Google| Subject | Re: Google Copying Apple.....Almost as bad as Samsung |
| From | Harry Mudd the Anti-Fanboy |
| Date | 07/01/2014 06:32 (07/01/2014 00:32) |
| Message-ID | <lotdlm$djv$1@dont-email.me> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.mac.advocacy |
| Follows | Alan Baker |
| Followups | Alan Baker (5m) > Harry Mudd the Anti-Fanboy |
On 7/1/2014 12:21 AM, Alan Baker wrote:
Alan BakerYes.
On 2014-07-01 04:17:58 +0000, Harry Mudd the Anti-Fanboy said:Alan BakerHarry Mudd the Anti-FanboyHarry Mudd the Anti-FanboyAlan BakerHarry Mudd the Anti-FanboyAlan BakerHarry Mudd the Anti-FanboyAlan BakerHarry Mudd the Anti-FanboyAlan BakerHarry Mudd the Anti-Fanboy-hh-hhHarry Mudd the Anti-Fanboy
As soon as 'Harry' used the word 'true' as a qualifier, the jig was up.
Why is that? "True" can carry the context of "primarily designed as"
It can, but not when in the context of the 'No True Scotsman' fallacy.
circular argument.
Nope. Wrong again.Alan Baker-hhHarry Mudd the Anti-Fanboy
And your usage perfectly followed the fallacy as illustrated.
like hell it did...
It did precisely. In a nutshell:
"All phablets fit in pants pockets... ...except the Galaxy Note 8... ...but that's not a true phablet".
provide a cite where I >specifically< said ">ALL< phablets fit in pants pockets". I mean, generally phablets do, but i never quite said exactly that. NOTE: the 'generally' is just like you like to twist 'typically', and means there may be exceptions.
"Any phablets >designed< as such generally do fit in pockets however."
I did say 'generally' meaning there may be exceptions, kinda like the way you like to twist 'typically'.
And the you engaged in the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.
"And the you"? What kind of Canuck syntax is that?
Yeah... "n".Alan BakerHarry Mudd the Anti-FanboyA few weasel word, but close enough.
"A few weasel word"? A "Few"(meaning more than one) is contradicted by the singular "Weasle word". You really are syntactically challenged aren't you?
"s".
Happens when you think more quickly than you can type.
At least you admit it. I do the same thing myself....a *lot*.Alan Baker
Not a problem for you I'm sure.No reply?The Galaxy Note 8 was designed as a phablet.
You were supposed to supply some other criteria besides screen size that it didn't meet, but you punked out on that, too.
How about being able to hold and operate a phablet one-handed? That's not an unreasonable requirement for a phablet.
How about it? Are you claiming that that is one of the "other defining parameters"?
And are you just thinking this up as you go along?
Maybe I am, so what?
Because it doesn't sound like something you actually had worked out before.How about it being able to be hip-holstered? try that with an ipad mini or a Note 8.
What are the other "other defining parameters", Fanboy?
We can keep working on this if you like. Personally I don't see why your pressing the point like you are since I never claimed the Note 8 or ipad mini couldn't be a phone, just that they aren't really good as phablets.. You claim to never have said the iPad was a phablet. If this indeed true, you sure seem to be spinning your wheels with circular arguments over this whole issue trying to tie me up in knot over an issue I have complete clarity on...
-- my favorite company is *anybody* BUT >Apple<!
06/25/2014-
