An aside: I initially thought that the then-rumoured MacBook Air would not carry that name to production, as it seemed like a stupid name at the time. It didn’t fit with Apple’s naming philosophy at the time. Now, though, I’ve changed my mind. It’s a great name that really emphasises two aspects of the product: it’s very light and thin, and it gets much of its content over the air, with no ethernet port, nor an optical drive. It also ties into Apple’s AirPort line.
It’s a redesign that contains some genuinely good ideas and is executed professionally. But the argument that the redesign’s author makes is not quite so persuasive, mostly because it makes some rash assumptions, misses some critical realities and, perhaps worse of all, takes a somewhat inflammatory approach in criticizing the many people who work on the original site.
Seriously though, how often do you go to a news site looking for one particular headline that is crammed 2400px down the page? I know I don’t and I can’t remember finding any hidden gems either. […] Newspapers always have one front page article that receives the giant headline treatment. The rest of the articles the readers have to “scroll” and find. Why can’t their online counterparts work in the exact same way?