[_pius]

I wish I knew why the concept of hypocrisy is so difficult to grasp that people are prone to apply it incorrectly. Maybe people just don't understand when someone is making a moral statement, and when someone isn't.

Indeed, "tu quoque" fail abounds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

[cageface]

Merriam Webster defines hypocrisy thus:

"feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion"

I'd say Apple's lambasting of Adobe for failing to provide open & reliable cross-platform software fits the bill perfectly. Steve's critique of Flash can be both accurate and hypocritical at the same time.

[pohl]

Apple's lambasting of Adobe for failing to provide open & reliable cross-platform software

I think a quotation to support your interpretation above would be helpful, because it's not at all what I read in "Thoughts on Flash" today.

That is, I did not get the impression that Apple thought Adobe ought to deliver anything open. They were merely pointing out that it is not — and that this does not meet Apple's vision for what they want to support within Mobile Safari.

In fact, he went so far as to concede that "Apple has many proprietary products too."

[_pius]

Steve's critique of Flash can be both accurate and hypocritical at the same time.

Great point, actually.