That is a great link! Thanks!

Hyperbole

At this point, it is all part of the buildup and drama or releasing new products. Creating a buzz.

Definitely.

We wouldn't be talking about it.

He is putting apple in the same category as twitter, yahoo and theranos. Really? At this point it is becoming cliche to predict the demise of Apple.

I would argue that theirs was not a stellar year, and imho their momentum stalled relative to other tech giants.

So hence they ended up in the 'losers' column.

Of course that doesn't mean they had quite as terrible year as some in the list...but for ease of reference it's a binary list rather than a gradient.

Apple actually released products. The iPhone 7, Apple Watch, iPad Pro, Macbook, Macbook Pro [1]. Do note all these products have their own use cases and niches. Of these, iPad Pro is a new line, while Apple Watch is a stable iteration. IMO only the MBP was rather disappointing, and too expensive for what it delivered (I bought a 2015 MBP instead).

There was also a noticeable lack of product updates though; MBA, iMac, Mac Mini, Mac Pro. That's two times Pro. Apple is losing on the top segment of laptops/workstations. They're doing rather well on handheld/portable devices.

The reason people say Apple is 'losing' is because they perceive the competition is catching up on high quality laptop/notebook design, as well as hybrid tablet/notebook. Wether that is true remains to be seen.

[1] http://buyersguide.macrumors.com

> At this point it is becoming cliche to predict the demise of Apple.

Well, if everyone's doing it then in a certain sense they _have_ lost a lot of their cachet, no?

Also, you don't remember the late 90s. I was a huge Apple fan back then, and those were some disheartening years. In retrospect, I rather wish I'd bought their stock back then …

Apple really was in trouble back then, though, so all the doom and gloom was justified. In 1997, they had $7 billion in revenue and lost about $1 billion. They now make more in profit per quarter than they had in revenue for all of 1997.

There are some signs that they may be headed for trouble eventually, but they're fairly minor, considering.

If you read technology pundits Apple has been predicted to be in demise for nearly every year after the 90s.

It's just like the 1990s, except instead of being nearly bankrupt, Apple is now one of the wealthiest companies in the world.

Nothing lasts forever. The moment Apple fails to excite people it is game over. And the apple fatigue is getting stranger.

This is great. I like it a lot. This is a great sample app to learn Aurelia.

My flea repellant is working very well then...

Same here, never have had a problem and I use both services.

Any chance you can go into detail how you bundle your 3rd party dependencies separately? I have tried that, without much luck.

For me it's like this:

> jspm bundle app//* - [app//*] js/tmp/dependency-bundle.js --inject --no-runtime

That tells JSPM to bundle everything except your application if your app lives within the app/ directory.

> jspm bundle babel js/tmp/bundles/babel.js --inject --skip-source-maps --minify

This tells it to bundle the Babel dependencies which aren't considered in the above.

Using bundle arythmetic.

jspm bundle src/app.js - src/[/*]

This will tell jspm to bundle src/app.js with all its dependencies, excluding everything in the src/ directory. This will result in JSPM bundling only your dependencies.

I think any age you are comfortable with. My son's school just started using Khan Academy as a supplement. He is in second grade, but third grade math. He really enjoys it, as do I.

Here is the first Git commit he talks about in the article:

https://github.com/git/git/tree/e83c5163316f89bfbde7d9ab23ca...

Having read "Git from the Bottom Up" [1], it's interesting and refreshing how concise Torvald's explanation is.

Of course, he also didn't have as much to explain at that stage :)

[1] https://jwiegley.github.io/git-from-the-bottom-up/