> it is per se impossible for someone to disagree with the EU's stance on interoperability in good faith or that there may be legit downsides.

Oh, you can definitely disagree. The problem is in good faith which Gruber shows none of. To the point of going from "why the hell would you want to change your Messages default app" to "oh, it absolutely makes sense to chaneg the messages default app but it makes no sense to change Photos, EU is bad" in a blink of an eye.

Thanks for bringing my attention to the comment guidelines, I'll try to keep to them in the future. I assure you, I do write here in good faith.

I'm open to listening to those who oppose the EU's position on Apple's ecosystem. I draw the line at people comparing Apple's circumstances with those portrayed in Harrison Bergeron. Apple, its developer community and its app ecosystem are unlike anyone in that story, and they certainly aren't oppressed rebels. That comparison was an editorial choice made by John Gruber in his coverage of tech news, including a link to a copy of the story he personally typeset. It rang loudly then of sentimental bias, and it's still ringing.

I don't have evidence of the makeup of the Daring Fireball readership, but many of them are at least adjacent to the tech industry, and so his words have incredible reach, Hacker News notwithstanding. But what are his credentials? When he weighs the merits of a programming language, an API, a platform, or anything technical, I want him to speak from experience. Collaborating with Aaron Swartz twenty-one years ago on Markdown is respectfully not very relevant technical experience in the domains DF traditionally covers. Vesper was one ObjC app written by three people in 2013. I'm glad it was well-received, but again, what significance does Gruber's experience have? Why should the industry listen to him when he (admittedly not so often nowadays) discusses software development? If asked, I think he'd strongly agree that people in power should have considerable relevant experience.

PS— the article that began this discussion is, "The Website Hacker News Is Afraid to Discuss". As you can see, I've been eager, not afraid, to discuss the merits of Daring Fireball, though not so eager as to upvote it on HN.

> But what are his credentials? When he weighs the merits of a programming language, an API, a platform, or anything technical, I want him to speak from experience.

Sure, but he doesn't actually do that very much, does he? Like, that is absolutely not the focus of the blog. He talks a lot about the business of Apple, Apple's products and their direction, and how Apple interacts with various communities.

I don't think someone needs to have an engineering degree to have a valid opinion about the things the EU is telling Apple to do.

Apple's business relies tremendously on its developer relations. If Gruber doesn't regularly navigate that wedge of the ecosystem, then I don't think he can speak with authority on its soundness. I mean I wouldn't!

Actually, fun counterpoint. This is the current top of the front page: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43498984

It's about Apple. It's an opinion piece, where someone's saying that Apple should do a retrenchment OS release where they just fix bugs. It appears to be written by someone who is some combination of a pastor and a professional opinion-haver ("editor in chief").

I don't think there's any metric by which this person's article should be sitting unflagged at the top of the front page, but Gruber's recent something-rotten-in-Cupertino article should get promptly flagged and hidden away.

I'd say that knowing and interacting with a lot of active developers probably counts. As far as I can tell, he has those connections.

Thanks in turn for the thoughtful reply. I still hold to my own view, but you've dramatically raised the quality of argument I'd have to make to give a satisfying reply. Which is what I think Hacker News should aspire to.

My interest was largely to point out what I saw as the meta trend around discussion of Daring Fireball posts, so I'll leave the debate there or we could be here all night. But I wish you well

On a small point, from what I understand, I think full credits must be given to JG on MD it seems to be his own idea and implementation, my recollection of what I heard him discuss about it on his podcast in the past, was that Aaron Swartz helped him with some ideas and notes.

Thanks for the correction! I'd edit my original comment if I could; it certainly makes the point stronger.

If creating Markdown doesn't make you a technologist, what does?

Correct.

The parent's point stands. Their comment isn't lacking context, and fundamentally it sounds like we all agree with their argument; the sentiment towards Apple has changed, and the environment these blogposts exist in is not the same. Gruber started blogging in an era when people had hope for Tim Cook, a sentiment that has basically dried up entirely today. The starry-eyed optimism for local-first development is dead in the Apple Intelligence era, and Apple's vision for the future is muddled.

Yes, this is the dynamic that emerges. When trust breaks down over silly things like keyboard reliability and right to repair and third-party app stores and $99/year service fees, people that were once rooting for Apple start to question why we hold out hope at all. It's not Gruber's fault for remaining faithful, but many of his modern articles are out-of-touch with the reality of Apple's situation. It's like performative bewilderment at this point, which this OP article really seems to reflect.