1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!
    Dismiss Notice

The great iPhone hunt of 2007

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by Lex, Jun 16, 2007.

  1. On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 19:43:22 -0700, Kurt wrote
    (in article <labolide-D795BF.19432220062007@news.giganews.com>):

    > In article <0001HW.C29F323A01B105E3F0182648@news.comcast.net>,
    > George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote:
    >
    >> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 18:32:17 -0700, Kurt wrote
    >> (in article <labolide-A88E68.18321720062007@news.giganews.com>):
    >>
    >>> In article <137j51favie4s4a@corp.supernews.com>,
    >>> geoffm@lava.net (Geoff Miller) wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> So the bottom line is, maybe you should drive more Chevrolets,
    >>>> and of more recent vintage, before you dismiss the entire make
    >>>> out of hand. And mind you, I'm no Chevy partisan. As far as
    >>>> passenger cars go, I'm first and foremost a Mercedes guy. And
    >>>> I'd probably have bought a Ford pickup if it weren't for the
    >>>> fact that the Chevy/GMC offered a more capacious extended cab
    >>>> in the model years I was interested in. (And all else being
    >>>> equal -- which it is -- I actually prefer the looks of the GMC.)
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Mercedes hasn't made a good car in years. I had a '66 230S (the
    >>> quintessential Beirut taxicab) a few years back. Overbuilt and drove
    >>> for ages. The new ones have quality issues. I have a friend with one of
    >>> the 350 SUVs (brand new). Piece of crap. At the dealer every month for
    >>> work. Left her stranded for than a few times.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> I question the desirability or wisdom of having so much of a car controlled
    >> by a computer. Cars today are MUCH TOO COMPLICATED. No wonder they have
    >> reliability problems. The only people who seem able to really pull it off
    >> are
    >> the Japanese, I understand that even Japanese cars aren't as bulletproof as
    >> they once were.

    >
    > I sold my '95 Infiniti J30 last year with 97K miles. Never had anything
    > other than regular servicing. Drove it all over the west and southwest.
    > No rattles, and never a problem. Amazing.
    >
    > The Daimler Chrysler merger hurt Mercedes the most, when Mercedes lost
    > control of where the parts came from.
    >
    >


    Yeah, I think I agree with that. They know it too. MB is trying to unload
    Chrysler - with no takers. Maybe the Chinese will end-up buying it like they
    did MG.
     



    › See More: The great iPhone hunt of 2007
  2. Geoff  Miller

    Geoff Miller Guest

    Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> writes:

    [combination phone/PDA]

    : The problem with that approach is that it's a single point of
    : potential failure.

    > The best way to handle that is to have another in the car etc.


    Buying two of something on the off-chance that one breaks isn't
    terribly cost-effective with personal electronics. At least
    with my approach, owning two gizmos that do two different things
    means that I get my money's worth by using both of them all of
    the time.


    > I already do that with the non portable stuff. I wouldnt dream
    > of being without spares/alternatives for anything that gets used
    > much and which is a nuisance when it inevitably stops working.


    But unless you have both of them with you at all times, there's
    still going to be the nuisance of being without the use of the
    thing until you go home and get the other one out of the other
    car, or wherever it's kept. So I don't see that you gain much
    for the added expense.


    > I have that with stuff as basic as the car and house keys etc too.


    I do it with really critical things like toilet paper and vermouth.


    > The avaition system has used redundancy for a hell of a long
    > time now.


    The government or airline can afford to. Besides, it's trivial
    to have, say, a duplicate set of instruments in the context of
    the cost of the entire airplane. With stuff like electrical and
    hydraulic systems (not to mention engines), it can literally be
    a matter of life and death.


    > Much more viable than dinosauring along the old way.


    I really don't see that having a separate cell phone, digital
    camera and PDA makes me a "dinosaur." Those are all modern
    electronic devices, afer all. It isn't as though I'm using an
    abacus or something.

    The only reason I finally got a PalmPilot was because I got tired
    of stationery stores always being out of DayRunner pages in the
    size I needed. (The extortionate prices they charged for refills
    when they *did* have them in stock chapped my hide, too.) Did
    using a DayRunner make me a dinosaur? I don't see how; it's the
    same principle as a PDA. You have to admit, a lot of the attrac-
    tion of any PDA is the geek factor.


    > Mad, it makes a hell of a lot more sense to have it all in one
    > and have a spare if the use is that critical. That way you can
    > just ignore the spare until you actually need it because the
    > main one died or got lost etc and dont have to fart around with
    > the multiple items all the time.


    I can't imagine a scenario in which the use of any of those things
    were critical. They're conveniences, not necessities. What's
    interesting is how conditioned people have become to think of
    those things as necessities.


    > Makes a lot more sense to have everything in the one device so
    > you can use the camera effortless when required and dont have to
    > cart a physical camera around on the off chance you might need it.


    It's always in my backpack, which is usually with me. But not always.
    And admittedly, a car accident when I don't have the camera along would
    be an excellent time to have a camera in my phone. Now, if I could just
    remember to re-read the owner's manual so I'll know how to use the
    goddamed thing...



    Geoff

    --
    "We are like genitals unto the gods; they play with us
    for their amusement." -- Black Adder
     
  3. Todd Allcock

    Todd Allcock Guest

    At 22 Jun 2007 04:34:38 +1000 Rod Speed wrote:

    > Any 2 year old could leave that for dead, fuckwit child.

    That'll make a nice epitaph on your tombstone...

    ....hopefully sooner rather than later...

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
     
  4. Rod Speed

    Rod Speed Guest

    Geoff Miller <geoffm@lava.net> wrote
    > Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> writes


    > [combination phone/PDA]


    In fact what was being discussed was everything
    in the one device, not just phone and PDA.

    >> The problem with that approach is that it's a single point of potential failure.


    >> The best way to handle that is to have another in the car etc.


    > Buying two of something on the off-chance that one breaks
    > isn't terribly cost-effective with personal electronics.


    You dont need to do that for the convenience, just keep
    the previous obsolete one in the car in case you need it etc.

    > At least with my approach, owning two gizmos that do two different things
    > means that I get my money's worth by using both of them all of the time.


    Doesnt help when say the phone stops working, or the camera, you're still fucked.

    And you have to fart around with the two separate devices,
    particularly with basic stuff like multiple address books etc etc etc.

    >> I already do that with the non portable stuff. I wouldnt dream
    >> of being without spares/alternatives for anything that gets used
    >> much and which is a nuisance when it inevitably stops working.


    > But unless you have both of them with you at all times, there's
    > still going to be the nuisance of being without the use of the
    > thing until you go home and get the other one out of the other
    > car, or wherever it's kept.


    Most of us have the car with us most of the time. The other times arent
    necessarily any big deal if the single device does fail and your approach
    doesnt fix the problem since you are in precisely the same situation with
    the device that has failed when you need that functionality.

    And we get the convenience of just one device and not having to fart around with 3 etc.

    > So I don't see that you gain much


    More fool you.

    > for the added expense.


    There is no added expense if the previous one is the backup.

    >> I have that with stuff as basic as the car and house keys etc too.


    > I do it with really critical things like toilet paper and vermouth.


    I do it with everything that is used much. In spades with the stuff
    thats used every day like the PC, TV, cooking devices etc etc etc.

    >>> A friend of mine has one of those gizmos that's a combination
    >>> cell phone and PDA (a Treo or BlackBerry or something like that).
    >>> When she had to have the thing repaired because she'd inadvertently
    >>> dropped a heavy Cross ballpoint pen point-down (natch) on the PDA
    >>> screen, she found herself without a PDA or a cell phone. Buying
    >>> a device like that is an example of what's known in military aviation
    >>> circles as "bad headwork."


    >> The avaition system has used redundancy for a hell of a long time now.


    > The government or airline can afford to.


    It aint just the govt and airlines, private planes have redundancy too.

    > Besides, it's trivial to have, say, a duplicate set of
    > instruments in the context of the cost of the entire airplane.


    Even more trivial to keep the previous now
    obsolete single device as the backup too.

    > With stuff like electrical and hydraulic systems (not to
    > mention engines), it can literally be a matter of life and death.


    And with stuff you use much, like even something as basic as
    keys, it makes a hell of a lot of sense to have redundancy too.

    Makes absolutely no sense to not have spare keyboards
    and mice etc given that they are so cheap too.

    >> Much more viable than dinosauring along the old way.


    > I really don't see that having a separate cell phone,
    > digital camera and PDA makes me a "dinosaur."


    It does anyway.

    > Those are all modern electronic devices, afer all.
    > It isn't as though I'm using an abacus or something.


    Stupid to be farting around with three
    separate devices when one can do it all.

    > The only reason I finally got a PalmPilot was because I got tired of
    > stationery stores always being out of DayRunner pages in the size I needed.


    You're clearly a dinosaur by nature.

    > (The extortionate prices they charged for refills when
    > they *did* have them in stock chapped my hide, too.)
    > Did using a DayRunner make me a dinosaur?


    Yep, farting about with bits of paper is dinosaur stuff.

    I dont even bother with lists anymore, they get
    loaded into the high capability single device instead.

    Its also go stuff like lists of clothes etc sizes etc too, leaves
    farting around with lists like that on paper for dead too.

    > I don't see how; it's the same principle as a PDA.


    Nope, much more farting around moving stuff
    from piece of paper to piece of paper etc.

    Bet you still pay for stuff with physical checks too.

    > You have to admit, a lot of the attraction of any PDA is the geek factor.


    Nope, for anyone with a clue its just much more convenient,
    and no farting around hunting up refills etc too.

    >>> I have a cell phone and a Palm Pilot, and never the twain shall
    >>> meet, Mark. Oh, and a dedicated digital camera, too. I keep
    >>> the phone in the customary belt holster, and the camera and
    >>> PDA live in my backpack where they're always close at hand.


    >> Mad, it makes a hell of a lot more sense to have it all
    >> in one and have a spare if the use is that critical. That
    >> way you can just ignore the spare until you actually
    >> need it because the main one died or got lost etc and
    >> dont have to fart around with the multiple items all the time.


    > I can't imagine a scenario in which the
    > use of any of those things were critical.


    More fool you. And I said THAT CRITICAL.

    > They're conveniences, not necessities.


    So is your house and car and clothes using that mindlessly silly line.

    > What's interesting is how conditioned people have
    > become to think of those things as necessities.


    I never said a word about necessitys.

    >>>> And the camera is handy when shopping around to
    >>>> record some individual offers that can be compared
    >>>> with whatever new shows up until you buy it etc.


    >>> Oh, I agree that they have plenty of uses. Having a camera
    >>> available in the event of an auto accident comes to mind.
    >>> But I buy a telephone primarily as a telephone.


    >> Makes a lot more sense to have everything in the one device so
    >> you can use the camera effortless when required and dont have to
    >> cart a physical camera around on the off chance you might need it.


    > It's always in my backpack, which is usually with me.


    I dont bother with backpacks at all. Just a single device that goes in
    my pocket, even in summer when I dont even wear shirts with pockets.

    Leaves farting around with a backpack for dead.

    > But not always. And admittedly, a car accident when I don't have the
    > camera along would be an excellent time to have a camera in my phone.


    Yep, a single device that can do everything you ever do, even
    if its very rarely like with an accident leaves the alternatives
    for dead, if only because it will always be with you.

    Very handy to be able to check the basics on say model
    numbers etc when you are out and about and find one that
    looks like its the same model in a garage sale etc and its
    so cheap that it would be useful for spares etc etc etc.

    > Now, if I could just remember to re-read the owner's
    > manual so I'll know how to use the goddamed thing...


    Anyone with a clue buys devices that are properly designed so they are intuitive to use.

    The most you might have to do with a Nokia is look in a different menu for something
    that you have never used before but are aware that it can do like say a timer etc.
     
  5. Geoff  Miller

    Geoff Miller Guest

    Elmo P. Shagnasty <elmop@nastydesigns.com> writes:

    : Why do you insist on reading so much negative BS into such a simple,
    : straightforward term?

    > Oh, I don't. I understand value. It's generally the rest of the
    > world, populated by idiots and being manipulated by marketers, who
    > have bastardized the meaning of the word "value" to mean "the lowest
    > price thing we can still possibly call a thing".


    And what did I say that gave you the impression that I'm one of those
    people? If you could narrow that down to specific passage(s) of mine,
    I'm sure it would prove illuminating.


    > Well, Chevies aren't a value. They may be low priced--that is, the
    > cost to acquire them is low--but they aren't a value.


    Why not? And compared to what?

    I've noticed that the articles by the Chevy-haters in this thread are
    precious short on specifics. It gives me the impression that they're
    spouting received "wisdom" that simply happens to be fashionable among
    their peer group.



    Geoff

    --
    "We are like genitals unto the gods; they play with us
    for their amusement." -- Black Adder
     
  6. Geoff  Miller

    Geoff Miller Guest

    chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> writes:

    : I also rented a Malibu sedan a few years back. It impressed me
    : also.

    > I guess you are easier to please than I am. 8)



    That's a strange thing to say to somebody whose last four cars have
    been Mercedes-Benzes.



    Geoff

    --
    "We are like genitals unto the gods; they play with us
    for their amusement." -- Black Adder
     
  7. Geoff  Miller

    Geoff Miller Guest

    "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> writes:

    > Rod Speed apparently has something for fucking 2 year old
    > dead children.



    You mean dead two-year-olds, or children of any age who've
    been dead for two years?

    Somehow it doesn't sound quite as bad if the body is
    reasonably fresh...



    Geoff

    --
    "We are like genitals unto the gods; they play with us
    for their amusement." -- Black Adder
     
  8. Geoff  Miller

    Geoff Miller Guest

    Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> writes:

    > The Daimler Chrysler merger hurt Mercedes the most, when
    > Mercedes lost control of where the parts came from.


    Are you implying that Chrysler-sourced parts were used in
    Mercedes vehicles? I've heard of the reverse, e.g., the
    E-class rear suspension used on the Chrysler 300 and the
    previous-generatio SLK platform being used for the Crossfire,
    but that's all.



    Geoff

    --
    "We are like genitals unto the gods; they play with us
    for their amusement." -- Black Adder
     
  9. Rod Speed

    Rod Speed Guest

    Geoff Miller <geoffm@lava.net> wrote
    > Shawn Hirn <srhi@comcast.net> writes


    >> Buying a device like that is an example of what's
    >> known in military aviation circles as "bad headwork."


    >> If this is the same military who's doing such a lousy job in Iraq,
    >> I am not all that concerned with their opinion on handheld devices.


    > It isn't an opinion on handheld devices, you comprehension-deprived
    > little leftist nitwit. It's a figure of speech.


    > If you believe the military is doing a lousy job in Iraq, then perhaps
    > you, a noted expert on military strategy and tactics, would be
    > willing to edify the rest of us by offering some suggestions?


    Let the stupid ragheads fight it out amoungst themselves.

    They just aint worth first world country kid's lives.

    Even the stupid japs and krauts had enough of a clue to get
    on with it once they had lost. Not the stupid ragheads tho.

    Its possible that it might be possible to prevail after 40 years or so given
    that even the stupid irish managed to come to their senses eventually
    but its doubtful that the stupid ragheads can even manage that.

    > I really hope the draft is reinstated someday.


    Taint gunna happen, you watch.

    > Universal military experience would both diminish the frequency
    > of trendy yet uninformed anti-military twaddle such as yours,


    Odd that that didnt happen during Vietnam.

    At least with the current approach, those getting killed in the
    attempt to stop the stupid ragheads killing each other have
    volunteered to go there. The public support would be MUCH
    worse if it was their kids being shipped over there regardless.

    > and increase the likelihood that anyone who spouted
    > it got his ass booted up between his shoulderblades.


    Just another mindless fantasy.

    >> I have a cell phone and a Palm Pilot, and never the twain shall
    >> meet, Mark. Oh, and a dedicated digital camera, too. I keep
    >> the phone in the customary belt holster, and the camera and PDA
    >> live in my backpack where they're always close at hand.


    >> Good for you. About a year ago, I replaced my separate cell phone and
    >> Palm Pilot with a Palm Treo 700p smart phone and even after having it
    >> stolen from me this weekend, I would never go back to separate
    >> devices. When I had a separate Palm and cell phone, I ended up
    >> spending too much time duplicating address book info on both units.
    >> With my Treo 700p, I like the ability to keep all my data on one device
    >> and have it tied to my cell phone and my computer nearly effortlessly.


    > Good for you. Your mother must be very proud. I get around that
    > problem by not inputting any information into my cell phone in the
    > first place, hence no duplication of effort. If I need to look up a
    > number, the Palm Pilot is right there.


    Wota dinosaur. MUCH more convenient to dial it when its on the cellphone.

    > And as I pointed out earlier, if one of the devices breaks or is lost, I still have
    > the use of the other until the lost one can be replaced...later the same day.


    Pity that a camera doesnt work too well as a cellphone.
     
  10. Kurt

    Kurt Guest

    In article <137m5g1scj1rg17@corp.supernews.com>,
    geoffm@lava.net (Geoff Miller) wrote:

    > Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> writes:
    >
    > > The Daimler Chrysler merger hurt Mercedes the most, when
    > > Mercedes lost control of where the parts came from.

    >
    > Are you implying that Chrysler-sourced parts were used in
    > Mercedes vehicles? I've heard of the reverse, e.g., the
    > E-class rear suspension used on the Chrysler 300 and the
    > previous-generatio SLK platform being used for the Crossfire,
    > but that's all.
    >

    I had heard that besides the numerous quality issues (door trim falling
    off $100,000 cars, Chrysler was calling the shots for where parts came
    from.

    --
    To reply by email, remove the word "space"
     
  11. chrisv

    chrisv Guest

    Geoff Miller wrote:

    >chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> writes:
    >
    >: I also rented a Malibu sedan a few years back. It impressed me
    >: also.
    >
    >> I guess you are easier to please than I am. 8)

    >
    >That's a strange thing to say to somebody whose last four cars have
    >been Mercedes-Benzes.


    Nope. Your being "impressed" by a Malibu is proof positive.
     
  12. Geoff  Miller

    Geoff Miller Guest

    George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> writes:

    > American cars are, in my experience, generally not as good
    > as Japanese cars of the same price, but there are exceptions.



    My experience is similar to yours. I'm a Toyota fan, having
    owned two Toyota pickups and a Supra. I'm partial to Hondas,
    also (I used to own an '81 Accord sedan).

    That being said, American cars have made great strides over the
    last couple of decades. There are even a couple I consider
    particularly desirable, the new Mustang and the Chrysler 300
    (especially in SRT-8 form).



    Geoff

    --
    "History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it."
    -- Winston Churchill
     
  13. Geoff  Miller

    Geoff Miller Guest

    Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> writes:

    : Are you implying that Chrysler-sourced parts were used in
    : Mercedes vehicles?

    > I had heard that besides the numerous quality issues (door
    > trim falling off $100,000 cars, Chrysler was calling the
    > shots for where parts came from.



    That's highly unlikely, considering the well-documented fact
    that the so-called "merger" between Chrysler and DBAG was
    anything but a joining of equals. If you don't believe that,
    then how do you explain Daimler-Benz's recent selling off of
    Chrysler?



    Geoff

    --
    "History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it."
    -- Winston Churchill
     
  14. Geoff  Miller

    Geoff Miller Guest

    chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> writes:

    >> I guess you are easier to please than I am. 8)


    : That's a strange thing to say to somebody whose last four
    : cars have been Mercedes-Benzes.

    > Nope. Your being "impressed" by a Malibu is proof positive.



    Nope, yourself. Consider the context: I didn't say that the
    Malibu was the equal of any Mercedes. I said I was impressed
    by it. What impressed me was what the car offered for its price.

    That's known as "value." Value doesn't imply that something has
    to be the best in its class. It implies "bang for the buck," i.e.
    offering a lot for its price.



    Geoff

    --
    "History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it."
    -- Winston Churchill
     
  15. aemeijers

    aemeijers Guest

    "chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
    news:vhsk731l85l26bdkc0pv84qmag749b82p2@4ax.com...
    > Justin wrote:
    >
    >>Rod Speed wrote on [Thu, 21 Jun 2007 05:36:28 +1000]:
    >>>
    >>> Any 2 year old could leave that for dead, fuckwit child.

    >>
    >>Do you feel like you won now?

    >
    > Well, he did, until you ruined it by responding again.
    >
    > Just let the kook have the last word.
    >

    Better yet, just killfile him like most of us have. Reading all the
    pointless responses to Rod is almost as bad as reading Rod.
     
  16. chrisv

    chrisv Guest

    Geoff Miller wrote:

    >chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> writes:
    >
    >>> I guess you are easier to please than I am. 8)

    >
    >: That's a strange thing to say to somebody whose last four
    >: cars have been Mercedes-Benzes.
    >
    >> Nope. Your being "impressed" by a Malibu is proof positive.

    >
    >Nope, yourself.


    Nope.

    >Consider the context: I didn't say that the
    >Malibu was the equal of any Mercedes.


    No one thought that you had.

    >I said I was impressed by it.


    Yeah, we know that.

    > What impressed me was what the car offered for its price.


    That's not what you said.

    >That's known as "value."


    That's known as changing your story, and looking like a fscking idiot
    who cannot tolerate a friendly " I guess you are easier to please than
    I am. 8)"

    You MUST be so superior, I guess... You just CAN'T be "easier to
    please" than some stranger calling himself "chrisv" on usenet, and
    you'll defend your honor to the end.

    Asshole.

    >Value doesn't imply that something has
    >to be the best in its class. It implies "bang for the buck," i.e.
    >offering a lot for its price.


    It's clear that you are more-easily pleased than I am.
     
  17. Geoff  Miller

    Geoff Miller Guest

    Justin <nospam@insightbb.com> writes:

    : I've noticed that the articles by the Chevy-haters in this thread are
    : precious short on specifics. It gives me the impression that they're
    : spouting received "wisdom" that simply happens to be fashionable among
    : their peer group.

    > That's funny, I have specifics.



    Then lay 'em out for us.

    "Put up or shut up" is, I believe, the expression.



    Geoff

    --
    "History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it."
    -- Winston Churchill
     
  18. Kurt

    Kurt Guest

    In article <137p3gh47r00g49@corp.supernews.com>,
    geoffm@lava.net (Geoff Miller) wrote:

    > Kurt <labolide@spacegmail.com> writes:
    >
    > : Are you implying that Chrysler-sourced parts were used in
    > : Mercedes vehicles?
    >
    > > I had heard that besides the numerous quality issues (door
    > > trim falling off $100,000 cars, Chrysler was calling the
    > > shots for where parts came from.

    >
    >
    > That's highly unlikely, considering the well-documented fact
    > that the so-called "merger" between Chrysler and DBAG was
    > anything but a joining of equals. If you don't believe that,
    > then how do you explain Daimler-Benz's recent selling off of
    > Chrysler?
    >

    They melded a lot of resources. Chrysler is a losing brand these days.
    Mercedes regretted the merger.

    --
    To reply by email, remove the word "space"
     
  19. Geoff  Miller

    Geoff Miller Guest

    chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> writes:

    [alleged: I'm more easily impressed that he is]

    :: That's a strange thing to say to somebody whose last four
    :: cars have been Mercedes-Benzes.

    >> Nope. Your being "impressed" by a Malibu is proof positive.


    : Nope, yourself.

    > Nope.


    Nope yet again.


    : Consider the context: I didn't say that the Malibu was the
    : equal of any Mercedes.

    > No one thought that you had.


    You obviously did.


    : I said I was impressed by it.

    > Yeah, we know that.


    That seems to be about all you know. Well, that and the
    location of your ass, now that you were able to borrow a
    flashlight and a Rand-McNally Road Atlas.


    : What impressed me was what the car offered for its price.

    > That's not what you said.


    So what did I say, then?


    : That's known as "value."

    > That's known as changing your story, and looking like a fscking
    > idiot who cannot tolerate a friendly " I guess you are easier to
    > please than I am. 8)"


    Expanding on my conception of value isn't changing my story.
    'Course, you'd probably claim that anything at all that I'd
    said subsequent to my original post was "changing my story"...

    Calling someone a "fscking idiot" one exchange further into the
    thread indicates that your comment was anything but friendly.

    So when did I change my story? Please quote the relevant passages,
    and provide the corresponding dates and message-IDs. I'm sure we
    can clear this up in a metric heartbeat. Failure to coopetrate
    will, of course, be taken as a tacit admission that you were
    talking out your ass.


    > You MUST be so superior, I guess... You just CAN'T be "easier
    > to please" than some stranger calling himself "chrisv" on usenet,
    > and you'll defend your honor to the end.


    What does superiority have to do with it?

    Do you really expect someone to take kindly to ane insinuation that
    he has low standards, simply because he admits to being impressed by
    a less-than-premium-priced automoble? If you don't want an exchange
    of views about cars, then why are you here?


    > Asshole.


    Window-licking retard.


    : Value doesn't imply that something has to be the best in its class.
    : It implies "bang for the buck," i.e. offering a lot for its price.

    > It's clear that you are more-easily pleased than I am.


    What's clear is that you need to bolster your fragile sense of self-
    esteem with pretentious snobbery.

    Trundle along, now. The grownups are talking, and you'd only get
    frightfully confused. There's a good lad...



    Geoff

    --
    "Most autoerotic fatalities (wankers died in the line of duty) are
    found with some interesting object in their bum and a smile obscured
    by the dewey plastic bag over their heads." -- Steven Snedker
     
  20. Todd Allcock

    Todd Allcock Guest

    At 24 Jun 2007 02:20:24 +0000 Geoff Miller wrote:
    > If you don't want an exchange
    > of views about cars, then why are you here?


    Interesting question for both of you, considering the thread is
    ostensibly about the iPhone and is crossposted to posted to three
    cellular and two computer groups...


    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
     

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?