The issue isn't really Android, it's the touchscreen and the way the UX is a regression from many analog single-purpose devices.
If you gonna have a single-purpose device - make it analog (or close to analog)!
Don't give it a perceptible boot-time and all the other flaws that come with general-purpose computing. Don't make the user have to "wake up the device", let alone have to visually confirm that it is woken-up, before they can switch to the next song.
Now that I think about it, going no-buttons might have been a driver towards larger screens. Having at least a few buttons seemed to make it much less necessary.
Think of heart disease as slow, long-term damage to the cardiovascular system, and cholesterol is what the body uses as a bandaid.
If you have a lot of LDL cholesterol available, your body will use a lot of it, and you'll have stiffer arteries. If you don't have much available, it takes longer for the bandaids to build up.
This is one of the reasons statins reduce the number of heart attacks, but don't always seem to reduce all-cause mortality.
The band aid analogy doesn’t make sense when we consider the MR studies showing the lower your genetically determined LDL-c, the lower your risk of CVD. If everything was randomised except the number of band aids, why would having fewer band aids result in lower CVD risk?
> This is one of the reasons statins reduce the number of heart attacks, but don't always seem to reduce all-cause mortality.
That’s one potential explanation, but I don’t think it’s the most likely one. We tend to see non significant ACM in smaller, less powered trials, or those with lower LDL-c lowering. ACM is simply a less sensitive endpoint - if you have a treatment that reduces CVD incidence, then the “CVD incidence” endpoint will give you significant results with fewer CVD event differences between study arms compared to ACM since your power to detect differences is diluted by other fatal events that aren’t affected by statins (cancer, motor accidents etc).
reply