Let the games begin!
in [Wireless Internet]
|
From: John Navas on 8 Jul 2010 19:03 On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 17:30:45 -0400, in <op.vfjndjvditl47o(a)acer250.gateway.2wire.net>, tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 09:48:35 -0400, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 20:07:02 -0400, in >> <op.vfeal0u5itl47o(a)acer250.gateway.2wire.net>, tlvp >> <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> Essentially *all* the data was recovered. >> The only exceptions were those users who ignored advice to sit tight and >> wait, instead trying things on their own, which mangled their data, >> which they then complained about, even though it was their own fault. > >Should one really call it "their own fault" if the "advice to sit tight and wait" >that they ignored was advice that, for whatever reason(s), never reached them? > >> Such users probably wouldn't have done any better backing up data on >> their own, and would have still complained when something went wrong. > >There was certainly an implicit uptime guarantee that was violated >for them to complain about -- several weeks before restoration of data, no? > >> There will always be those who refuse to take responsibility for their >> own actions. > >Yup: MS, Danger, T-Mo -- those are the first to come to mind here :-) . >Or are you trying to pass the blame onto the victims? There's blame to go around, vendors and users. Playing the part of victim doesn't impress me. -- John "Facts? We ain't got no facts. We don't need no facts. I don't have to show you any stinking facts!" [with apologies to John Huston]
From: Char Jackson on 8 Jul 2010 22:45 On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 13:31:49 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >what matters is whether calls drop, which based on reports (from the >same people who say the bars drop) say is not happening. If that were true, and it's not, this whole story about the iPhone 4's antenna wouldn't have happened. >many are >saying the iphone 4 holds calls better than other phones. Few have said that. By far the majority have said that calls drop when they hold the iPhone 4 a certain way.
From: DevilsPGD on 8 Jul 2010 23:51 In message <op.vfjndjvditl47o(a)acer250.gateway.2wire.net> tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs(a)hotmail.com> was claimed to have wrote: >On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 09:48:35 -0400, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 20:07:02 -0400, in >> <op.vfeal0u5itl47o(a)acer250.gateway.2wire.net>, tlvp >> <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> Essentially *all* the data was recovered. >> The only exceptions were those users who ignored advice to sit tight and >> wait, instead trying things on their own, which mangled their data, >> which they then complained about, even though it was their own fault. > >Should one really call it "their own fault" if the "advice to sit tight and wait" >that they ignored was advice that, for whatever reason(s), never reached them? Or, what if they didn't really have a choice? A battery running out was all it took to cause data loss here.
From: tlvp on 9 Jul 2010 02:25 On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:03:56 -0400, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 17:30:45 -0400, in > <op.vfjndjvditl47o(a)acer250.gateway.2wire.net>, tlvp > <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 09:48:35 -0400, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 20:07:02 -0400, in >>> <op.vfeal0u5itl47o(a)acer250.gateway.2wire.net>, tlvp >>> <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Essentially *all* the data was recovered. >>> The only exceptions were those users who ignored advice to sit tight and >>> wait, instead trying things on their own, which mangled their data, >>> which they then complained about, even though it was their own fault. >> >> Should one really call it "their own fault" if the "advice to sit tight and wait" >> that they ignored was advice that, for whatever reason(s), never reached them? >> >>> Such users probably wouldn't have done any better backing up data on >>> their own, and would have still complained when something went wrong. >> >> There was certainly an implicit uptime guarantee that was violated >> for them to complain about -- several weeks before restoration of data, no? >> >>> There will always be those who refuse to take responsibility for their >>> own actions. >> >> Yup: MS, Danger, T-Mo -- those are the first to come to mind here :-) . >> Or are you trying to pass the blame onto the victims? > > There's blame to go around, vendors and users. > Playing the part of victim doesn't impress me. You're right: all the warning signals were there: T-mobile ... Microsoft ... Danger! Cheers, -- tlvp -- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
From: John Navas on 9 Jul 2010 12:15
On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 02:25:03 -0400, in <op.vfkb31m1itl47o(a)acer250.gateway.2wire.net>, tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:03:56 -0400, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 17:30:45 -0400, in >> <op.vfjndjvditl47o(a)acer250.gateway.2wire.net>, tlvp >> <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 09:48:35 -0400, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 20:07:02 -0400, in >>>> <op.vfeal0u5itl47o(a)acer250.gateway.2wire.net>, tlvp >>>> <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Essentially *all* the data was recovered. >>>> The only exceptions were those users who ignored advice to sit tight and >>>> wait, instead trying things on their own, which mangled their data, >>>> which they then complained about, even though it was their own fault. >>> >>> Should one really call it "their own fault" if the "advice to sit tight and wait" >>> that they ignored was advice that, for whatever reason(s), never reached them? >>> >>>> Such users probably wouldn't have done any better backing up data on >>>> their own, and would have still complained when something went wrong. >>> >>> There was certainly an implicit uptime guarantee that was violated >>> for them to complain about -- several weeks before restoration of data, no? >>> >>>> There will always be those who refuse to take responsibility for their >>>> own actions. >>> >>> Yup: MS, Danger, T-Mo -- those are the first to come to mind here :-) . >>> Or are you trying to pass the blame onto the victims? >> >> There's blame to go around, vendors and users. >> Playing the part of victim doesn't impress me. > >You're right: all the warning signals were there: >T-mobile ... Microsoft ... Danger! �Warning, Will Robinson! Danger!� :) |