To be honest, that summary was about as long as the article needed to be. There really wasn't anything else in it which hadn't been covered either in previous posts on Tim's blog or in the general atmosphere here (do we really need yet another "Walled gardens are evil!!!!!!1", when that's been rehashed so many times already?).
The one-line summary which started this little sub-thread was accurate and contained basically all the salient details. Most of the rest of the linked blog post is Tim explaining why he thinks Android's better than iPhone (and/or why he thinks Google is better than Apple). None of that material is new or noteworthy, none of it is new coming from Tim (he's expressed opinions on the subject before) and none of it will be unfamiliar to anyone who frequents any geek-oriented forum.
As I write this there are 48 comments in the thread here on HN. 40 of those 48 comments are the same Android vs. iPhone arguments everyone here has seen more times than they can count. Of the other 8, 3 are related to the process of how Tim got his new job. So that's a whopping 45 out of 48 comments which have nothing whatsoever to do with the actual bit of news announced in the linked article.
Which raises a couple questions:
* Is that really what you want from HN?
* Is a one-line summary of the article, minus the flamewar fuel, more or less useful than the actual article?
* Gee, Brain, what are we doing to do tonight? (Answer: The same thing we do every night, Pinky: argue about Android versus iPhone!)
(and for completeness' sake, yes, I flagged this link)
