… Are you trying to tell a native English speaker how to write his own language? Really? No. You’re completely wrong. Just freaking drop it. It was sad that this was your only rebuttal to the post; it’s beyond sad that you’re keeping this up. That you’re unaccustomed to seeing sentences written correctly isn’t my problem. I don’t end sentences with prepositions wherever possible.
As a native english speaker I am.
100% of my* PCs (also around 10; small world) have failed.
*PCs with which I’ve been forced to work.[/quote
I am ok with how you have written the first bit, the sentence I have issue with is the one you started with the *, try reading it out loud, heck get your Mac to read it out loud to you, if you are having trouble I'll give you a clue, work what? Heck I'll try spelling it out for, "PCs with which I've been force to work" what??? Work what? Work with, work for, work in, work on top of, work under, or do you mean "make work", what is it?
And as for sad, last time I asked you to back up some statements you ignored them. How about I try again and watch you ignore it again. Can you please name the make and model of these PCs?
Careful now, we don't want the jit to hit the fan.
Read this thread where the discussion turns to the English language, intertwined with nit-picking.
From the dictionary on my Mac
worldwide |?w??l(d)w??d, w??l(d)?w??d|
adjective
extending or reaching throughout the world: worldwide sales of television rights.
adverb
throughout the world: she travels worldwide as a consultant.
I still stand by my statement, Apple may have stores around the world, they certainly don't have worldwide though
Ah - interesting. How did you know to go looking in that thread? Anyway - his objection there was also incorrect, although not for the specific reasons given. It's a pretty common tactic, in the absence of a reasonable argument, simply to attempt to derail the issue under discussion.
Interesting you say that considering that is exactly what you are doing
Ah - interesting. How did you know to go looking in that thread? Anyway - his objection there was also incorrect, although not for the specific reasons given. It's a pretty common tactic, in the absence of a reasonable argument, simply to attempt to derail the issue under discussion.
Interesting you say that considering that is exactly what you are doing
No - as I'm quite sure you are aware - I was pointing out that TS was correct, and criticizing you for doing that, which is not the same at all.
And, just for the record as you bring it up again, in this context "worldwide" clearly refers to extent, so that if Apple rolls out a feature worldwide, that means it rolls it out in all its business locations on this world. That does not imply every continent or every country, and does not imply any indication of how many locations, worldwide, that it operates. If they were to roll something out "nationwide" in the US, would you take that to mean in every state? Every county? Every city? Or would you, correctly, assume that they meant at all their locations within the geographical extent of the US?
I'm not seeing the ambiguity. The US comprises 50 states plus DC. Relevance?
Our incorporated and unincorporated territories are the US, but receive the iPhone at different times.
But now we’re just getting pedantic. Let’s not turn this back into an “America” argument. " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Comments
As a native english speaker I am.
From the dictionary on my Mac
I still stand by my statement, Apple may have stores around the world, they certainly don't have worldwide though
Interesting you say that considering that is exactly what you are doing
Ah - interesting. How did you know to go looking in that thread? Anyway - his objection there was also incorrect, although not for the specific reasons given. It's a pretty common tactic, in the absence of a reasonable argument, simply to attempt to derail the issue under discussion.
Interesting you say that considering that is exactly what you are doing
No - as I'm quite sure you are aware - I was pointing out that TS was correct, and criticizing you for doing that, which is not the same at all.
And, just for the record as you bring it up again, in this context "worldwide" clearly refers to extent, so that if Apple rolls out a feature worldwide, that means it rolls it out in all its business locations on this world. That does not imply every continent or every country, and does not imply any indication of how many locations, worldwide, that it operates. If they were to roll something out "nationwide" in the US, would you take that to mean in every state? Every county? Every city? Or would you, correctly, assume that they meant at all their locations within the geographical extent of the US?
????
A possible reaction could be: 'define US'. And this might not be it:
I'm not seeing the ambiguity. The US comprises 50 states plus DC. Relevance?
Our incorporated and unincorporated territories are the US, but receive the iPhone at different times.
But now we’re just getting pedantic. Let’s not turn this back into an “America” argument.
Sorry, I was referring to jfanning, and his view on worldwide.
Heavens no! We've been through that one. Thoroughly.
All I see is a black square, is it meant to mean something?
The definition I provided was from Apple, I'm sorry if you disagree with the truth, that's not my problem.
It's the thumb up icon from Emoji keyboard. Displays it at my end, on Safari iOS7 and 10.8.4
OK, had to load it in Safari to see it
A bit annoying, all these different standards. Some like all these standards; there are so many to choose from.