I thought I saw him. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. I assume he left on good terms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Anyone else notice Bertrand Serlet in the audience at the most recent Apple event? That was pretty cool. Maybe he's a "consultant" like Bob. Or, hey, maybe he'll come back altogether now.
The director seemed to be bent on getting Al Gore in nearly every shot of the audience!
Like it or not, Apple's iOS apps like Podcasts are also an important part of the OS, and that app is a complete disaster. The dialler in iOS 6 is a disaster. And the colour-changing status bar is ug-lee! Game Centre? There's a lot of work to do. Notes too, IMO. Also, Notes and iCloud have issues, serious issues.
- I use the podcast app everyday. I think the tape reel is charming, and takes nothing away from functionality. The app is fully featured, intuitive to use, works well, and looks great. I use it for all my podcast needs. How the **** is it a complete disaster?
- The dialer is a 'disaster'? It's a damn grid of 9 buttons. They simply changed the color scheme. Hundreds of millions of people have no problem using it to dial. Again, what?
- Sure, game center is really over the top, but does this REALLY negatively affect anyone? Do people spend tons of time in gamecenter or something?
- Notes- again, completely fine. At least you can change the font now. Does the yellow background bug you that much? If so, there's a billion other notes apps on the appstore. The look is completely subjective, there's nothing objectively 'bad' about it.
- iMessages has been having its issues, but the rest of iCloud has been seamless for me. Everything from backup, to data syncing, to game save files, to seamless podcast resume from whatever device I'm using, to documents in the cloud, its an incredibly ambitious and multi-faceted service, and for the most part it does exactly what it sets out to do. 'Set it and forget it'. I love tapping in a note from my iPhone/iPad/Macbook and having it available everywhere, never worrying about the device I'm using.
I think your definition of 'disaster' is quite exaggerated, as you don't set out to justify how that term is justified.
What I do believe is that the general OSX interface needs an overhaul, especially the traffic lights. Needs to be rethought. I'm thinking built in, intelligent windows management, snapping, etc. In iOS, the fundamentals can't, and dont need to change much.
"Champing at the bit, also worded chomping at the bit or chafing at the bit, meaning to show impatience or burst with energy"
It's perfectly fine.
It depends - if you're the Associated Press, you only allow your writers to use "champing at the bit", not the others. It's become somewhat common for people to use "chomping at the bit" (so common that it's acceptable by most), but do you really chomp "at" something? That's pretty awkward - you generally chomp "on" something, not "at" it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
A little googling would have helped you here. Both the words champ and chomp mean the same thing in this case just as at and on can both mean the location of something. I could tell you the original phrase but an imitative term dating back as far as 1520 has absolutely no baring on what is proper and acceptable in English in 2012.
Google's been known to lie (just had to say that). And I think you mean "bearing". I'd also say that what is proper and what is acceptable are somewhat different.
My understanding is Steve was the one who pushed for it, thinking it would make the technology more approachable. All it does really is patronize people. Until we get to the point of haptic feedback, where something that looks like leather also feels like it then this skeumorphic stuff needs to go away, and fast.
- I use the podcast app everyday. I think the tape reel is charming, and takes nothing away from functionality. The app is fully featured, intuitive to use, works well, and looks great. I use it for all my podcast needs. How the **** is it a complete disaster?
I find podcast laggy and unreliable. Maybe not a disaster, but performance and usability wise, it's a disappointing and crappy move down from the previous iTunes based performance and experience. The tape reel only shows that they put flash before function. It adds nothing and likely the average user (anyone less than half my age, anyway) has never even seen a cassette deck before, much less a reel to reel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
What I do believe is that the general OSX interface needs an overhaul, especially the traffic lights. Needs to be rethought. I'm thinking built in, intelligent windows management, snapping, etc. In iOS, the fundamentals can't, and dont need to change much.
At their core I think both OS X and iOS are pretty sound. But they both have inconstancies and details that need to fixed.
It's time for a "Snow Leopard" release of both OSes. An under the hood "No New Features" release where they can take time to fix everything, make it work properly, increase performance, unify the GUI, and smooth out the UX. I'm thinking they've just moved too fast to get things right lately.
At their core I think both OS X and iOS are pretty sound. But they both have inconstancies and details that need to fixed.
It's time for a "Snow Leopard" release of both OSes. An under the hood "No New Features" release where they can take time to fix everything, make it work properly, increase performance, unify the GUI, and smooth out the UX. I'm thinking they've just moved too fast to get things right lately.
I use Podcast every day as well and it functions ok. I'd like a way to toggle Pause/Play without looking at the screen, like when I'm driving. Can Apple make a double-tap of the screen or triple tap or make use of one of the external hardware buttons work for the toggle?
Also, the UI for many players (whether for podcasts, video or music) is often cramped. How about using that big screen a little more effectively? Why must I laser in on the play/pause button? I'm constantly hitting the wrong buttons or concentrating like a ninja to make sure I don't hit the wrong buttons.
This goes to my statement that if Ive and others use these apps a lot, they will understand that there are useful features being overlooked and some of them are quite obvious to longtime users.
I'll second this poster's desire to get rid of the stoplight window controls. No one intuitively understands what they do. I can never predict what the hell the green button is going to do from app to app. I think Apple could change this for new users so it's more obvious. And while they're at it, put all the window control buttons together. I probably mouse 67K miles per year using my 27" iMac. This can be reduced by grouping buttons intelligently.
Thanks for a brilliant piece, Daniel. I sincerely hope minimalism and utilitarianism does not replace whimsy, which has been a part of Apple history since the beginning.
Also, the UI for many players (whether for podcasts, video or music) is often cramped. How about using that big screen a little more effectively? Why must I laser in on the play/pause button? I'm constantly hitting the wrong buttons or concentrating like a ninja to make sure I don't hit the wrong buttons.
THANK you! Why the hell do I care about things like album cover art when it means I can't hit the freakin' buttons?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by bugsnw
I'll second this poster's desire to get rid of the stoplight window controls. No one intuitively understands what they do. I can never predict what the hell the green button is going to do from app to app.
One of those things Windows really does better than Mac. I'm not even sure why we have the yellow button. Do we really need both "Hide App" and "Minimize to Dock" controls? Do people minimize some windows to the dock while leaving others from the same app open?
Podcasts is the worst app Apple has released in years. I hope Jony tells 2 guys to "redesign that slow, superfluous heap of crap". Heck, they could have bought Instacast for 500K, gave it a spit shine, called it Podcasts, and it would have been 50 times better, with far less work.
And when I say Notes and iCloud have serious issues, I mean in terms of the two syncing quickly and automatically together. Not to mention iMessage, which hasn't worked as advertised, for me, for at least 3 months.
Apple fan site, Apple-centric article, first post - and you cannot leash yourself not to try jab around a bit?
Funny.
I don't get it. You'd prefer idiot trolls being entirely anti-Apple? That's fine on an Apple site? Can't jab at opponents on Apple sites, though. No, that's wrong. So is doing what the trolls do here on their respective fan sites. No, no. Not gonna fly.
It depends - if you're the Associated Press, you only allow your writers to use "champing at the bit", not the others. It's become somewhat common for people to use "chomping at the bit" (so common that it's acceptable by most), but do you really chomp "at" something? That's pretty awkward - you generally chomp "on" something, not "at" it.
Google's been known to lie (just had to say that). And I think you mean "bearing". I'd also say that what is proper and what is acceptable are somewhat different.
1) AP has nothing to do with what is exceptable in everyday use.
2) It became somewhat common long before you were born.
3) So now when people refer to googling something it means only info coming from google directly and not links to other items that contain information? When the ful did that happen?
4) You know how preserve text work. Sometimes it gets it right sometimes it doesn't.
I don't get it. You'd prefer idiot trolls being entirely anti-Apple? That's fine on an Apple site? Can't jab at opponents on Apple sites, though. No, that's wrong. So is doing what the trolls do here on their respective fan sites. No, no. Not gonna fly.
[SIZE=36px]???????[/SIZE]
Hypothetically I'd prefer idiot trolls to be anti-Apple, because if you introduce pro-Apple idiot trolls (and lets pretend they don't already exist), this forum would end up with more trolls than normal people.
But I'm saying "hypothetically" because I don't like term troll - in fact I think it is the most abused term I have seen for a while. It also doesn't make sense. Most people calling others "trolls" perfectly fit in the category; trolls are quickest to see a troll in others.
Yes some people are here to flame and provoke. But then, the way I see it, your first post in a tread that has nothing to do with MS, is an attempt to provoke another flame. And you are supposed to be a moderator, not a resident... provoker.
And I'm not even saying that your opinion about Windows 8 is wrong. Only that your little quip isn't bringing any argument to the topic. Only inspiring others to throw in their napalm, be it pro or anti-whatever. For what reason? So that you can call them trolls?
Again - I can expect that for many others, but you are Moderator.
That particular link, referring to that particular phrase, is wrong. I understand what a sarcastic inversion is, but I don't think the author of that piece does. Either that or (s)he is just grasping at straws to defend a common phrase for which there is no reasonable argument.
"I could care less" simply is NOT a sarcastic inversion, it's just a corruption that proliferated because it sounded "different."
You may choose to accept it because you know what was meant by its use and challenging it distracts from the purpose of the discussion (like is happening here), but that doesn't make it correct, even if some grad student DID happen to write a weak argument for it on a web site when he was tired.
Uh uh. The trouble with the web is, sometimes, people like you.
You think dictionary.com -- a site with a link that I helpfully provided, instead of simply telling you that you're talking bullish!t -- must rely on some "grad student...writ[ing] a weak argument...when he was tired." That would be like my saying that, in your cloak of anonymity (v5v!?), you could well be some unemployed bum pretending you know something about the English language. (The sad part? In my case, it might well be right, compared to your wild surmise about a widely used website that's part of a well-known firm that puts it out there and tells you -- if you'd care to find out -- who they are.)
What do you know about dictionary.com that tells you it's run/managed by grad students? Pretty much the same as what you claim to know about sarcastic inversions.
If you want to really make a case for what you're saying, instead of sounding like some silly blowhard: tell us who you are, why I should believe your knowledge regarding the topic, provide a logical argument, provide a helpful cite (instead of appealing to your anonymous, likely bogus, authority). Preferably, all four of the above.
If you can't/won't -- let me try and say this politely: get lost.
Addressing one part of this thread - that of aesthetics vis-a-vis apps and user interfaces- the app that really takes the bun [I]and[/I] the biscuit is that frightful iOS "Game Center" [sic.]. I dislike it so much that I've buried it away in a folder where I never have to see it ever again. Truly sick-inducing.
It reminds me of something out of the '90s with its mismatched fonts and colours - perhaps something cobbled together by a "Jolt"-crazed teenager. I would love to see Sir Jonathon get the axe out on that one, quick smart!
Uh uh. The trouble with the web is, sometimes, people like you.
You think dictionary.com -- a site with a link that I helpfully provided, instead of simply telling you that you're talking bullish!t -- must rely on some "grad student...writ[ing] a weak argument...when he was tired." That would be like my saying that, in your cloak of anonymity (v5v!?), you could well be some unemployed bum pretending you know something about the English language. (The sad part? In my case, it might well be right, compared to your wild surmise about a widely used website that's part of a well-known firm that puts it out there and tells you -- if you'd care to find out -- who they are.)
The "grad student" remark was supposed to be funny. I withdraw it in the interest of not muddying the discussion.
My point was, and is, that even big, respected organizations sometimes get basic, fundamental stuff wrong, because even big, respected organizations are run by people and people are fallible. My providing a link that rebuts your link would be pointless, because my position is that it doesn't matter whether "Expert A" says it *is* a sarcastic inversion while "Expert B" says it is not. Either expert could be wrong. Want proof? Watch the news on TV. Big, respected organizations sometimes get important details wrong. Read court documents. No better example of a system designed to wring out mistakes, yet they happen ALL THE TIME. How about textbooks? Do I need to go on? I'm not trying to insult anyone, I'm just saying that just because dictionary.com gives a phrase a label, it doesn't mean they're right.
I'm not trying to arrogantly put myself above so-called experts. I am and always have been an utter moron. That's why I'm so sure they're mistaken -- the test is so simple that even a doofus like me can get through it: apply the definition to the phrase and see if it fits, right? In the case of "I could care less" it just doesn't. You don't have to take my word for it or that of any third-party expert because you can do it yourself. The phrase doesn't fit the model of deliberately saying the opposite of what you mean to make a point about the actual intent. Even the author at dictionary.com failed to explain the logic in the claim, even though (s)he made a point of explaining how it applies to the other examples (s)he offered.
Besides, maybe I'm misreading what the dictionary.com author wrote, but to me it read kinda like, "I dunno, people in the States started saying it this way and no one is really sure why. Sarcastic inversion maybe?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
[...] If you want to really make a case for what you're saying, instead of sounding like some silly blowhard: tell us who you are, why I should believe your knowledge regarding the topic, provide a logical argument, provide a helpful cite (instead of appealing to your anonymous, likely bogus, authority). Preferably, all four of the above.
If you can't/won't -- let me try and say this politely: get lost.
1. I'm not anonymous, I've said before that my name is Lorin and that I'm an audio engineer in Vancouver. Beyond that, my employer expects me to maintain an appropriate level of discretion. If you actually care to know more you can PM me, but you really needn't bother because (see next point)
2. I make no claim of special expertise. In fact, I claim that none is required.
3. I don't know how to be any MORE logical than to simply apply the definition the author supplied and see if it applies to the phrase in question.
4. Since a fundamental tenet of my argument is that so-called "experts" can be mistaken, it would be a contradiction of request 3 ("logical" argument) for me to provide citations supporting my position. But if it makes you feel better, here, try this: http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ico1.htm
To me it looks like our "expert" at dictionary.com just plagiarized bits and pieces of this document to make a quick point, but failed to grasp the broader intent.
In the linked article the author does give a nod to the argument that it's a sarcastic inversion, but suggests that he, too, thinks that's an academically interesting but ultimately flawed explanation, suggesting instead that it's really just the result of people being basically stupid.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by palegolas
iOS is fine.. It's OSX that needs the serious work.
I still think its really sad that Forstall is leaving though.
iOS has lots of annoying problems. But it's still a work in progress and despite it's problems, it's miles ahead of the others.
I thought I saw him. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. I assume he left on good terms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Anyone else notice Bertrand Serlet in the audience at the most recent Apple event? That was pretty cool. Maybe he's a "consultant" like Bob. Or, hey, maybe he'll come back altogether now.
The director seemed to be bent on getting Al Gore in nearly every shot of the audience!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
Like it or not, Apple's iOS apps like Podcasts are also an important part of the OS, and that app is a complete disaster. The dialler in iOS 6 is a disaster. And the colour-changing status bar is ug-lee! Game Centre? There's a lot of work to do. Notes too, IMO. Also, Notes and iCloud have issues, serious issues.
- I use the podcast app everyday. I think the tape reel is charming, and takes nothing away from functionality. The app is fully featured, intuitive to use, works well, and looks great. I use it for all my podcast needs. How the **** is it a complete disaster?
- The dialer is a 'disaster'? It's a damn grid of 9 buttons. They simply changed the color scheme. Hundreds of millions of people have no problem using it to dial. Again, what?
- Sure, game center is really over the top, but does this REALLY negatively affect anyone? Do people spend tons of time in gamecenter or something?
- Notes- again, completely fine. At least you can change the font now. Does the yellow background bug you that much? If so, there's a billion other notes apps on the appstore. The look is completely subjective, there's nothing objectively 'bad' about it.
- iMessages has been having its issues, but the rest of iCloud has been seamless for me. Everything from backup, to data syncing, to game save files, to seamless podcast resume from whatever device I'm using, to documents in the cloud, its an incredibly ambitious and multi-faceted service, and for the most part it does exactly what it sets out to do. 'Set it and forget it'. I love tapping in a note from my iPhone/iPad/Macbook and having it available everywhere, never worrying about the device I'm using.
I think your definition of 'disaster' is quite exaggerated, as you don't set out to justify how that term is justified.
What I do believe is that the general OSX interface needs an overhaul, especially the traffic lights. Needs to be rethought. I'm thinking built in, intelligent windows management, snapping, etc. In iOS, the fundamentals can't, and dont need to change much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
"Champing at the bit, also worded chomping at the bit or chafing at the bit, meaning to show impatience or burst with energy"
It's perfectly fine.
It depends - if you're the Associated Press, you only allow your writers to use "champing at the bit", not the others. It's become somewhat common for people to use "chomping at the bit" (so common that it's acceptable by most), but do you really chomp "at" something? That's pretty awkward - you generally chomp "on" something, not "at" it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
A little googling would have helped you here. Both the words champ and chomp mean the same thing in this case just as at and on can both mean the location of something. I could tell you the original phrase but an imitative term dating back as far as 1520 has absolutely no baring on what is proper and acceptable in English in 2012.
Google's been known to lie (just had to say that). And I think you mean "bearing". I'd also say that what is proper and what is acceptable are somewhat different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
My understanding is Steve was the one who pushed for it, thinking it would make the technology more approachable. All it does really is patronize people. Until we get to the point of haptic feedback, where something that looks like leather also feels like it then this skeumorphic stuff needs to go away, and fast.
Don't forget "Smellovision".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
- I use the podcast app everyday. I think the tape reel is charming, and takes nothing away from functionality. The app is fully featured, intuitive to use, works well, and looks great. I use it for all my podcast needs. How the **** is it a complete disaster?
I find podcast laggy and unreliable. Maybe not a disaster, but performance and usability wise, it's a disappointing and crappy move down from the previous iTunes based performance and experience. The tape reel only shows that they put flash before function. It adds nothing and likely the average user (anyone less than half my age, anyway) has never even seen a cassette deck before, much less a reel to reel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
What I do believe is that the general OSX interface needs an overhaul, especially the traffic lights. Needs to be rethought. I'm thinking built in, intelligent windows management, snapping, etc. In iOS, the fundamentals can't, and dont need to change much.
At their core I think both OS X and iOS are pretty sound. But they both have inconstancies and details that need to fixed.
It's time for a "Snow Leopard" release of both OSes. An under the hood "No New Features" release where they can take time to fix everything, make it work properly, increase performance, unify the GUI, and smooth out the UX. I'm thinking they've just moved too fast to get things right lately.
Coincidence or spooky?
Jony is the future of Apple!
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN
At their core I think both OS X and iOS are pretty sound. But they both have inconstancies and details that need to fixed.
It's time for a "Snow Leopard" release of both OSes. An under the hood "No New Features" release where they can take time to fix everything, make it work properly, increase performance, unify the GUI, and smooth out the UX. I'm thinking they've just moved too fast to get things right lately.
I use Podcast every day as well and it functions ok. I'd like a way to toggle Pause/Play without looking at the screen, like when I'm driving. Can Apple make a double-tap of the screen or triple tap or make use of one of the external hardware buttons work for the toggle?
Also, the UI for many players (whether for podcasts, video or music) is often cramped. How about using that big screen a little more effectively? Why must I laser in on the play/pause button? I'm constantly hitting the wrong buttons or concentrating like a ninja to make sure I don't hit the wrong buttons.
This goes to my statement that if Ive and others use these apps a lot, they will understand that there are useful features being overlooked and some of them are quite obvious to longtime users.
I'll second this poster's desire to get rid of the stoplight window controls. No one intuitively understands what they do. I can never predict what the hell the green button is going to do from app to app. I think Apple could change this for new users so it's more obvious. And while they're at it, put all the window control buttons together. I probably mouse 67K miles per year using my 27" iMac. This can be reduced by grouping buttons intelligently.
You are obsessed with Microsoft, are you now.
Apple fan site, Apple-centric article, first post - and you cannot leash yourself not to try jab around a bit?
Funny.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bugsnw
Also, the UI for many players (whether for podcasts, video or music) is often cramped. How about using that big screen a little more effectively? Why must I laser in on the play/pause button? I'm constantly hitting the wrong buttons or concentrating like a ninja to make sure I don't hit the wrong buttons.
THANK you! Why the hell do I care about things like album cover art when it means I can't hit the freakin' buttons?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by bugsnw
I'll second this poster's desire to get rid of the stoplight window controls. No one intuitively understands what they do. I can never predict what the hell the green button is going to do from app to app.
One of those things Windows really does better than Mac. I'm not even sure why we have the yellow button. Do we really need both "Hide App" and "Minimize to Dock" controls? Do people minimize some windows to the dock while leaving others from the same app open?
And when I say Notes and iCloud have serious issues, I mean in terms of the two syncing quickly and automatically together. Not to mention iMessage, which hasn't worked as advertised, for me, for at least 3 months.
Originally Posted by nikon133
You are obsessed with Microsoft, are you now.
Apple fan site, Apple-centric article, first post - and you cannot leash yourself not to try jab around a bit?
Funny.
I don't get it. You'd prefer idiot trolls being entirely anti-Apple? That's fine on an Apple site? Can't jab at opponents on Apple sites, though. No, that's wrong. So is doing what the trolls do here on their respective fan sites. No, no. Not gonna fly.
???????
1) AP has nothing to do with what is exceptable in everyday use.
2) It became somewhat common long before you were born.
3) So now when people refer to googling something it means only info coming from google directly and not links to other items that contain information? When the ful did that happen?
4) You know how preserve text work. Sometimes it gets it right sometimes it doesn't.
Hypothetically I'd prefer idiot trolls to be anti-Apple, because if you introduce pro-Apple idiot trolls (and lets pretend they don't already exist), this forum would end up with more trolls than normal people.
But I'm saying "hypothetically" because I don't like term troll - in fact I think it is the most abused term I have seen for a while. It also doesn't make sense. Most people calling others "trolls" perfectly fit in the category; trolls are quickest to see a troll in others.
Yes some people are here to flame and provoke. But then, the way I see it, your first post in a tread that has nothing to do with MS, is an attempt to provoke another flame. And you are supposed to be a moderator, not a resident... provoker.
And I'm not even saying that your opinion about Windows 8 is wrong. Only that your little quip isn't bringing any argument to the topic. Only inspiring others to throw in their napalm, be it pro or anti-whatever. For what reason? So that you can call them trolls?
Again - I can expect that for many others, but you are Moderator.
Originally Posted by nikon133
Only that your little quip isn't bringing any argument to the topic.
It directly relates to the topic at hand, and it's a jab at Microsoft.
Maybe I've just been around too long; jabs at Microsoft used to be bread and butter. Or at least the weekly multivitamin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v
That particular link, referring to that particular phrase, is wrong. I understand what a sarcastic inversion is, but I don't think the author of that piece does. Either that or (s)he is just grasping at straws to defend a common phrase for which there is no reasonable argument.
"I could care less" simply is NOT a sarcastic inversion, it's just a corruption that proliferated because it sounded "different."
You may choose to accept it because you know what was meant by its use and challenging it distracts from the purpose of the discussion (like is happening here), but that doesn't make it correct, even if some grad student DID happen to write a weak argument for it on a web site when he was tired.
Uh uh. The trouble with the web is, sometimes, people like you.
You think dictionary.com -- a site with a link that I helpfully provided, instead of simply telling you that you're talking bullish!t -- must rely on some "grad student...writ[ing] a weak argument...when he was tired." That would be like my saying that, in your cloak of anonymity (v5v!?), you could well be some unemployed bum pretending you know something about the English language. (The sad part? In my case, it might well be right, compared to your wild surmise about a widely used website that's part of a well-known firm that puts it out there and tells you -- if you'd care to find out -- who they are.
What do you know about dictionary.com that tells you it's run/managed by grad students? Pretty much the same as what you claim to know about sarcastic inversions.
If you want to really make a case for what you're saying, instead of sounding like some silly blowhard: tell us who you are, why I should believe your knowledge regarding the topic, provide a logical argument, provide a helpful cite (instead of appealing to your anonymous, likely bogus, authority). Preferably, all four of the above.
If you can't/won't -- let me try and say this politely: get lost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeeJay2012
'Sir Ives' shortened = 'Sir I' = 'Siri'.
Coincidence or spooky?
Jony is the future of Apple!
That's fun, and interesting. Seems like it might contain a kernel of truth.
Reminds me of Sagan, BHA, LaW.
It reminds me of something out of the '90s with its mismatched fonts and colours - perhaps something cobbled together by a "Jolt"-crazed teenager. I would love to see Sir Jonathon get the axe out on that one, quick smart!
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Uh uh. The trouble with the web is, sometimes, people like you.
You think dictionary.com -- a site with a link that I helpfully provided, instead of simply telling you that you're talking bullish!t -- must rely on some "grad student...writ[ing] a weak argument...when he was tired." That would be like my saying that, in your cloak of anonymity (v5v!?), you could well be some unemployed bum pretending you know something about the English language. (The sad part? In my case, it might well be right, compared to your wild surmise about a widely used website that's part of a well-known firm that puts it out there and tells you -- if you'd care to find out -- who they are.
The "grad student" remark was supposed to be funny. I withdraw it in the interest of not muddying the discussion.
My point was, and is, that even big, respected organizations sometimes get basic, fundamental stuff wrong, because even big, respected organizations are run by people and people are fallible. My providing a link that rebuts your link would be pointless, because my position is that it doesn't matter whether "Expert A" says it *is* a sarcastic inversion while "Expert B" says it is not. Either expert could be wrong. Want proof? Watch the news on TV. Big, respected organizations sometimes get important details wrong. Read court documents. No better example of a system designed to wring out mistakes, yet they happen ALL THE TIME. How about textbooks? Do I need to go on? I'm not trying to insult anyone, I'm just saying that just because dictionary.com gives a phrase a label, it doesn't mean they're right.
I'm not trying to arrogantly put myself above so-called experts. I am and always have been an utter moron. That's why I'm so sure they're mistaken -- the test is so simple that even a doofus like me can get through it: apply the definition to the phrase and see if it fits, right? In the case of "I could care less" it just doesn't. You don't have to take my word for it or that of any third-party expert because you can do it yourself. The phrase doesn't fit the model of deliberately saying the opposite of what you mean to make a point about the actual intent. Even the author at dictionary.com failed to explain the logic in the claim, even though (s)he made a point of explaining how it applies to the other examples (s)he offered.
Besides, maybe I'm misreading what the dictionary.com author wrote, but to me it read kinda like, "I dunno, people in the States started saying it this way and no one is really sure why. Sarcastic inversion maybe?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
[...] If you want to really make a case for what you're saying, instead of sounding like some silly blowhard: tell us who you are, why I should believe your knowledge regarding the topic, provide a logical argument, provide a helpful cite (instead of appealing to your anonymous, likely bogus, authority). Preferably, all four of the above.
If you can't/won't -- let me try and say this politely: get lost.
1. I'm not anonymous, I've said before that my name is Lorin and that I'm an audio engineer in Vancouver. Beyond that, my employer expects me to maintain an appropriate level of discretion. If you actually care to know more you can PM me, but you really needn't bother because (see next point)
2. I make no claim of special expertise. In fact, I claim that none is required.
3. I don't know how to be any MORE logical than to simply apply the definition the author supplied and see if it applies to the phrase in question.
4. Since a fundamental tenet of my argument is that so-called "experts" can be mistaken, it would be a contradiction of request 3 ("logical" argument) for me to provide citations supporting my position. But if it makes you feel better, here, try this: http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ico1.htm
To me it looks like our "expert" at dictionary.com just plagiarized bits and pieces of this document to make a quick point, but failed to grasp the broader intent.
In the linked article the author does give a nod to the argument that it's a sarcastic inversion, but suggests that he, too, thinks that's an academically interesting but ultimately flawed explanation, suggesting instead that it's really just the result of people being basically stupid.