iphone fold?

[badgolferman]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2019/09/17/apple-iphone-fold-iphone-11-pro-max-upgrade-new-iphone/

[sms]

On 9/18/2019 10:06 AM, badgolferman wrote:

> https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2019/09/17/apple-iphone-fold-iphone-11-pro-max-upgrade-new-iphone/

I need one of these! Not surprising that this is coming since the
Android folding phones are just hitting the market, despite the fiasco
with the first Samsung model. Apple was smart to not try to be on the
bleeding edge of folding displays.

An iPhone Fold with Touch ID, USB-C, and 5G could command a very high
price. Even without a headphone jack.

[nospam]

In article <qltrjt$s5v$1...@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> >
> > https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2019/09/17/apple-iphone-fold-iphone-

> > 11-pro-max-upgrade-new-iphone/
>
> I need one of these! Not surprising that this is coming

it isn't coming any time soon, if ever.

apple and other companies patent all sorts of stuff that is never
productized.

> since the
> Android folding phones are just hitting the market, despite the fiasco
> with the first Samsung model. Apple was smart to not try to be on the
> bleeding edge of folding displays.

although samsung redesigned the fold, it still remains to be seen how
well it will hold up in actual use.

many people, including mechanical engineers, are incredibly skeptical
that it will hold up more than 6-12 months, if that long.

however, it will probably last more than the one day the old one did.

> An iPhone Fold with Touch ID, USB-C, and 5G could command a very high
> price.

nope.

> Even without a headphone jack.

trolling.

[Lewis]

In message <qlto6v$edj$1...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:


> https://www.forbes

Please stop posting links to shit sites.


--
There is nothing so stupid that some person somewhere will not, with
earnestness, say it.

[Lewis]

In message <qltrjt$s5v$1...@dont-email.me> sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 9/18/2019 10:06 AM, badgolferman wrote:

>> https://www.forbes

> I need one of these! Not surprising that this is coming

It's not. Forbes is filled with garbage The vast majority of their
"content" is written by trolls on the level of our local shitbag troll.

Never believe anything on forbes.com,

> An iPhone Fold with Touch ID, USB-C, and 5G could command a very high
> price. Even without a headphone jack.

Never going to happen. Ever.

--
GRAMMAR IS NOT A TIME OF WASTE Bart chalkboard Ep. AABF10

[nospam]

In article <slrnqo521d....@promini.lan>, Lewis

<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>
> > An iPhone Fold with Touch ID, USB-C, and 5G could command a very high
> > price. Even without a headphone jack.
>
> Never going to happen. Ever.

never is a really long time.

foldable devices might become somewhat common at some point, but not
for a while and it's *extremely* unlikely to be an iphone, which is
already small enough to fit in a pocket.

although still unlikely for the foreseeable future, a foldable ipad
could be useful. people want something the size of a tablet, but
pocketable like a phone.

[JF Mezei]

On 2019-09-18 15:40, Lewis wrote:

>> An iPhone Fold with Touch ID, USB-C, and 5G could command a very high
>> price. Even without a headphone jack.
>
> Never going to happen. Ever.

Old news. Apple had foldable iPhone a number of years ago, it was called
the iPhone6. (I beleive it was markted as "Bend gate" :-) :-) :-) :-)

[Lewis]

In message <180920191606591689%nos...@nospam.invalid> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnqo521d....@promini.lan>, Lewis
> <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>>
>> > An iPhone Fold with Touch ID, USB-C, and 5G could command a very high
>> > price. Even without a headphone jack.
>>
>> Never going to happen. Ever.

> never is a really long time.

No, never. Apple is not bringing back touch id.

--
Humans are always slightly lost. It's a basic characteristic. It
explains a lot about them.

[nospam]

In article <slrnqo5f2o....@promini.lan>, Lewis

<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> >>
> >> > An iPhone Fold with Touch ID, USB-C, and 5G could command a very high
> >> > price. Even without a headphone jack.
> >>
> >> Never going to happen. Ever.
>
> > never is a really long time.
>
> No, never. Apple is not bringing back touch id.

apple has said touch id is not going away. they said they're going to
continue with both touch id *and* face id because touch id is less
expensive. it's currently on several macbooks and likely to be on an
iphone se successor and possibly a future apple watch if they get
in-screen touch id working reliably.

but the key feature he claims to want is a *folding* *phone*, except
that it's a disaster waiting to happen for all sorts of reasons.

it makes a little more sense for an ipad or even a laptop, but even
that has numerous issues to be resolved, making it not that likely
short term, although possible longer term.

the biggest question is how rugged is something that is repeatedly
flexed going to hold up over time.

[badgolferman]

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

> On 2019-09-18, Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> In message <qlto6v$edj$1...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman
>> <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> https://www.forbes
>>
>> Please stop posting links to shit sites.
>

> Especially clickbait trash pieces written by perpetual ass clown, Gordon
> Kelly. You have to be a *huge* fucking sucker to believe anything that
> dip shit says without question.
>

Sigh...

[badgolferman]

Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <qlto6v$edj$1...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman
> <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> https://www.forbes
>
> Please stop posting links to shit sites.
>
>

There are much worse sites. You seem to have quite a bias toward anything
that doesn’t fit in your little universe.

[Arlen Holder]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 01:39:43 +0000 (UTC), badgolferman wrote:

> There are much worse sites. You seem to have quite a bias toward anything
> that doesn't fit in your little universe.

Hi badgolferman,

Lewis (and Jolly Roger) always prove to be classic apologists.

A basic trait of all apologists is that they're deathly afraid of facts.
o Where most are so afraid of facts, they react to facts with a vehemence

It's as if you told a child the fact that Santa Claus doesn't exist.
o That child reacts to the bearer of fact with vicious hatred.

It doesn't matter that EVERYONE knows the fact Santa Claus doesn't exist.
o These Apple Apologists attack the bearer of facts with a violent hatred

For example, even the government of the US has stated facts they hate:
<http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220190278422%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20190278422&RS=DN/20190278422>

And Patently Apple also stated facts that apologists apparently hate:
<https://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2019/09/apple-continues-their-work-on-a-flexible-foldable-device-that-began-in-2011.html>

Those facts don't matter to the Apple Apologists.
o Apologists hate facts so much that they viciously attack the bearer.

This vehement hatred of facts is a well known trait of Apologists.
o What are the common well-verified psychological traits of the Apple Apologists on this newsgroup?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/18ARDsEOPzM/veU8FwAjBQAJ>

Rest assured though that the remaining adults on this newsgroup appreciate
that you provided us with reliable verifiable facts about Apple activities.

[Arlen Holder]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 01:39:42 +0000 (UTC), badgolferman wrote:

>>>> https://www.forbes
>>>
>>> Please stop posting links to shit sites.
>>
>> Especially clickbait trash pieces written by perpetual ass clown, Gordon
>> Kelly. You have to be a *huge* fucking sucker to believe anything that
>> dip shit says without question.
>>
>
> Sigh...

Hi badgolferman,

Thank you for posting that factual information about Apple patents.

You're not an apologist, where the proof is that facts don't scare you,
and, where Lewis & Jolly Roger (known apologists) clearly hate facts so
vehemently that they viciously attacked Forbes for simply reporting on the
basic facts, which came from this US Government Patent Office document:
<http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220190278422%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20190278422&RS=DN/20190278422>

Apparently Apple recently filed a "continuation patent" which apparently
contains the following related set of "claims:
o flexible display & control circuitry
o hinge
o squeeze sensor & control circuitry
o squeeze app
o squeeze force sensor
o squeeze force sensor location
based on a recent factual summary by Patently Apple:
o Apple continues their work on a Flexible / Foldable Device that began in 2011
<https://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2019/09/apple-continues-their-work-on-a-flexible-foldable-device-that-began-in-2011.html>
who summarized the legalese in the patent continuation as...

"The big things that have been added to Apple's patent claims includes:
a flexible display; control circuitry; a hinge; squeezing the flexible
display changes an app; a sensor for squeezing; and a force sensor.

Thanks for posting these facts about Apple patent applications.
o Remaining adults on this newsgroup appreciate the factual information.

[Lewis]

I have a bias against sites that host shitbag know-nothing trolls who
have a years-long history of posting utter garbage.

--
'It's still a lie. Like the lie about masks.' 'What lie about masks?'
'The way people say they hide faces.' 'They do hide faces,' said Nanny
Ogg. 'Only the one on the outside.' --Maskerade

[Arlen Holder]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 04:59:19 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

> I have a bias against sites that host shitbag know-nothing trolls who
> have a years-long history of posting utter garbage.

Hi Lewis,

It's fantastic when you post because I love to study you Apologists!
o You (& Jolly Roger) are absolutely perfect poster children for the genre.

You blame Forbes for simply reporting what the US Patent Office published.
o I thank you for continuing to prove my point you apologists hate facts.

You brazenly object to facts that no reasonable adult could object to.
o The fact _is_ that Apple applied for the patent continuation.

You _hate_ that fact - but to an adult - it's simply ... a fact.
o That apologists hate facts doesn't change the fact they're still facts.

[nospam]

In article <qlv2s9$uc$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder

<arlen...@arlinghlder.edu> wrote:

>
> You blame Forbes for simply reporting what the US Patent Office published.

patents do not mean there will be a product using said patens.

anyone claiming that deserves to be bashed.

[sms]

LOL, but that didn't fold with the display intact.

Anyway, all phone makers will eventually have foldable models, all phone
makers will have 5G, and the iPhone will likely follow the lead of the
iPad and move to USB-C. Touch ID is already predicted to re-appear with
the iPhone 12.

[nospam]

In article <qlvvoa$lr2$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> Anyway, all phone makers will eventually have foldable models,

nonsense, and it's quite likely it's just a passing fad, like 3d tv was.

> all phone
> makers will have 5G,

on some models, but it will be many years until everything is 5g.

> and the iPhone will likely follow the lead of the
> iPad and move to USB-C.

possible, but not likely.

> Touch ID is already predicted to re-appear with
> the iPhone 12.

no it very definitely is not.

[badgolferman]

Lewis wrote:

>In message <qlum8v$nc1$2...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman
><REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>> In message <qlto6v$edj$1...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman
>>> <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> https://www.forbes
>>>
>>> Please stop posting links to shit sites.
>>>
>>>
>
>> There are much worse sites. You seem to have quite a bias toward
>>anything that doesn’t fit in your little universe.
>
>I have a bias against sites that host shitbag know-nothing trolls who
>have a years-long history of posting utter garbage.

Let's make a deal -- I will stop posting links from Forbes and you stop
berating and talking down to people.

--
"The Bible tells us to love our neighbors and also to love our enemies;
probably because generally they are the same people." ~ G. K. Chesterton

[Arlen Holder]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 08:57:50 -0400, nospam wrote:

> patents do not mean there will be a product using said patens.
>
> anyone claiming that deserves to be bashed.

Hi nospam,

FACTS & LOGIC>

Remember when all of you misunderstood the Qualcomm legal case?
Remember when all you apologists misunderstood Snit's WiFi video?
Remember when all you apologists denied iPhone X throttling software?

Trust one thing nospam - and trust it well.
o I'm not dumb like you apologists always prove to be.

I know EXCTLY what it means for Apple to file a patent continuation.
o And I know what it does NOT mean, nospam

Just like I know you are playing tricks with RAM usage nospam
o When you cherry pick a minor advantage iOS has over Apple

And just like I know you play tricks with 5G teething, nospam
o Where I point out that Apple has had far worse teething pains

Just like I pointed out today your DXOMark review bullshit, nospam
o Where you claim it's an "arbitrary" score - but you ignore the tests

In general, nospam, the apologists are utter morons
o It's a wonder that they can even survive in this complex world.

For the most part, nospam, while you're clearly an apologist par excellence
o In general, you simply brazenly lie - as I think you know you're wrong

Notice I actually give you credit for being smarter than Lewis or JR
o Lewis & JR & BK and a host of others - are so dumb it's unimaginable

I don't think you're as dumb as what you write makes you out to be
o I think you have an AGENDA which is to foment Apple MARKETING bullshit

Guess what?
o I have an agenda too - which is to combat your bullshit - with facts.

You'll notice, for example, I never once claimed Apple was coming out with
the product - where anyone who is intelligent (i.e., not Lewis or JR for
sure), would simply do what I did:
1. Read and comprehend what badgolferman's Forbes article said
2. Read and comprehend the Patently Apple referece they cited
3. Read and (attempt to comprehend) the actual continuance application

FACTS & LOGIC>

I read all three references BEFORE I posted a single thing, nospam.
o You likely did not do that - but I think you "could" do that.

But certainly, just as Alan Baker couldn't comprehend the Qualcomm
agreement, and just as certainly as the fact that Snit couldn't comprehend
a Y axis and just as certainly as you didn't comprehend the difference
between a decibel and a megabit (for Christs' sake nospam), it's a
certainty that neither Lewis nor Jolly Roger could comprehend that.

Remember Joerg Lorenz claimed that news was false because he didn't find it
in his German media search - and we all (rightly so) called him a moron?

Well, both Lewis & Jolly Roger readily prove they're utter morons.
o They discount, out of hand, the FACTS that Forbes did report.

Think about this, nospam, and I know you play childish games becuase you
hate facts that don't show Apple in a positive light - but think about
this:

If I can read the Forbes article and if I can comprehend exactly what it
says, and if I can then dig to their source and comprehend what they said,
and then if I can dig deeper into the patent continuation application
itself (which, admittedly is harder to decipher what it "really" says), why
can't Lewis & Jolly Roger do the same thing?

The answer is that they're both just plain stupid.
o For you to defend their stupidity - is par for the course.

Since you Apologists consistantly plus-1 each other
o Remember you plus-one'd Snit's idiotic video

Where you didn't even realize there's a difference between a decibel and a
megabit for Christs' sake.

You can brazenly deny all these facst nospam, but you know I will simply
return with the cites which prove the basic fact:
a. You apologists are about as credible as the result of a coin toos

And
b. Some apologists (e.g., Lewis & JR) are utter fantastically dumb morons.

Lewis & JR hate Forbes for one reason and one reason only
o Forbes reports facts that they don't like.

They hate me for the same reason, nospam.
o And that's just fine.

My goal on this ng is different than yours nospam.
o Your goal is apparently to foment Apple MARKETING bullshit
o Mine is to counter all your apologist bullshit - with facts & logic.

FACTS & LOGIC

[Lewis]

In message <xn0lz42x...@reader.albasani.net> badgolferman <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Lewis wrote:

>>In message <qlum8v$nc1$2...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman
>><REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>>> In message <qlto6v$edj$1...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman
>>>> <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> https://www.forbes
>>>>
>>>> Please stop posting links to shit sites.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>> There are much worse sites. You seem to have quite a bias toward
>>>anything that doesn’t fit in your little universe.
>>
>>I have a bias against sites that host shitbag know-nothing trolls who
>>have a years-long history of posting utter garbage.

> Let's make a deal -- I will stop posting links from Forbes and you stop
> berating and talking down to people.

I will never stop berating idiots and trolls.

--
"He loves Nature in spite of what it did to him." - Forrest Tucker

[Lewis]

In message <qlvvoa$lr2$1...@dont-email.me> sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> Touch ID is already predicted to re-appear with the iPhone 12.

No it is not.


--
"Yes," said the skull. "Quit while you're a head, that's what I say."

[nospam]

In article <qm0c49$h3b$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder

<arlen...@arlinghlder.edu> wrote:

>
> Remember when all of you misunderstood the Qualcomm legal case?

nope. *you* misunderstood it.

numerous people pointed out to you exactly what happened and who paid
what to whom and you *still* got it wrong.

> Remember when all you apologists misunderstood Snit's WiFi video?

nope. *you* misunderstood that too, going so far to try to claim that
people didn't know what a decibel means.

> Remember when all you apologists denied iPhone X throttling software?

yet another thing you don't understand, claiming that every iphone will
be throttled no matter what, a claim that is not only false, but beyond
absurd.

> o I'm not dumb like you apologists always prove to be.

also false.

> I know EXCTLY what it means for Apple to file a patent continuation.

apparently not, since you're babbling about a product that might never
be sold.

oh, and if you were half as dumb as you claim, you would not have made
a spelling mistake.

[Arlen Holder]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 15:54:37 +0000 (UTC), badgolferman wrote:

> Let's make a deal -- I will stop posting links from Forbes and you stop
> berating and talking down to people.

Hi badgolferman,

This is long - so only an adult will read it - but it contains adult logic.

As you know, I study the Apple apologists, and, as you know, I've said they
don't act like normal people (which you found out when you had asked if
anyone admits they're wrong - where I clearly showed you adults did - but
not apologists).

What we're seeing here almost nobody will notice - but if you comprehend
what I say below - you'll realize this is a trait of why people purchase
Apple products in the first place.

Bear in mind, this concept I explain below may be above 99% of the people
who read this post - but that doesn't negate that people who buy Apple
products don't delve deeply into the actual facts of the matter - just as
JR and Lewis didn't - and worse ....

People who buy Apple products tend to read a DIFFERENT MESSAGE than the
actual facts show (e.g., nospam's hilarious claims of imaginary RAM
performance, or Snit's hilarious claims of imaginary Wi-Fi functionality,
or Alan Baker's hilarious claims that Apple pulled a fast one on Qualcomm,
etc.).

NOTE: This list of hilarious claims of imaginary functionality by the Apple
apologists goes on and on (as you well know, badgolferman); so there MUST
be a reason that Apple Apologists can't comprehend basic facts and then
tehy can't form a logical assessment of those facts.

THIS FORBES RTHREAD IA A PERFECT EXALE OF THAT APOLOGISTS' TRAIT
o Not only did the apologist NOT comprehend what the forbes article said
o But the apologists didn't even logically assess any of the facts

Lewis & JR didn't like the facts you cited simply because facts tend to
destroy their imaginary belief system that Apple marketing (admittedly
brilliantly) crafted for them to believe.

Even nospam, who isn't anywhere nearly as fantastically unfathomably dumb
as most apologists, apparently read more into the Forbes article than the
facts show.

For example, nospam repeatedly claimed that a mere patent application
(actually, in this case, a continuance of a long string of similar patent
applications by Apple) is meaningless in terms of accurately predicting
future product - which is patently true....

However...

Everyone claiming that Forbes "said" that Apple is producing a folding
phone seems to have misunderstood what Forbes literally said.

Just like all the apologists (and even intelligent non-apologists like
Steve) misunderstood the fiduciary ramifications of Apple's surrender to
Qualcomm, these people don't have the intelligence to actually COMPREHEND
what the Forbes article actually said.

I posit this tendency of the apologists to "guess" (wrongly most of the
time) as to what someone says, is exactly why they intensely gravitate to
Apple marketing messaging.

Apple KNOWS THIS!
o Apple isn't stupid.

Apple gives these types of people the PERFECTELY CRAFTED marketing message
(Such as the RAM handling is better or the privacy is better.)

And then these people who gravitate to bogus marketing - eat it up.

The claims in this thread by Lewis, Jolly Roger, & nospam support that.
o They can't comprehend the facts of what was ACTUALLY said
o They simply "guess" as to what the Forbes article said

And - predictably - consistently - hilariously ...
o They guess wrong.

The proof that they guessed wrong is simply to ask them an adult question.

If they feel the Forbes article mistated a fact, then here's the test:
o Name just one

That is, if they feel Forbes told a fib, all they have to do is...
o Name just one

That is, name just one fib that Forbes told in that article
o Name just one

Notice the simplest test of an imaginary belief system is...
o Name just one

They can't name a single fact in that article that Forbes got wrong.
o What is wrong is their GUESS of what forbes said

Not what forbes actually said.
o Their hatred for Forbes colored their logical assessment.

And yet, they can't find a single fact in that article that is wrong
o What does that say about the belief system of the known apologists?

[Arlen Holder]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:03:45 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

> I will never stop berating idiots and trolls.

As defined by Lewis...as...
o Anyone who says a fact that Lewis simply doesn't like.

HINT: Lewis deprecated the Forbes article, and yet, Lewis failed the test.
o Lewis' entire belief system turns out to be wholly imaginary.

He can't even name a sentence in the Forbes article that misstated a fact.
o Not even one.

Lewis failed the simplest test of imaginary belief systems.
o Name just one.

And yet, Lewis brazenly claims
o "I will never stop berating idiots and trolls."

But that's why I LOVE every time Jolly Roger & Lewis post to this ng.
o They prove my point about apologists in every single one of their posts!

[Arlen Holder]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 06:27:34 -0700, sms wrote:

> Anyway, all phone makers will eventually have foldable models, all phone
> makers will have 5G, and the iPhone will likely follow the lead of the
> iPad and move to USB-C. Touch ID is already predicted to re-appear with
> the iPhone 12.

Hi Steve,

I agree that I'm old and set in my ways, where I'm perfectly happy with the
form factor of my el cheapo $130 LG Stylo 3 Plus years after I purchased
it, where, since you're not an Apple Apologist I can ask you a basic "why"
question, perhaps.

Why do people want a foldable phone?

Maybe it's great ... dunno - I never even thought of looking at one to test
it out - but what's the appeal of a foldable phone?

I mean, I fully get that you end up with 'more screen' in something that
fits in your pocket - but you don't get that larger screen for free (in
engineering terms).

The engineering (& cost) tradeoffs are currently enormous ... aren't they?

To me, it's sort of like asking what's the appeal of landing a man on the
moon ... or on mars ... where I get the national pride and technology stuff
- where this foldable phone comes at a huge cost that could be spent
elsewhere, on the part of the consumer.

What do most people find is the current "appeal" of these new fangled
foldable phones?

--
NOTE: I'm sure ten years from now they will have many kinks worked out.

[Arlen Holder]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 13:20:48 -0400, nospam wrote:

>> Remember when all of you misunderstood the Qualcomm legal case?
>
> nope. *you* misunderstood it.

Hi nospam,

Remember, I'm likely better educated than almost anyone here, at better
schools almost certainly, and clearly, I have worked in one of the toughest
technical environments on this planet for decades ...

Hehhehheh... even Steve misunderstood the royalty numbers ... but he knows
enough not to claim that I misunderstood it when I proved to him that he
got the royalty numbers wrong.

Since Steve isn't an apologists ... I simply asked him to apologize - which
he didn't do - but - to his credit - he never responded again which means
he knows that I was right.

For you to misunderstand is normal, but what is always an enigma is
o Do you misunderstand because you're stupid, or,
o Do you purposefully distort what actually happened in that thread?

> numerous people pointed out to you exactly what happened and who paid
> what to whom and you *still* got it wrong.

You brazenly claim I'm wrong - sans a single reference cite of my facts.

The question with you, nospam, always is:
a. Are you really as stupid as what you write indicates you are, or,
b. Are you simply purposefully distorting what actually happened?

>> Remember when all you apologists misunderstood Snit's WiFi video?
>
> nope. *you* misunderstood that too, going so far to try to claim that
> people didn't know what a decibel means.

Hehhehheh... here's Snit's hiliarious video which you plus one'd him on!
<https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo> (Snit video, which apologists applauded)

Every single thing you plus one'd on that video - was dead wrong.

HINT: The difference between you and me, nospam, is stellar
o I don't bullshit; you constantly do.

While it's clear that Jolly Roger & Lewis are utter morons
o You're likely a slightly different type of Apple Apologist, nospam.

With you, it's harder to tell whether
a. You're really as stupid as what you write indicates you are, or,
b. You're simply distorting what happened for your own nefarious purpose.

>> Remember when all you apologists denied iPhone X throttling software?
>
> yet another thing you don't understand, claiming that every iphone will
> be throttled no matter what, a claim that is not only false, but beyond
> absurd.

hehhehheh,....

I love when you post your clever wording nospam, because your clever twist
of the words indicates you likely KNOW exactly what I said, which was that
the throttling SOFTWARE was INSTALLED on the iPhone 8 and iPhone X (even as
Apple essentially lied to Congress that it wouldn't be "as" necessary) with
the specific iOS update of October 31st (sometimes said to be November
1st).

Notice, you're wrong nospam, but it's not clear WHY you're wrong:
a. Did you distort what I said simply because you're really that stupid?
b. Or did you purposefully distort what I said for your childish purpose?

Most apologists aren't as smart as you are, nospam, so they will never
notice your clever interjection of words distorting what I said.

Notice Lewis & JR essentially did the same thing on the Forbes' article,
where their objection is to what they "guessed" Forbes wrote - but they
can't actually find a single sentence in that Forbe's article that isn't a
fact.

In their case, they simply are too dumb to comprehend the facts.
o In your case, you distorted the facts.

Do you want me to provide the references again for the umpteenth time?

>
>> o I'm not dumb like you apologists always prove to be.
>
> also false.

Hehhehheh...

One thing you apologists all hate, including you nospam, are facts.

>> I know EXCTLY what it means for Apple to file a patent continuation.
>
> apparently not, since you're babbling about a product that might never
> be sold.

hehhehheh...

I have to wonder if you're really not comprehensive or if you're playing
games.

Notice, you're wrong nospam, but it's not clear WHY you're wrong:
a. Did you distort what I said simply because you're really that stupid?
b. Or did you purposefully distort what I said for your childish purpose?

If you're really dumb, then I take that sentence at face value, where
nobody but an intelligent adult will realize you distorted what I said,
where I never once said what Apple was going to produce by way of foldable
phones.

It's common for morons like Lewis and Jolly Roger to get things wrong
o And it's common for you, nospam, to consistently get things wrong

But I think you're DIFFERENT than the rest of the Apple Apologists
o I don't really think you're as stupid as what you write indicates
o I think you purposefully distort what I said for your own purpose

It's why I used to say you could be a defense lawyer but never a prosecutor
(because the prosecutor is held to a different standard with respect to
facts).

It's always an enigma with you, nospam:
a. Are you really as stupid as your track record indicates you are?
b. Or do you simply distort what was actually said for your own purpose?

>
> oh, and if you were half as dumb as you claim, you would not have made
> a spelling mistake.

You can play silly childish games, where you'll never see me confront
someone for a spelling error (except under one circumstance) which you do
simply because you can't find any errors in my facts or in my logical
assessment of those facts.

--
The one circumstance that I poke fun at spelling errors is when people
can't even form a complete sentence when they're trying to insult someone.

[nospam]

In article <qm0huj$sd3$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder

<arlen...@arlinghlder.edu> wrote:

>
> Remember, I'm likely better educated than almost anyone here, at better
> schools almost certainly, and clearly, I have worked in one of the toughest
> technical environments on this planet for decades ...

even if that were true, it's meaningless.

bill gates & mark zuckerberg are college dropouts.

and at the other extreme,
<https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/17/us/los-angeles-yale-graduate-homeless/in
dex.html>
Shawn Pleasants has the kind of resume that would attract the
attention of any job recruiter: high school valedictorian, economics
major from Yale University, Wall Street banking jobs, small business
entrepreneur. But a few wrong turns in life 10 years ago left him
homeless, and today he's living underneath a tarp in the Koreatown
section of Los Angeles.

> > numerous people pointed out to you exactly what happened and who paid
> > what to whom and you *still* got it wrong.
>
> You brazenly claim I'm wrong - sans a single reference cite of my facts.

many different people have provided numerous cites and you ignore *all*
of them, mindlessly repeating your babble.

> I love when you post your clever wording nospam, because your clever twist
> of the words indicates you likely KNOW exactly what I said, which was that
> the throttling SOFTWARE was INSTALLED on the iPhone 8 and iPhone X (even as
> Apple essentially lied to Congress that it wouldn't be "as" necessary) with
> the specific iOS update of October 31st (sometimes said to be November
> 1st).

nobody lied to congress, something which is a significant crime that
would *not* go unpunished if it were to happen.

[badgolferman]

To be one of the first in owning new technology.

[badgolferman]

Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <xn0lz42x...@reader.albasani.net> badgolferman
> <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Lewis wrote:
>
>>> In message <qlum8v$nc1$2...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman
>>> <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>>>> In message <qlto6v$edj$1...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman
>>>>> <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.forbes
>>>>>
>>>>> Please stop posting links to shit sites.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>> There are much worse sites. You seem to have quite a bias toward
>>>> anything that doesn’t fit in your little universe.
>>>
>>> I have a bias against sites that host shitbag know-nothing trolls who
>>> have a years-long history of posting utter garbage.
>
>> Let's make a deal -- I will stop posting links from Forbes and you stop
>> berating and talking down to people.
>
> I will never stop berating idiots and trolls.
>

Character attacks never accomplish anything constructive. Reason and
compromise do.

[Lewis]

In message <qm0ntm$6qm$1...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> In message <xn0lz42x...@reader.albasani.net> badgolferman
>> <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Lewis wrote:
>>
>>>> In message <qlum8v$nc1$2...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman
>>>> <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <qlto6v$edj$1...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman
>>>>>> <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.forbes
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please stop posting links to shit sites.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> There are much worse sites. You seem to have quite a bias toward
>>>>> anything that doesn’t fit in your little universe.
>>>>
>>>> I have a bias against sites that host shitbag know-nothing trolls who
>>>> have a years-long history of posting utter garbage.
>>
>>> Let's make a deal -- I will stop posting links from Forbes and you stop
>>> berating and talking down to people.
>>
>> I will never stop berating idiots and trolls.
>>

> Character attacks never accomplish anything constructive. Reason and
> compromise do.

You cannot reason with stupid and you cannot compromise with trolls,
zealots, or crazies.



--
I would rather be a mute poet, a blind artist or a deaf musician than a
heartless man. -Graffiti, bathroom wall @ The Napoleon House New Orleans
1967 (via @johnlarroquette)

[B...@onramp.net]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 20:20:06 +0000 (UTC), badgolferman

<REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> In message <xn0lz42x...@reader.albasani.net> badgolferman
>> <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Lewis wrote:
>>
>>>> In message <qlum8v$nc1$2...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman
>>>> <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <qlto6v$edj$1...@gioia.aioe.org> badgolferman
>>>>>> <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.forbes
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please stop posting links to shit sites.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> There are much worse sites. You seem to have quite a bias toward
>>>>> anything that doesn’t fit in your little universe.
>>>>
>>>> I have a bias against sites that host shitbag know-nothing trolls who
>>>> have a years-long history of posting utter garbage.
>>
>>> Let's make a deal -- I will stop posting links from Forbes and you stop
>>> berating and talking down to people.
>>
>> I will never stop berating idiots and trolls.
>>
>
>Character attacks never accomplish anything constructive. Reason and
>compromise do.

Try either with Arlen Holder. Only a kill file works with some.

[Arlen Holder]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 20:39:45 -0500, B...@Onramp.net wrote:

> Try either with Arlen Holder. Only a kill file works with some.

Hi BK,

FACTS. (Yes, I know you apologists fear facts - that's why I use them.)

The fact is that Lewis said this about Forbes' simple facts:
"Never believe anything on forbes.com,"

And yet, Lewis can't find a _single_ fact that Forbes got wrong.
o Not even one.

Clearly, Lewis owns a completely imaginary belief system.

FACTS:

Then, the facts show, Lewis posted this:
o "Please stop posting links to shit sites"

Notice - Lewis hates Forbes ... but why?
o His claim is that the facts are wrong, right?

And yet, Lewis is the one whose facts are dead wrong.

The facts show that Lewis' response to being told he was dead wrong was
o "I will never stop berating idiots and trolls."

FACTS:

What's utterly hilarious, which is why I LOVE when Lewis posts...
is that Lewis, after being proven dead wrong, then said:
' "You cannot reason with stupid and you cannot compromise with trolls,"

Hehhehheh...
o You can't get any better proof of what apologists are than that!

Apologist literally call all facts they don't like, trolls.
o What will be hilarious is when they call this factual post, a troll.

Why are apologists so obviously deathly afraid of facts?
o I don't know why.

I think it's because facts instantly DESTROY their imaginary belief system.

[Arlen Holder]

On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 19:14:44 +0000 (UTC), badgolferman wrote:

> To be one of the first in owning new technology.

Hi badgolferman,

I'm not sure if that's a joke or if that's an honest answer
o Or both in one laconic statement. :)

But if THAT is the reason, well, um, certainly I "understand" that
o But if that is the reason - then I guess it answers the question.

There are SOME things that we don't "know" we want though.
o Like a keyboard was when I moved from the blackberry.

When I was on the blackberry, I was perfectly happy with a keyboard.
o But then the clit broke and Blackberry was deprecating

So I FIRST tried to find Android phones that had a physical keyboard
o Which was, essentially, impossible.

Of course, it turns out, I really didn't WANT a keyboard
o It turns out that the on-screen keyboard works just fine (sort of)

So, maybe... maybe the foldable phone ... maybe it's like that?
o Maybe it's something I want - but maybe I have to use it to realize that?