As a British-born 69-year-old writer, former publisher and editor, my experience of the word "math" is that it is primarily American. When I see it used in print, or hear it on British radio and TV, it is used only by Americans. "Maths" (as in the short form of mathematics) is always used in Britain, and also appears to be used primarily in the rest of the English-speaking world. However, language changes with time... but another word spelling increasingly used by Americans in forum messages which I (as a photographer) dislike is "lense" rather than lens.
Did you learn that at University?¡ In American English we use the indefinite article to denote the thing referred to is nonspecific. I think that one is an oddity in British English because the same rule applies. In the US excluding the determiner would imply that the university was known and obvious but not specified, like if someone says, "Mom will be pissed when he gets home" as opposed to, "we need a mom to help with the field trip."
Maths is used in Australia, the abuse I dislike most is "loose" rather than "lose", instead of removing vowels such as "u" from words Americans seem to have decided to add another "o".
Noooo! (see what I did there?) Americans have not changed the spelling of lose to loose, it's a typo or someone that simply doesn't know better.
Now the word loosed is verb which means 'let go' as in the sentence, "they loosed the reins and let the horse gallop."
KDarling's quote: No one, not even Apple developers, could spend their time looking to see if someone else had come with similar ideas. It would takes years to research a single days' worth of coding.
You my friend, are hiding from the truth. It has been proven that Samsung has intentionally gone over Apple's iPhone and iPad with a microscope.
As a British-born 69-year-old writer, former publisher and editor, my experience of the word "math" is that it is primarily American. When I see it used in print, or hear it on British radio and TV, it is used only by Americans. "Maths" (as in the short form of mathematics) is always used in Britain, and also appears to be used primarily in the rest of the English-speaking world. However, language changes with time... but another word spelling increasingly used by Americans in forum messages which I (as a photographer) dislike is "lense" rather than lens.
I haven't seen "lense" used very often. My US Mac tries to correct it to "lens" when I type that.
It seems your objection to a different dialect is mostly "but it's not what I learned elsewhere". As time goes on, former subjects of the Empire are going to diverge more. I think you might have several complaints about Canadianisms that exist right now.
Not according to one of the reports from a blogger who was in the room. The report is that there was a delay before the younger attorney could identify it.
Well, sure, because he had to wait, as court decorum would require, until he was asked:
"Koh frequently remarked on the similarity between each company's tablets. At one point during the hearing, she held one black glass tablet in each hand above her head, and asked Sullivan if she could identify which company produced which.
"Not at this distance your honor," said Sullivan, who stood at a podium roughly ten feet away.
"Can any of Samsung's lawyers tell me which one is Samsung and which one is Apple?" Koh asked. A moment later, one of the lawyers supplied the right answer."
Regardless, there's absolutely no reason why even an older woman attorney should not be able to tell the difference.
You must not be married. There are all sorts of possible reasons. At the least, she might have vainly not have been wearing the necessary glasses. Or, like many women, Koh and the lawyer just don't see the difference in devices like men do.
Quote:
And, yet, the jury who saw all the evidence said that Samsung owes Apple more than a billion dollars. So please explain why your unfounded opinion is more valid than theirs?
Strawman. No one's talking about the jury. We're talking about that Samsung review document. The jury didn't base their verdict on a line per line review of that document, nor did they issues a line per line analysis.
I studied each line and compared it to what Samsung actually did. If you don't want to believe me, then please do the same and tell us all exactly what pages you think Samsung actually implemented and that were unique to Apple. Thanks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hfts
Quote:
KDarling's quote:
No one, not even Apple developers, could spend their time looking to see if someone else had come with similar ideas. It would takes years to research a single days' worth of coding.
You my friend, are hiding from the truth. It has been proven that Samsung has intentionally gone over Apple's iPhone and iPad with a microscope.
And you sir, are not following the thread , which has nothing to do with that other trial. This is a new one, concentrating on software patents such as slide to unlock, universal search, and links in emails.
My response was to TS's proposal that the only reason people want shorter limits on software patents, is so they can "copy" them quicker. Copying almost never comes into the equation. It's instead all about who had that time and money to file for a patent first.
Well, sure, because he had to wait, as court decorum would require, until he was asked:
"Koh frequently remarked on the similarity between each company's tablets. At one point during the hearing, she held one black glass tablet in each hand above her head, and asked Sullivan if she could identify which company produced which.
"Not at this distance your honor," said Sullivan, who stood at a podium roughly ten feet away.
"Can any of Samsung's lawyers tell me which one is Samsung and which one is Apple?" Koh asked. A moment later, one of the lawyers supplied the right answer."
You must not be married. There are all sorts of possible reasons. At the least, she might have vainly not have been wearing the necessary glasses. Or, like many women, Koh and the lawyer just don't see the difference in devices like men do.
Strawman. No one's talking about the jury. We're talking about that Samsung review document. The jury didn't base their verdict on a line per line review of that document, nor did they issues a line per line analysis.
I studied each line and compared it to what Samsung actually did. If you don't want to believe me, then please do the same and tell us all exactly what pages you think Samsung actually implemented and that were unique to Apple. Thanks.
And you sir, are not following the thread , which has nothing to do with that other trial. This is a new one, concentrating on software patents such as slide to unlock, universal search, and links in emails.
My response was to TS's proposal that the only reason people want shorter limits on software patents, is so they can "copy" them quicker. Copying almost never comes into the equation. It's instead all about who had that time and money to file for a patent first.
Wriggling away as usual. Reminds me of a Vampire when the sun rises.
You made a general comment, and I refuted it very easily, I didn't even raise a sweat.
Samsung copy like there is no tomorrow, this was proven in the $1B law suite, which they lost (this was just one of the many peices of evidence submitted by Apple). Did you not read the part where they listed the brilliant innovations of the iPhone/iPad against their own garbage and concluded that they were far, far behind.
Why are they the only company making money from Android, while the rest don't ? Want some help ?
You either do not read, or tend to put aside anything negative about your employers, or simply have an issue with comprehending English.
As your buddy GG says, maybe English is not your mother tongue.
Comments
Did you learn that at University?¡
Noooo! (see what I did there?) Americans have not changed the spelling of lose to loose, it's a typo or someone that simply doesn't know better.
Now the word loosed is verb which means 'let go' as in the sentence, "they loosed the reins and let the horse gallop."
No one, not even Apple developers, could spend their time looking to see if someone else had come with similar ideas. It would takes years to research a single days' worth of coding.
You my friend, are hiding from the truth. It has been proven that Samsung has intentionally gone over Apple's iPhone and iPad with a microscope.
I haven't seen "lense" used very often. My US Mac tries to correct it to "lens" when I type that.
It seems your objection to a different dialect is mostly "but it's not what I learned elsewhere". As time goes on, former subjects of the Empire are going to diverge more. I think you might have several complaints about Canadianisms that exist right now.
To get this right, they only need to know one short line: "Lose as in the game, loose as in your mother"
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Not according to one of the reports from a blogger who was in the room. The report is that there was a delay before the younger attorney could identify it.
Well, sure, because he had to wait, as court decorum would require, until he was asked:
"Koh frequently remarked on the similarity between each company's tablets. At one point during the hearing, she held one black glass tablet in each hand above her head, and asked Sullivan if she could identify which company produced which.
"Not at this distance your honor," said Sullivan, who stood at a podium roughly ten feet away.
"Can any of Samsung's lawyers tell me which one is Samsung and which one is Apple?" Koh asked. A moment later, one of the lawyers supplied the right answer."
- Huffington Post
Quote:
Regardless, there's absolutely no reason why even an older woman attorney should not be able to tell the difference.
You must not be married. There are all sorts of possible reasons. At the least, she might have vainly not have been wearing the necessary glasses. Or, like many women, Koh and the lawyer just don't see the difference in devices like men do.
Quote:
And, yet, the jury who saw all the evidence said that Samsung owes Apple more than a billion dollars. So please explain why your unfounded opinion is more valid than theirs?
Strawman. No one's talking about the jury. We're talking about that Samsung review document. The jury didn't base their verdict on a line per line review of that document, nor did they issues a line per line analysis.
I studied each line and compared it to what Samsung actually did. If you don't want to believe me, then please do the same and tell us all exactly what pages you think Samsung actually implemented and that were unique to Apple. Thanks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hfts
Quote:
KDarling's quote:
No one, not even Apple developers, could spend their time looking to see if someone else had come with similar ideas. It would takes years to research a single days' worth of coding.
You my friend, are hiding from the truth. It has been proven that Samsung has intentionally gone over Apple's iPhone and iPad with a microscope.
And you sir, are not following the thread
My response was to TS's proposal that the only reason people want shorter limits on software patents, is so they can "copy" them quicker. Copying almost never comes into the equation. It's instead all about who had that time and money to file for a patent first.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Well, sure, because he had to wait, as court decorum would require, until he was asked:
"Koh frequently remarked on the similarity between each company's tablets. At one point during the hearing, she held one black glass tablet in each hand above her head, and asked Sullivan if she could identify which company produced which.
"Not at this distance your honor," said Sullivan, who stood at a podium roughly ten feet away.
"Can any of Samsung's lawyers tell me which one is Samsung and which one is Apple?" Koh asked. A moment later, one of the lawyers supplied the right answer."
- Huffington Post
You must not be married. There are all sorts of possible reasons. At the least, she might have vainly not have been wearing the necessary glasses. Or, like many women, Koh and the lawyer just don't see the difference in devices like men do.
Strawman. No one's talking about the jury. We're talking about that Samsung review document. The jury didn't base their verdict on a line per line review of that document, nor did they issues a line per line analysis.
I studied each line and compared it to what Samsung actually did. If you don't want to believe me, then please do the same and tell us all exactly what pages you think Samsung actually implemented and that were unique to Apple. Thanks.
And you sir, are not following the thread
My response was to TS's proposal that the only reason people want shorter limits on software patents, is so they can "copy" them quicker. Copying almost never comes into the equation. It's instead all about who had that time and money to file for a patent first.
Wriggling away as usual. Reminds me of a Vampire when the sun rises.
You made a general comment, and I refuted it very easily, I didn't even raise a sweat.
Samsung copy like there is no tomorrow, this was proven in the $1B law suite, which they lost (this was just one of the many peices of evidence submitted by Apple). Did you not read the part where they listed the brilliant innovations of the iPhone/iPad against their own garbage and concluded that they were far, far behind.
Why are they the only company making money from Android, while the rest don't ? Want some help ?
You either do not read, or tend to put aside anything negative about your employers, or simply have an issue with comprehending English.
As your buddy GG says, maybe English is not your mother tongue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
Which Apple product was my Samsung oven copied off?
Judging by the low grade deep tissue burns on my legs - the 12-inch PowerBook circa 2004.
Wait till you get into a discussion with the person that this applies to.