That's exactly his point. The approach of merely counting calories ignores the fact that some foods such as diet soda are low in calories but can have an effect on body composition.
You shouldn't just "eat less" you should "eat better", and that means eating an appropriate amount of healthy good.
Research has shown that, among dietary and health guidelines, switching soda for diet soda is the most effective guideline that exists.
Eating better is obviously preferable, but the reason most people fail their diet is because it is too hard for them to comply with it. This is where the "switch to diet soda" is so effective; people can actually do it.
I wasn't comparing regular soda to diet soda, I was comparing having diet soda to not having diet soda. Diet soda affects gut flora and insulin levels. Calories are not the whole story.
That has only been demonstrated in mice, however, and only with semi-unrealistically large dosages of sucralose, if memory serves me right.
In humans, we have a lot of evidence that shows that the source of calories does not matter, for fat loss. Long term health is another issue, of course.
IMHO, putting focus anywhere but on calories is doing oneself a very big disservice, except for some athletes and bodybuilders for whom other factors are important as well.
What effect on body composition is that? Artificial sweeteners don't cause insulin resistance, so they should be fine for you.
The acid in Diet Coke is real bad for your teeth, but fruit juice is more acidic and has more sugar than diet soda and yet you probably think it's healthy, right?
> Developers avoid Windows for far more complex, intangible reasons that go way beyond a code converter. There are all kinds of perceptions about Windows and Windows users that simply will not change because of this tool.
More developers use Windows than any other platform. Your entire comment epitomises the cultish bubble that many HN developers seem to live in, completely oblivious to the rest of the world.
Almost everyone I know that owns a Mac dual boots Windows, uses it in a VM, or doesn't use OSX at all. Macs would not have anywhere near the success they have had without Windows compatibility.
As a counterpoint, I don't know a single Mac owner who dual-boots Windows, and only a handful who use a VM for anything (using something like VirtualBox seems to be limited almost exclusively to devs, not normal users). The Mac users I know (and those I see in coffee shops) seem to mainly run Photoshop, Illustrator, a web browser, Powerpoint or Keynote, and Word or Pages, all on OS X. I'm similar except that I also run iTerm2 and ssh to a Linux box in the cloud for my non-Mac needs. But some kind of data on the broader population of mac owners would be interesting.
With respect: I expect you probably do know a lot of folks who dual-boot Macs, they just don't talk about it. Everybody assumes I'm all Mac, all the time, because of my day job. And I do rarely dual-boot--because I have VMware Fusion and just virtualize my Boot Camp partition.
To explain further, for the downvoters, Apple is trying to position itself as "the company that safeguards your privacy (for those that can afford it)" because its their key point of differentiation with Google.
Its very unlikely that Tim Cook would make a statement like this unless it is in line with their marketing message.
I run headless so don't run into that problem... it would be nice to get some more power so I could plug in a hard drive without having to use a USB hub, though. Tried it a few times without a hub and the drive keeps clicking - spinning down may be the right term? So I've held off on using it as a media center which is what I really want to do.
The power circuits were revised quite a bit in the B+ (and 2), and also between early spins of the Pi and later ones. You may have better luck with a later board revision - I have a Pi B from the very first batch and it can barely keep a backlit keyboard going, but never bothered returning it because I don't use its USB anyway. There's also a lot of flaky USB power supplies out there - make sure yours is solid.
This is just not true. Android manufacturers sell huge numbers of high end phones that cost the same amount as iPhones. I have owned both, and found the Android to be a much better user experience. iPhone has the worst keyboard I've ever used, the screen on the 5 was way too small, and I just find the whole UI to be really clunky and badly designed for the way I use devices (eg. The lack of a back button and inconsistent way apps try to deal with this limitation)
Sure, plenty of people like iPhones and plenty of people would swap, but I know a lot of people who really don't like iOS and are far happier with a high end android
> This is just not true. Android manufacturers sell huge numbers of high end phones that cost the same amount as iPhones.
But not in India, a third world country, as OP makes the point. Majority of Android budget range here is ₹5000 ($90) to ₹15000 (~$300). Where as an iPhone costs ₹53,500.
My point is that there are probably plenty of Indians who, if they had 53,000 to spend on a phone, would choose a high end Android. Some iPhone fans try to make the argument that "everyone who could afford it would buy an iPhone", and that is just not true as evidenced by the large number of high end Androids which are sold. Some people just don't like iOS.
At first i thought, you were comparing against only the mobile divisions of Google and Microsoft. But after some search, I found that their profit is really massive!
Now i really want to understand the forces in play, that help the iphone reap such gigantic profits :)
How so? This is about Google's relative competitiveness. You seem to blithely dismiss Apple's success with iOS relative to Android, claiming that high end Android phones sell in comparable quantities. This is patently contradicted by the facts. If the goal of an enterprise is to make profits, Apple is crushing Google in the mobile device business.
Google & Apple aren't remotely in the same business WRT mobile. Apple is hugely successful, no question, with their success riding largely on four factors: 1) industrial design, 2) idiot-proof OS, 3) zero hardware diversity, 4) 3rd party developer support. Google is hugely successful, too, but they have no mission statement that says they are intending to squeeze every last penny from the mobile market. I mean seriously, the last number I heard was that there were close to 1500 people working on Chrome-related stuff. The fact is that Google makes "small" (hundreds of millions to a few billion) amounts on a broad variety of things, and underwrites the spectrum of R&D/engineering via their advertising juggernaut. Whether they do well at this or not is another question, but they are not competing with Apple on hardly any fronts.
The discussion is not about whether Apple is a profitable company, its about whether "everyone who could afford it would buy an iPhone". There is plenty of evidence that many people prefer Android regardless of price. Whether Apple's business model is good or bad is a completely different discussion.
I've also asked on reddit r/linux r/programming and r/bsd so I've got a pretty good spread. I'm still getting 2-3 answers per minute so I'll hold of on drawing conclusions until I've closed the survey but it looks pretty well rounded at this point.
Good analogy. But you got the countries around the wrong way with "(US/USSR, Apple/Google)". The resemblence to the cold war is even more striking when you realise that this also parallels planned economy vs free market.
It will be interesting to see if we get the same result at the company level as we did at the country level.
You shouldn't just "eat less" you should "eat better", and that means eating an appropriate amount of healthy good.