I enjoyed this article in the New Yorker, about Moleskine notebooks, up until this utter nonsense:
In the past decade, programs like Evernote, SimpleNote, Microsoft’s OneNote, and Apple’s newly feature-creeped Notes (now with freehand drawing, as though no one recalls the ill-fated Newton) have promised better solutions: richer notes, infinite storage, more security. Each iteration of this software invariably introduces more layers of technology—complex menu systems, incompatible formats, awkward input options—that run interference between thoughts and their eventual digestion.
Simplenote’s iterations add no layer of complexity, and the Newton comparison is just ridiculous. It’s like arguing that post-its might be lethal because once upon a time an arrow pierced a heart, and that arrow was made of wood, thus it’s post-its’s fault. Missing its mark? Yeah, that’s my point.
I guess I should’ve known the article could be wonky. After all, the title is Why startups love Moleskines…