NEWS: Apple sued over hot iPad shutdowns
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security of wireless networks
Next: NEWS: Security shortcomings in WPA2 that threaten security ofwireless networks
From: John Navas on 4 Aug 2010 11:55 On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 08:39:16 -0700, in <alangbaker-77569C.08391604082010(a)news.shawcable.com>, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: >In article <p21j565np9a09puppdng9d461lqc70dqqp(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >> 1. I have no personal interest in the iPad because it does not fit my >> own needs (whether well engineered or not). > >'I've never had this kind of thermal issue with a >cell phone or an Acer netbook even in pretty harsh conditions. The >apologies here, starting with the "technical" nonsense posted by Steven, >are a sorry commentary on Apple engineering.' > >That is taking a position. Indeed, but on the *apologies*, not on the engineering itself, on which I have no opinion. Does that help? >> 4. I have no opinion about the alleged iPad overheating problem. > >Then what you said to begin your participation in this thread makes no >sense. My only comment was that the issue is reminiscent of the fanless Mac. It is. >> 5. I know many comparable products that do not have the alleged issue. > >And yet declare something that you now say you're not claiming happens a >"sorry commentary on Apple engineering"... Again, I'm commenting about the "commentary", not the engineering. You really need to read more carefully, instead of dashing off another knee jerk bash. >> 6. I know that actual thermal performance is often considerably >> different from published specs, usually better, sometimes worse. >> >> 7. I know that some past Apple products have had thermal issues. >> >> This is based on relevant professional and personal experience. >> >> Now please give it a rest. Thanks. > >Any time you want to stop replying, please feel free. So you're trying to bash me into submission? -- John If the iPhone and iPad are really so impressive, then why do iFans keep making excuses for them?
From: John Navas on 4 Aug 2010 11:57 On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 08:40:39 -0700, in <alangbaker-65B05E.08403904082010(a)news.shawcable.com>, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: >In article <g32j56le6lu0tusn9n0d63on22nbcan7ve(a)4ax.com>, > John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 03:13:41 -0700 (PDT), in >> <0da5286b-244d-4ab4-908b-b13a6f33bb78(a)w30g2000yqw.googlegroups.com>, -hh >> <recscuba_google(a)huntzinger.com> wrote: >> >> you said apple had shoddy engineering, despite other companies having >> >> products with the same specs. it's *your* statement and it's called >> >> hypocrisy. >> >> I said nothing of the sort. > >You said it was a "sorry commentary on Apple engineering". To say that, >you must believe the allegation. Nope. You're making an assumption that's neither warranted nor true. >> Translation: I don't buy into the bashing of compact digital cameras by >> those who wrongly claim a dSLR makes for a better photographer. >> >> Back into the kill filter you go. > >The first refuge of the weak-minded. The childish response of an iFan. -- John "Never argue with an idiot. He'll drag you down to his level and then beat you with experience." -Dr. Alan Zimmerman
From: Kurt Ullman on 4 Aug 2010 11:57 In article <p21j565np9a09puppdng9d461lqc70dqqp(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 07:48:45 -0700, in > > 1. I have no personal interest in the iPad because it does not fit my > own needs (whether well engineered or not). > > 2. I started this thread only because it's a relevant item of interest. Yet pretty much every thread you start is about how something is wrong with an Apple product. Sorta argues against the personal interest part. Being essentially an anti-fanboy, you have about the same amount of credibility, at least to my mind. > > Now please give it a rest. Thanks. Guffaw. -- I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator and name it after the IRS. Robert Bakker, paleontologist
From: nospam on 4 Aug 2010 11:57 In article <g32j56le6lu0tusn9n0d63on22nbcan7ve(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> > >> What part of "It's not my allegation" do you not understand? > >> > >> > >What part of "you're defending one half and hiding behind 'it's not my > >> > >allegation' for the other half" do *you* not understand. > >> > >> > What part of I'm-not-taking-any-position do you not understand? > >> > >> you said apple had shoddy engineering, despite other companies having > >> products with the same specs. it's *your* statement and it's called > >> hypocrisy. > > I said nothing of the sort. actually, you did. In article <l6ig569fjhpfb83o2t1jtsbnu1tq2bja45(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > They do? Which ones? I've never had this kind of thermal issue with a > cell phone or an Acer netbook even in pretty harsh conditions. The > apologies here, starting with the "technical" nonsense posted by Steven, > are a sorry commentary on Apple engineering. note the last sentence, 'sorry commentary on apple engineering.' ok you didn't say the word shoddy but you certainly implied it. > >> > iFans tend to see anything other than praise as an attack. > >> > >> pejorative remarks means you have no substance. it's your standard > >> 'out.' > > That's not pejorative. Check the definition. of course it isn't pejorative when you refer to apple fans as ifans, but if someone dares calls a camera a point and shoot, something that many camera stores and even some camera makers do, you say it's pejorative. hypocrisy at its finest. > >> > You need to broaden your horizons, and not be so defensive. > >> > >> actually, it's you who needs to do that. > > > >This kind of trolling is par for the course for John Navas. > >John is notoriously untruthful in the rec.photo* forums. > >Slap him, then ignore him. > > Translation: I don't buy into the bashing of compact digital cameras by > those who wrongly claim a dSLR makes for a better photographer. nobody claimed that it made for a better photographer. why do you resort to lies? what they claimed that a higher quality camera (i.e., large sensor, better optics) will produce a higher quality image than a lower quality camera (i.e., small sensor, cheap lens), and that's governed by the laws of physics. > Back into the kill filter you go. coward.
From: nospam on 4 Aug 2010 12:00
In article <313j56tbr3ghik2cfsff1b5b07l4d2dgmk(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >> 1. I have no personal interest in the iPad because it does not fit my > >> own needs (whether well engineered or not). > > > >'I've never had this kind of thermal issue with a > >cell phone or an Acer netbook even in pretty harsh conditions. The > >apologies here, starting with the "technical" nonsense posted by Steven, > >are a sorry commentary on Apple engineering.' > > > >That is taking a position. > > Indeed, but on the *apologies*, not on the engineering itself, > on which I have no opinion. Does that help? no, because you said 'sorry commentary on apple engineering' so you clearly *do* have an opinion, and a penchant for lying or being incredibly obtuse. > My only comment was that the issue is reminiscent of the fanless Mac. > It is. which tablets and smartphones (which the ipad is often considered a 'large iphone) have fans? another double-standard. > >> 5. I know many comparable products that do not have the alleged issue. > > > >And yet declare something that you now say you're not claiming happens a > >"sorry commentary on Apple engineering"... > > Again, I'm commenting about the "commentary", not the engineering. > You really need to read more carefully, instead of dashing off another > knee jerk bash. you need to write more carefully. |