Really hope you’re correct…love Rosemary
2 Likes
Rosemary will be co-host of iOS Today with Mikah Sargent.
4 Likes
That is Great news, Love Rosemary
2 Likes
Good for Rosemary. I would have enjoyed seeing her on MBW. Cant say I will watch/listen to IOS Today. Hopefully the seat on MBW will be filled with a great contributor such as Rosemary.
Please, no. Andy Ihnatko sends MacBreak down an unlistenable rambling rathole. He is the reason why MacBreak often exceeds two hours in length. Just ridiculous. I fast-forward through most of his commentary because it adds nothing or illustrates a situation only people who stream opera have.
Whoah, there. Looks like you were waiting for an opportunity to unload. Anyway, I look at Andy’s extemporaneous anecdotal style of rhetoric as time-inefficient, as well, however I still welcome his perspective from a journalistic standpoint. I think the solution isn’t to gouge his social eyes out, but rather to welcome those who embrace his perspective of integrity and humility in providing commentary who maybe tend less toward the obtuse and verbose. Those of us not into opera don’t have all that much to filter out, unless you hold it against him his personal tastes when it comes to picks of the week.
2 Likes
“Gouge his social eyes out?” If you mean to present a valid critique, there you have it. Any show should be open to input from listeners. I am not saying boot Andy from the show but, for God’s sake, reign it in a little. Or a lot.
“Don’t have that much to filter out?” Are you serious? Depending on the topic, Ihnatko can easily consume an excess airtime with his low-quality utterances.
I do appreciate Ihnatko’s perspective from an “everyday budget” standpoint. Not everyone has the deep pockets of an Alex or a Leo, so I appreciate the dose of reality he brings to the show, in that regard. He speaks for a lot of listeners, I am sure. But he speaks… and he speaks… and he speaks… far after the point has been made.
“rathole”, “ridiculous”, “adds nothing”, and finishing with a flourish of a broad brush tarring as “only people who stream opera” seems like a gouge, in my book shrug My critique of your post was in defense of Andy, not a “critique” of you (perhaps you referred to Andy, there, or even your own original post??).
Take another look at the statement and paragraph in which the phrase, “don’t have much to filter out” was included: I referred to the topic of opera.
I can see why you like Andy Ihnatko.
I think we can all see just how much you dislike him (and seemingly, anything that smacks of it, to you).
How ironic, how determined you seem to immitate him in your pattern of insistent denunciations 
And you seem to imitate Ihnatko with your pattern of verbosity and wordiness. Are you secretly Andy himself?
Funny to imagine what you find that reply added to the discussion of the actual topic, your point in which you had already, repeatedly, made 
Funny to imagine that you think that reply would change anyone’s mind about Ihnatko. It’s almost as if you have a personal stake in defending him or something.
I chose to counter what I felt to have been an errantly unkind swipe at him, neither defense of my own post in his favor nor an attempt to convince others of anything beyond the inappropriateness of such vituperation✌️
As for this latest reply of yours’ accusation of having a personal stake in defending Andy, that I find to be projection of yours presuming that to irk you similarly places one in the wrong along with him. It’s almost as if you have a personal stake in leveraging your distaste for him as a cudgel against all comers, unless perhaps you’re really so nasty as to aim the swings of your rhetorical daggers directly for your perceived detractors whatever the context
I like Andy. The show wouldn’t be the same without him.
2 Likes
Mentioning Ihnatko is verbose and rabbit-chasing on the podcast is not an “unkind swipe”; it’s reality. At least once per episode, he apologizes for taking the conversation off-track. He knows he does it … and can’t help himself from doing it anyway.
Listen, wordsmith. I get it. You love Ihnatko’s presence on the show and, for some reason, feel the need to white knight for him. That’s cool. You be you.
Relative to Andy’s contributions to his shows, the reason I mentioned his ethos is because it’s why his digressions typically do enhance the show IMO in having relevance to a point that he’s using them to make, as opposed to self-serving circumspection or rambling. I can understand and accept a low (or even no) tolerance for it in a show (though I disagree there should be none), but acting like none of it is distinguishable from meritless drivel or that it should all be treated as that for being illustrative rather than declarative is IMO a mistake, and that’s why I’ve responded to so many of your posts here in order to preserve room beyond whatever is arbitrated to qualify as impossible to pare-down in the interests of a show’s discussion being deemed palatable. I wouldn’t say I love his presence so much as appreciate his ethos, as you’ve noted in your appreciation for his advocacy beyond high-end spend, it’s just that I guess I have more patience?
BTW, there’s a great exposition he provided recently on Alex Lindsay’s YouTube series “Focus On”:
starting at 01:39:22
At 01:47:33 he answers a question about one of his most realtime-unfortunate yet finest of qualities in taking a writerly tac to even extemporaneous speech.
1 Like
I deeply appreciate Andy. I wish he wrote more— or at all; as best as I can tell it has been years since he published anything. Every few months he’ll reference working on a piece but he never publishes. I wonder if he just needs an editor or at least a deadline.
2 Likes
I love Focus On…Alex rocks