or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Gatorguy

Well... umm. . . OK then. *We can all go to iTunes and buy user data. . . Then drop by Google Play for another heapin' helpin". Gotcha. I think I'll just read some other thread, maybe check back in tomorrow when the real Soli shows up.*I hope Microsoft, Samsung and Yahoo are paying attention. They can claim clean hands by just opening an iTunes and Google account to buy the user data from them.
Soli, are you still confused by what I've repeatedly said? Google does not sell data (nor does Apple). As you're so presumably sure that they do it's easy-peesy to prove me wrong: Point to where we can buy that data from them. Then we can be done with this frustrating exercise.
Then by "patently false" you could only have been referring to my respect for you since everything before that was demonstrably true and provable by simply reading what we each wrote.Carry on then since respect can't be proven and just has to be accepted on faith.
Then read the previous post again and follow the quotes. I'm beginning to wonder if this is the real Solipsism or instead another poser like we had a few weeks back. You're not making sense.
Oh geez.... What I said was you can't even buy a copy of what data Google has! Google sells no data whatsoever, not even copies of it. Nor does Apple AFAIK.. Please don't make claims up Soli and read what what actually written in context. I have much more respect for you than what's being presented at the moment.
Easy question for you good sir. What claim did I make about Google and data that the previous poster who you state you agree with did not?
Soli, it's not like you to put words in my mouth, especially patently untrue ones. It was you oddly equating pirated movies and Google data, not me. Worse, I don't even condone the theft of movies nor music in the first place, tho you seem to imply I've opined it's OK. You're talking about theft.No sir, my posts from the start have said Google does ad placement rather than sale of data. You've now apparently agreed with that in your reply to the previous poster so why did...
When did Apple let the fact that most folks don't yet use a better technology hold them back from it?With that said you're right that it should not have been a surprise. John Paczkowski reported way back in April that his Apple sources told him they wouldn't include it.
PR FUD instigated by the competition that has their own "always listening" search features and already struggled with the same uninformed claims? Ridiculous. Of course the competiton isn't going to throw FUD at Apple over this. They have to deal with the same silliness.IMHO this FUD is coming primarily from the fringes of the Apple owning tin-foil hat crowd, not competitors.
Agreed. This is likely near-identical to Motorola's version, a dedicated low-power chip listening for a wake-up phrase.(In Moto's case you can create your own). Google Now does the same. Amazon's Echo operates the same way except that I doubt it uses a low-power chip since it's AC-powered. None of these is sending what it hears "back to the hive" without the user first activating it with the wake-up phrase.The user knows when it's listening and sending. These devices...
New Posts  All Forums: