Speaking as someone who finds RSS to be useless (having tried all kinds of ways to consume it) and knew support had been dropped from ML, I think you're being condescending. It's not like apple advertises unfeatures on its product page. I would have no problem if RSS support were hidden by default for people not obviously using it, but this is pretty stupid. apple has gone from shoving RSS down our throats (default crap in Safari, etc.) to not supporting it at all with no warning for typical users.
Whether it is stupid, even if we're just going to assume such a thing can be viewed objectively, is beside the point.
If you think it is stupid, don't use it. If you want your money back because you bought something that you didn't properly research, why not ask for it instead of whining about it on your blog?
And, on the point of Apple not advertising 'unfeatures' (I like that term), we, as consumers, make decisions in these situations about how much we're willing to research different investments ahead of time. Likely, for most, an OS is not something to research in depth when it's only $20. But it's only $20. Downgrade if you hate it so much. Live in the past. But don't claim you feel violated... when you made the decision. She violated herself if anything.
So if you take your car in for service and a computer software upgrade is necessary and they remove a feature you use, that's OK?
Clearly Apple continues to show just they truly do not care about customers. It's Apple's way or GTFO. And along the way a legion of fanatics has been conned into accepting this abusive behavior. Here's hoping these nitwits aren't in charge of any other important decisions for anyone else.
When Apple switched to QuickTime Player X they left QuickTime Player 7 around for people who needed its features. Likewise iMovie. all Appl had to do was leave the old version of Mail.
I expect an OS to mostly stay out of my way and let me do stuff. If an upgrade is going to damage my stuff in some way it's the most minimal of courtesy to warn me and give me options.
The fact that she should have done that is completely irrelevant to whether Apple should have provided a way to export her data, much like you can't just run over a pedestrian on a crosswalk just because he forgot to look both ways.
People need to spend some time understanding their architecture before just blindly moving into a PaaS provider. There are pitfalls and I bet we see some startups go the PaaS route then pivot later on.
True though don't didn't they initiate the trend in Just In Time manufacturing. Not sure to what scale they do these days having previous read about them buying up mountins of flash memory few years back. I dare suspect that customised models like the macbook pro which are built to your spec from the choices you get a more accomodating item for building to order. Few standard configs will be in the shops and if you want something different they can get it for you. Items ike iPads they can bulk build as little variance/permutations as its just how much memory in them for storage. But yet there has been many a time they have sold out. No supplier realy wants that, but also at the same time it does help with free news and in a way help promote your product as it does have your advantage as long as those who miss out initialy can wait and not purchase a alternative in frustration.
Apple products are shipped the same day, unless they are Build-To-Order or in high demand.
Apple is a completely different business than DELL. Apple sells in its own retail stores, through big box retailers, through Apple Service Providers, and via its own web site.
The high-demand products must be experiencing some kind of limit in manufacturing. It could be the factory producing the screens can only make so many. Acquiring the components is not a trivial thing with products that aren't cookie cutter.
If you want your website, app, whatever to look like it was made by someone who dedicates their time and energy to design, you'd better find someone who meets that description.
Assuming what the author says actually ends up being Amazon's strategy, I think bringing in a dirt-cheap smartphone option and thereby accelerating the movement of another class of consumers (many of whom are probably still using feature phones) onto the mobile web is pretty disruptive, if only because it accelerates the adoption of the mobile web. The means -- forced adverts/consumerism -- isn't where the value is, the end -- more mobile web users -- is.
If you don't properly research a product, don't complain about its features.
Do some research next time.
Take responsibility for your actions instead of blaming others.
These are elementary principles.