Moderator Behaviors

1234568»

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 160
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

    Perhaps I should setup a domain, MacHumors.com, displaying a white page with just one single link ...to this thread.


     


    Oh, "Stuff Appletards Say" is already dedicated to hate speech about me, so you don't have to worry about that.

  • Reply 142 of 160
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    Oh, "Stuff Appletards Say" is already dedicated to hate speech about me, so you don't have to worry about that.

    I know; I'm reading the iPhone naming scheme thread, where you're the only one making sense on the naming scheme.
  • Reply 143 of 160
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post





    I know; I'm reading the iPhone naming scheme thread, where you're the only one making sense on the naming scheme.


     


    For someone not intending to suck up you're doing an amazing job of sucking up.


     


    In actuality


     


    a) his logic was predicated on a faulty premise and not in line with actual naming history


    b) he was annoyingly dismissive and aggressive with anyone with a differing opinion which was the primary problem


    c) he was proven wrong


     


    The same pattern emerged with the iPad mini.


     


    For folks trying to get rid of him realize that the site owner(s) don't really care since he's probably unpaid free labor and he's not impacting site revenue.  That a few folks leave the forums is of no interest and in many ways his outlandish behavior increases hits so he's a net positive for them.  You don't generate any revenue.  You don't provide free labor.  Therefore you don't matter.


     


    The best thing to do is simply ignore him as best you can.  Eventually, in a few years, circumstances and interests will change and he'll leave.

  • Reply 144 of 160
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by nht View Post

    a) his logic was predicated on a faulty premise and not in line with actual naming history


     


    Ah, so when I said the name "iPhone 3G" was based on the type of telephony, I was wrong, that was faulty, and wasn't in line with actual naming history, huh?




    Maybe just stop lying?





    The best thing to do is simply ignore him as best you can.  Eventually, in a few years, circumstances and interests will change and he'll leave.



     


    lolno. I'm in it for the long haul. Get used to it.

  • Reply 145 of 160
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    nht wrote: »
    For someone not intending to suck up you're doing an amazing job of sucking up.

    In actuality

    a) his logic was predicated on a faulty premise and not in line with actual naming history
    b) he was annoyingly dismissive and aggressive with anyone with a differing opinion which was the primary problem
    c) he was proven wrong

    The same pattern emerged with the iPad mini.

    For folks trying to get rid of him realize that the site owner(s) don't really care since he's probably unpaid free labor and he's not impacting site revenue.  That a few folks leave the forums is of no interest and in many ways his outlandish behavior increases hits so he's a net positive for them.  You don't generate any revenue.  You don't provide free labor.  Therefore you don't matter.

    The best thing to do is simply ignore him as best you can.  Eventually, in a few years, circumstances and interests will change and he'll leave.

    Indeed, not my intension, and understand it does look like it, for others.

    "In actuallity" But that's an opinion. Just like "faulty premise", "in line with actual naming history", "annoyingly", "dismissive", "primary problem"

    and c) 'proven wrong'.. I remember it as he having his opinion why it should be named the 6, not that it would. This is key; he is sharing his opinion, but because of his 'coming on strong' he gets lambasted for it.

    Well, good or bad, you understand it and have a view on how future events might unfold.
  • Reply 146 of 160
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post



    and c) 'proven wrong'.. I remember it as he having his opinion why it should be named the 6, not that it would. 


     


    Proven wrong is the correct factual assessment.  He was adamant in his assertion that in no way would the next iPhone be called the iPhone 5.  This was incorrect.


     


    As you remember it?  I thought you just said you were reading the thread?  Perhaps you should provide the link to the thread you are reading.

  • Reply 147 of 160
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by nht View Post

    Proven wrong is the correct factual assessment.  He was adamant in his assertion that in no way would the next iPhone be called the iPhone 5.  This was incorrect.


     


    That's spot on, though, even though your first point wasn't.

  • Reply 148 of 160
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Ah, so when I said the name "iPhone 3G" was based on the type of telephony, I was wrong, that was faulty, and wasn't in line with actual naming history, huh?




    Maybe just stop lying?


     


    lolno. I'm in it for the long haul. Get used to it.



     


    I'm not lying when I say that your basic premise was proven to be incorrect.  If the logic is sound (not necessarily true but I'll give that to you since I'm not going back to check) and the result erroneous then the flaw is in the initial conditions.  Hence your premise was wrong and you are again being an asshat by calling me a liar because I disagree. 


     


    Maybe just get bent.  I'm already used to you.

  • Reply 149 of 160
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by nht View Post

    I'm not lying when I say that your basic premise was proven to be incorrect.


     


    That they named phones alternately based on telephony, generation, and speed was "incorrect"?


     


    No. It wasn't.

  • Reply 150 of 160
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    That they named phones alternately based on telephony, generation, and speed was "incorrect"?


     


    No. It wasn't.



     


    It certainly was incorrect.  There is no specific pattern to Apple product naming so your claim is completely wrong.


     


    iPhone 4S name is not based on telephony, generation nor speed.  The phone was 3G, 5th generation and the S was for Siri and not speed.


     


    Here is what Cook said:


     


    Quote:


    “Well you look back at iPod,” he reminisced (Cook is a huge fan of the iPod), “We changed it a few times. We changed the size and came up with the ‘iPod Nano.’ Then we changed it massively and then we came up with ‘iPod shuffle.’”


    Cook revealed that the naming iterations often accompany massive product shifts and are actually not stemming from any sort of structure. Apparently Apple really names things on a case by case basis, “We went from the MacBook Pro to the MacBook Air to the iMac. You can do it either way is the real story.”


    ” You can stick with the [same] name and people generally love that (I wonder why), and/or keep upping the number, or keep the same IDs like with the 4s” Cook said, revealing that some times the choices are just arbitrary, for example, the ‘S’ in 4S stands for ‘Siri,’ whereas the S in 3GS stands for ‘speed.’"




     


    http://techcrunch.com/2012/05/29/cook-reveals-more-details-about-apples-product-naming-policies-and-yes-the-s-stands-for-siri/


     


    This is proven from statements made by the guy at the very top.  Why don't you go call Cook a liar?

  • Reply 151 of 160
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    nht wrote: »
    ” You can stick with the [same] name and people generally love that (I wonder why), and/or keep upping the number, or keep the same IDs like with the 4s” Cook said, revealing that some times the choices are just arbitrary, for example, the ‘S’ in 4S stands for ‘Siri,’ whereas the S in 3GS stands for ‘speed.’"</p>

    Nitpicking here, but does this last line say that Cook said the S stands for Siri? I have watched the keynote twice, searching for tiddybits like this one, but can't recall anyone saying the S stands for Siri. Ok, that was the keynote, this is an interview with Kara from AllThingsD. Thanks for the link. But did he or didn't he say that the S stands for Siri, because I'm reading the quote marks as an editorial statement, not reading it as Cook saying it. Am I reading it wrong?
  • Reply 152 of 160
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by nht View Post

    It certainly was incorrect.  There is no specific pattern to Apple product naming so your claim is completely wrong.


     


    I never claimed there was an overarching pattern. Once again, stop making things up. I did say that "S" models are never the first in a set of two (I remembered something! Happy.). Even you can't lie (again) and claim I'm wrong there.


     


    So let's go back to the crux of the entire argument, and the reason I made it in the first place.


     


    Every single product that Apple has made since 1996 has had a name descriptive of the product in some fashion.


     


    EXCEPT FOR THE IPHONE 5.


     


    Every. Single. Product. Hardware AND software.


     


    Tell me what the "5" stands for in "iPhone 5" and I'll drop it entirely. Tell me. I'll wait.

  • Reply 153 of 160
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    I never claimed there was an overarching pattern. Once again, stop making things up.



     


    You JUST wrote:  "That they named phones alternately based on telephony, generation, and speed was "incorrect"?"


     


    This is called a pattern.  You claimed this pattern exists.  This is incorrect, I did not make it up, you were simply wrong.


     


     


    Quote:


    So let's go back to the crux of the entire argument, and the reason I made it in the first place.


     


    Every single product that Apple has made since 1996 has had a name descriptive of the product in some fashion.


     


    EXCEPT FOR THE IPHONE 5.


     


    Every. Single. Product. Hardware AND software.


     


    Tell me what the "5" stands for in "iPhone 5" and I'll drop it entirely. Tell me. I'll wait.




     


    Incorrect.  iPod Shuffle is hardly usefully descriptive.  Does shuffle mean small?  No.  Does it mean you can shuffle songs?  You could always do that and you can do that on all the other models as well.  That you can only shuffle?  No, that's not true.


     


    The iPad no longer has any descriptive name other than the core name of the product itself.  No iPad 3.  No iPad 4.  Just iPad.


     


    Apple uses simple identifiable product names.  They are descriptive when they want it to be although "Airport" doesn't conjure up routers as much as places where to catch a flight.  QuickTime is a fast clock application right?  Is Logic Pro is something software developers use? 


     


    iPod isn't descriptive except in the most weirdly convoluted way (digital hub->hubs in general->spaceships (huh?)->2001 spaceship->pod).  


     


    It's a name based on the pods from the movie 2001.


     


     


    Quote:


    During the process, Jobs had settled on the player's descriptive tag line -- "1,000 songs in your pocket" -- so the name was freed up from having to be descriptive. It didn't have to reference music or songs.


    ...


    Then Chieco was shown a prototype iPod, with its stark white plastic front.


     


    "As soon as I saw the white iPod, I thought 2001," said Chieco. "Open the pod bay door, Hal!"


    Then it was just a matter of adding the "i" prefix, as in "iMac."



     


    http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2006/10/71956?currentPage=all


     


    In any case you've just shifted your position from: 


     


    "That they named phones alternately based on telephony, generation, and speed" to "the name is descriptive in some fashion" which is laughably vague.


     


    Which part of:


     


     


    Quote:


    Cook revealed that the naming iterations often accompany massive product shifts and are actually not stemming from any sort of structure. 


     


    ..


     


    Cook said, revealing that some times the choices are just arbitrary



     


    confuses you?  That you can't admit you were in error even when Tim Cook says product naming has no structure and naming choices are sometimes arbitrary is idiotic.  It's whatever sounds good for marketing, sometimes with an i slapped in front and sometimes not.


     


    The 5 doesn't have to stand for anything besides "the new one you really want to buy after the 4S".


  • Reply 154 of 160
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by nht View Post

    You JUST wrote:  "That they named phones alternately based on telephony, generation, and speed was "incorrect"?"


     


    This is called a pattern.  You claimed this pattern exists.  This is incorrect, I did not make it up, you were simply wrong.



     


    I'm waiting for these two statements to be mutually exclusive or for your argument to make any sense.





    Incorrect. 



     


    I stopped reading here. You know why. Funny, though.


     



    In any case you've just shifted your position from: 


     


    "That they named phones alternately based on telephony, generation, and speed" to "the name is descriptive in some fashion" which is laughably vague.



     


    Once again, explain to me how these statements are mutually exclusive. Actually, no. Don't waste your time or mine. Because, as you've just done, you'll lie about it. 






    Which part of: confuses you?




     


    The part where every single product name has related to the product itself in some way… except that of the iPhone 5.

  • Reply 155 of 160
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    I'm waiting for these two statements to be mutually exclusive or for your argument to make any sense.


     


    I stopped reading here. You know why. Funny, though.


     


    Once again, explain to me how these statements are mutually exclusive. Actually, no. Don't waste your time or mine. Because, as you've just done, you'll lie about it. 


     


    The part where every single product name has related to the product itself in some way… except that of the iPhone 5.



     


    LOL...TS you like to pull people's chains but like I said I'm used to your asshattery.


     


    You can't even accept you're wrong when Tim Cook states something opposite of what you've written.  That's just too funny.  You and Soli make a great couple.

  • Reply 156 of 160
    gwmacgwmac Posts: 1,807member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nht View Post


     


    The best thing to do is simply ignore him as best you can.  Eventually, in a few years, circumstances and interests will change and he'll leave.



     


    I hope you are wrong and he leaves long before then or is finally shown the door by Neil. But like you said free labor and few volunteers to take his place I would imagine.  No biggie, I have been on this site for over 10 years and I will definitely try to ignore him as best as I can. At least I was able to block his twin Soli so that is a small consolation. Talk about two peas in a pod. 


     


    Why someone gets so worked up over the naming scheme of a phone that he has no intention of ever purchasing in any case is beyond me. Let them call it the iPhone X for all I care. 

  • Reply 157 of 160
    geekdadgeekdad Posts: 1,131member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by gwmac View Post


     


    I hope you are wrong and he leaves long before then or is finally shown the door by Neil. But like you said free labor and few volunteers to take his place I would imagine.  No biggie, I have been on this site for over 10 years and I will definitely try to ignore him as best as I can. At least I was able to block his twin Soli so that is a small consolation. Talk about two peas in a pod. 


     


    Why someone gets so worked up over the naming scheme of a phone that he has no intention of ever purchasing in any case is beyond me. Let them call it the iPhone X for all I care. 



    Just do what I have learned to do........I know he will not make sense.....I know he will never admit to being wrong......i just try not to take the bait and reply to ANYTHING he writes. He has no life except this site soooo he can focus ALL of his attention to his mis guided preditions. You guys are beating a dead horse. No matter how many times you prove he was dead wrong about something like naming the iP5 or the quotes in my signature he is always right in his mind......... so it is kinda like trying to explain complex things to a small child.....they just don't get it.......nor do they have the capacity to get it....

  • Reply 158 of 160
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by geekdad View Post

    No matter how many times you prove he was dead wrong about something like… …the quotes in my signature…


     


    Man, that's pathetic. No matter how many times I prove to you the statements weren't mutually exclusive, you'll still be on that racket. image


     


    I think it's hilarious that every accusation levied against me is actually indicative of the accuser. 

  • Reply 159 of 160
    gwmacgwmac Posts: 1,807member


    Unless my eyes are deceiving me I finally have the ability to block someone here that I was unable to do so only yesterday. Hopefully this is not a temporary glitch.  I have a very strong feeling I am not alone in expressing gratitude to the staff at AI for listening to our pleas. Perhaps this site can return to a sense of normalcy and more reasonable discussions as I remember from years past. Thank you


     


    image

  • Reply 160 of 160
    geekdadgeekdad Posts: 1,131member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by gwmac View Post


    Unless my eyes are deceiving me I finally have the ability to block someone here that I was unable to do so only yesterday. Hopefully this is not a temporary glitch.  I have a very strong feeling I am not alone in expressing gratitude to the staff at AI for listening to our pleas. Perhaps this site can return to a sense of normalcy and more reasonable discussions as I remember from years past. Thank you


     


    image



    Yes! This worked for me this morning as well! Thank you AI.

Sign In or Register to comment.