> people go, "you have to think of the consumers. Consumers don't use those features, because consumers are stupid. I can't see why anyone would ever add/keep a feature that's not going to be used by those consumers."
Well, I don't think "people" generally do that. It's nothing to do with stupidity; just lack of need and interest.
> The comment I replied to didn't go nearly that far
Not just "didn't go that far", it wasn't anything to do with that. It was just articulating pleasant surprise.
If I were to return this thread to its objective origin, I would agree that if you're selling a mass-market device, it's surprising to cater to a fractional percentage of that user base. I don't see how that's contentious.
Well, I don't think "people" generally do that. It's nothing to do with stupidity; just lack of need and interest.
> The comment I replied to didn't go nearly that far
Not just "didn't go that far", it wasn't anything to do with that. It was just articulating pleasant surprise.
If I were to return this thread to its objective origin, I would agree that if you're selling a mass-market device, it's surprising to cater to a fractional percentage of that user base. I don't see how that's contentious.