocked off" Java.

> And as good as honeycomb cereal is, Android is pretty sluggish and ugly compared to iOS. iOS is <I><b>gorgeous.</b></I>

Oh I see, you're a troll. I'll respond anyway. Android is not sluggish compared to iOS; especially given that Honeycomb isn't even out in the wild running on real devices yet, this statement is totally unfounded. I'll grant you that iOS is gorgeous, though. But so is Honeycomb. :)

> Nobody bought the iPad because of specs, aside from the battery life. If you think they did, you still do not understand the market, and are probably baffled that people are not buying Intel based tablets.

iPad was a new product in a new form factor. It was a "game-changer". Nobody bought it based on specs because they had nothing to compare it to. I'm definitely not suggesting that people will buy new tablets based on specs either, but it will matter that the two devices are in the same league.

-----


I'm not a troll, I'm perfectly serious. I am pointing out that Google claims that Dalvik "IS NOT JAVA!!!" which is funny because everybody knows Android runs Java™.

Additionally, the specs are irrelevant when comparing the iPad, which runs C applications, to something that must ram everything through a Java VM. And I mean, irrelevant to geeks, as the platforms are so different that it is impossible to compare them based on specifications. To normal people, the specs are completely, 100%, totally irrelevant, aside from battery life.

The new iteration of Android has some UI tweaks, but it's still awfully busy. It's clearly made for the power user who cares about specs. I mean, yeah, you can see two things at once. Ordinary people will just say "I typed in the wrong window." It seems like an important spec to be able to have an arbitrary number of things going on at once on the device, and their Expose knockoff is, well, an Expose knockoff, but I just wonder if they thought this through all the way, or if they are thinking in a Microsoft sort of way, that one more bullet point on a spec sheet will make that sale.

-----


What an awful name. Of course the iPad gas a lame name, but at least it has an obvious pronunciation. I see "Xoom" and say "exhume" which means to dig a body up.

I think I smell the reek of death. Now if the exhume was only say, $300 for the wifi only unit, they'd have something. Even $400 would be too much for what consumers will call a "generic iPad" as even the hard-up could find another $99 if they already had $400 to drop on a toy like a tablet.

Exhume indeed. This may illustrate to clever marketers that for a lot of people, the obvious and seemingly correct pronunciation for a clever brand might bite them. My grandpa called Qwest "queue west" as they made him wait for a customer service agent too long for his liking. He was onto something.

-----


when the Apple tablet was announced, the chosen name for the device was subject to ridicule for weeks on the internet. After it became one of the fastest selling tech products ever, the internet whiners were nowhere to be found...

-----


What do you mean? The name is still awful.

Hell I am writing this on my iPad, and I still think it is an awful name.

On edit: you missed my main point, which is that Xoom has no clear pronunciation. Is it "zoom?" I am supposing that is what they want me to call it, but "exhume" is what it looks like.

-----


The lil blogger says "The Library of Congress declared that it is completely legal to jailbreak your devices."

Firstly, the Library of Congress hardle makes legal decisions, and additionally, if they did, that does not imply that a company can not lock them down.

-----


Actually the average consumer does not know what Zune is. Maybe your average geek does.

-----


Designers use a GUI tool like Dreamweaver, or do not code at all.

Developers can make a program or web site using a text editor.

-----


This it a lot less true today than it would have been several years ago. I'm a designer and most of the younger designer's I know are comfortable programming in several languages.

Anyway, your statement is an oversimplification. You could also say that the website the designer made would have better usability and be more engaging for the users (but perhaps buggy), while the developer would have a well coded site that no one (except maybe other developers) would want to use.

-----


You aren't a designer if you actually produce code. If you "can" code but do not, and use dreamweaver or a similar drawing to code tool, then yeah, you are a designer.

-----

More

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: