Subject | Re: Google Copying Apple.....Almost as bad as Samsung |
From | Harry Mudd the Anti-Fanboy |
Date | 07/01/2014 01:54 (06/30/2014 19:54) |
Message-ID | <lostb5$q5n$1@dont-email.me> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | comp.sys.mac.advocacy |
Follows | Alan Baker |
Followups | Alan Baker (3m) > Harry Mudd the Anti-Fanboy |
Alan BakerYou've got "No scotsman" stuck on your brain, donchya? so what is 'standard' about an ipad mini or note 8 as a phablet? -- my favorite company is *anybody* BUT >Apple<!
On 2014-06-30 23:23:29 +0000, Harry Mudd the Anti-Fanboy said:Harry Mudd the Anti-FanboyAlan Baker
On 6/30/2014 6:57 PM, Alan Baker wrote:Alan BakerHarry Mudd the Anti-Fanboy
On 2014-06-30 22:54:03 +0000, Harry Mudd the Anti-Fanboy said:Harry Mudd the Anti-FanboyAlan Baker
On 6/30/2014 6:02 PM, KDT wrote:KDTHarry Mudd the Anti-Fanboy
Maybe so, but the wiki sets a guideline as to what constitutes a phablet. But then try holding an ipad up to your ear and see how silly it looks compared to more phone sized dimensions in form fctor... ---/ *Wiki* set a guideline? You don't know how the whole Wikipedia thing works do you?
OK, so wiki didn't >set< the guideline, but it did republish a guideline....
And it's a GUIDEline.
The purpose of which is to set a standard.
No.
It is DESCRIPTIVE, not PRESCRIPTIVE.Harry Mudd the Anti-FanboyAlan Baker
How does the note 8 or ipad mini fit that standard?
I don't have to on two counts.
1. It sets TYPICAL dimensions which means that items outside of that range can still be part of the set.
2. It isn't a standard, it's a description.Harry Mudd the Anti-FanboyAlan Baker
I suppose if you want to call them 'fat phablets', that's fine. But they aren't standard phablets....
And straight back to the "no true Scotsman"!~