Magazines, websites getting desperate
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Peter on 4 Jul 2010 22:56 "John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:0gh236t60a4tehesnmnreef87lcgcge56u(a)4ax.com... > On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 21:58:45 -0400, in > <vme2365c5aaoaecooe3rejdqflnbp6n799(a)4ax.com>, tony cooper > <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >>On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 18:40:27 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> >>wrote: > >>>the engine is a substantial part of the car's functionality. for some >>>people, cellular is a small part of what a smartphone can do. >> >>Small, possibly, but usually essential. I note that no one has said >>that they have a phone but don't use it as a telephone. And, I don't >>expect anyone to say this is the case unless they haven't paid the >>bill and their phone service has been cut off. > > I know people using both iPhones and Android phones without regular > phone service as combo iPod, Wi-Fi Internet device, and Wi-Fi phone. > >>It's pretty silly to try to make a case that phone service is not part >>of a functioning phone when everyone has phone service on their phone. > > Not so silly -- you're ignoring Wi-Fi. > What is silly is you stubbornly beating this long since dead horse. ;) > >>>an iphone or android phone with no cellular plan is still functional on >>>wifi, and when there's no wifi, as an address book, >> >>What do you do with an address book if you can't make calls? > > Email. Birthdays. Addresses. Websites. Notes. The list is long. > >>>with pay as you go, you can pay for the occasional call, if needed. >> >>And you will. You will want phone service if you have a phone. > > No, _you_ will want phone service, > others will be quite content with Wi-Fi. > > You have a bad habit of projecting your own values onto others. > I am muttering something about pots and kettles -- Peter
From: Peter on 4 Jul 2010 22:57 "John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:fvh236d6s6tj4241evj6ocjuqp96sb4mip(a)4ax.com... > On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 22:34:29 -0400, in > <4c3146b4$0$5547$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, "Peter" > <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > >>"nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message >>news:040720101827561859%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... >>> In article <mmc236tm7phe02fl8a8nirsb252hv20qg9(a)4ax.com>, John Navas >>> <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Check out T-Mobile USA pricing, and you will see a price difference >>>> between service without a bundled phone and service with a bundled >>>> phone. If you own carrier isn't doing that, then it's pocketing the >>>> difference. Elementary, my dear Peter. ;) >>> >>> it depends how long you keep a phone. most people buy a new phone every >>> couple of years, which means it may actually be less expensive to get a >>> subsidized phone. >>> >>> and then there's the coverage issue. >> >>Coverage isn't important. Price is everything. <\end sarcastic tag> > > Everything includes price and coverage, both of which are very good. > For you! Not for me! -- Peter
From: Peter on 4 Jul 2010 22:58 "John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:51i2361oc52s3bkvhpfipjt38dfv3sa330(a)4ax.com... > On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 22:39:35 -0400, in > <4c3146b4$2$5547$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, "Peter" > <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > >>"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>news:mcd236t9o2rj0p5ebf4irq5k1276et9pb5(a)4ax.com... >>> On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 17:45:40 -0700, John Navas >>> <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >>> >>>>On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 18:53:07 -0400, in >>>><4c311690$1$5500$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, "Peter" >>>><peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>>"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>>news:gs2236t9l6h3oq0fsvq4mj4qi1vf5o5cmi(a)4ax.com... >>>> >>>>>> I can't get my mind around this. Your "phone" has WiFi, GPS, music, >>>>>> and camera functions. A phone should have phone functions. Without >>>>>> the phone functions, it's an electronic device but it's not a phone. >>>>> >>>>>There ya go! >>>>>If I agree to take the phone & 3G service Verizon will subsidize the >>>>>phone >>>>>cost. >>>> >>>>It's effectively a time payment agreement, not a subsidy per se. >>> >>> It is a subsidy if the price of the phone is artificially low in order >>> to get you to purchase the phone from that provider and to use their >>> service. >> >>Please. Navas is never wrong. Just ask him. > > An old saying in litigation: > When you have the facts on your side, pound on the facts. > When the law is on your side, pound on the law. > When neither the law nor the facts are on your side, > pound on the table (and your opponent). Irrelevant. Bye! -- Peter
From: J. Clarke on 4 Jul 2010 22:44 On 7/4/2010 8:44 PM, John Navas wrote: > On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 18:36:33 -0400, in > <gs2236t9l6h3oq0fsvq4mj4qi1vf5o5cmi(a)4ax.com>, tony cooper > <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >> I can't get my mind around this. Your "phone" has WiFi, GPS, music, >> and camera functions. A phone should have phone functions. Without >> the phone functions, it's an electronic device but it's not a phone. > > That position is getting increasingly shaky. > Time to declare victory and move on. You seem to be confusing a "phone", which is a device for talking, with a "PDA", which is a device for doing a bunch of other stuff that doesn't involve talking. If you can't talk on it then it's not a phone.
From: J. Clarke on 4 Jul 2010 22:43
On 7/4/2010 9:35 PM, nospam wrote: > In article<81b236hnqeko42fcti688l6evm22mafg7k(a)4ax.com>, tony cooper > <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >>>> I am particularly uninterested in a phone that uses one of those >>>> things about the size of a banana that clips on the ear. >>> >>> That's a shame, because Bluetooth can be quite handy. >> >> I can't imagine how. People wear that banana thing all day and stand >> there and talk into space when they get a call. I think that's rude. >> When I get a phone call I move away from other people. I've never >> thought it much trouble to pull out my phone. > > handsfree headsets while driving are now required in a lot of places, > and even when not driving, it's very nice to not need to hold a phone > up to one's ear. Headsets of _any_ kind are _forbidden_ in a lot of places. What is _required_ is a handsfree set built into the car that uses speakers built into the car. > bluetooth headsets are also small and nowhere near the size of a banana. > >> I find it really annoying to be standing in line and being forced to >> listen to the person next to you yammering away about their personal >> business. The worst is those Nextel things where you have to listen >> to *both* sides the conversation. > > that's etiquette, not bluetooth. |