I disagree. Looking at the title, & reading over the preview of the book, I think that the concise, anti-politically correct tone the author uses is one of his best selling points. After all the book is titled "no bullshit". And there's already plenty of texts that use ostensibly comforting words to artists.
There is a difference between being somewhat edgy and improper ("no bullshit") and actively working against one's aims by including copy that is confrontational and discouraging to the most insecure segment of one's audience ("you have a math problem; you need therapy"). Those whom it does not bother might appreciate this continuation of his tone, but it is horribly damaging with the audience that it claims to target.
I have some experience encouraging groups who tend to be less sure of their abilities in an academic subject to study that subject and am friends with many people who are much more involved in these efforts, and I know that being confrontational is counterproductive and that you have to be very careful about how you suggest to them that they have a "problem", even if you are telling them that they can overcome that problem. You want to stay positive and show empathy toward their struggles, emphasizing that the struggles are not any failing or inherent shortcoming on their part and are very common.
PS: I know a lot of people who say that they absolutely hate math because they think, for some reason, that they are not good at it. You should consider giving math another try. Math is not just about algebra ...
I like the abrasive comment "you have issues", but it is better to stay positive rather than point fingers. Everyone has issues ;)
There's tens of similar surveys published online. None of them include "search-as-u-go". In fact Apple doesn't seem to think that it's that big enough of a deal to promote. They advertise tens of features & this isn't one of them. And that's because it's expected (everyone uses it already) or it's not that important to a buyer when choosing a phone to purchase.
It's just not reasonable to assume that the "search-as-u-go" technology could give any sort of significant advantage to Samsung to be the cause of a shift in market share or something with similarly "unascertainable" consequences, which is precisely what the ruling of irreparable damage relies on.
> Irreparable harm seems to imply that this could hurt Apple in a major way
Yes, this is what bothers me most about it. Litigating bogus patents is one thing, but this grandstanding about the impact of tiny features is sickening. Especially after we had the ruling from Posner that it has to be the specific feature in question that is causing the "irreparable" harm. It seems to me that the irreparable harm is drastically tilted in Google's direction here, as they are unable to market the latest version of their operating system, potentially for months until iOS6 is released. Compare that to the tiny (non-existent?) lost sales on Apple's side - supposedly due to customers saying "hey, since Google's phone can search for apps and contacts on the same screen, I'm buying that one!" - of their nearly obsolete iPhone4s, it seems ridiculously unfair to me.
There's tens of similar surveys published online. None of them include "search-as-u-go". In fact Apple doesn't seem to think that it's that big enough of a deal to promote. They advertise tens of features & this isn't one of them. And that's because it's expected (everyone uses it already) or it's not that important to a buyer when choosing a phone to purchase.
It's just not reasonable to assume that the "search-as-u-go" technology could give any sort of significant advantage to Samsung to be the cause of a shift in market share or something with similarly unascertainable consequences, which is precisely what the ruling of irreparable damage relies on.
