Originally Posted by jfanning
What? That is the way it works I'm afraid.
You may be afraid, but that's not the way it works.
There are subtle differences between words used alone, and idiomatic expressions that include them. Full featured is one of those expressions that everyone (almost, it seems) understands.
full wagon - the wagon has no more capacity, not there appears to be a wagon there, which is good enough for us.
That's not an ideomatic expression.
What we're talking about is like the difference between the "letter of the law" and the "spirit of the law.".
The letter is simply the written legality, but the spirit goes further. It's what the law was intended to accomplish.
That's what expressions such as full featured mean, they're more like the spirit than the letter.
Your example is a simple sentence describing a situation which no one here would disagree with.
No, I am taking the definition for what it is, you are the one having the problem with it.
That's the problem. You're about the only one here who sees it that way.
The article that was posted on AI, mentioned a full featured device, you can either take that to mean one of two things.
1. The device has a complete set of features
2. The features the device has are fully implemented.
If Daniel was correct (which I don't believe he is) in his assertion of the iPhone being full featured, which one was he referring to? Choose carefully, as the iPhone does not meet either definition
If, as most people would, you considered a full featured phone to mean that it has the characteristics that smartphones would have in general, then, yes, #1 would fit.
What you are talking about are details within each feature set.
See, there is your issue, I am not talking about another other device, in fact my complaint is not even about the iPhone, I am talking about an article that was published on AI, an article that contains false information.
You consider it to be false, but most here don't agree.
I don't care how you take it, I know I am correct.
Well, well, now who has hubris?
You can say that you think you are correct. You don't know that you are.