Iphone Users Smarter Than Android Owners?

[George Kerby]

What say Ye?

<http://www.ktrh.com/articles/houston-news-121300/data-shows-iphone-users-ar
e-smarter-13194058/>

[Jolly Roger]

Tired, old story. Slow news day? *yawn*

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[Michelle Steiner]

In article <D0EE607B.B3E96%ghost_...@hotmail.com>, George Kerby

I read only the title and first paragraph, and concluded that the
author should not be publishing anything.

One minor error in the title: It should be "Data show", because "data"
is plural.

Major error in the paragraph: "their is data to back it up now"
"their"?? Really? Also, it should be "are data", not "is data".

Now that I've finished the article (after writing the above", he cites
someone who contradicts his thesis: "Andrew Waber is a market analyst
with Chitika and says it doesn't show iPhone users are smarter than say
Android users, just that college graduates seem to prefer the iPhone."

A better study would be of what phone Mensa members prefer. <snicker>

[Recliner]

Speaking personally, Android (admittedly, I let my Mensa membership lapse
long before I got a smartphone).

[D.F. Manno]

In article <280120150900481667%mich...@michelle.org>,

Michelle Steiner <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:

> George Kerby <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > What say Ye?
> >
> > <http://www.ktrh.com/articles/houston-news-121300/data-shows-iphone-users-ar
> > e-smarter-13194058/>
>
> I read only the title and first paragraph, and concluded that the
> author should not be publishing anything.
>
> One minor error in the title: It should be "Data show", because "data"
> is plural.

Don't blame the writer for the headline. Writers almost never get to
write the headlines for their own stories.

--
D.F. Manno | dfm...@mail.com
GOP delenda est!

[nospam]

In article <280120150900481667%mich...@michelle.org>, Michelle Steiner

<mich...@michelle.org> wrote:

> > What say Ye?
> >
> > <http://www.ktrh.com/articles/houston-news-121300/data-shows-iphone-users-ar
> > e-smarter-13194058/>
>
> I read only the title and first paragraph, and concluded that the
> author should not be publishing anything.
>
> One minor error in the title: It should be "Data show", because "data"
> is plural.

either is acceptable.

<http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/07/05/is-data-is-or-is-data-aint-a-
plural/>
Most style guides and dictionaries have come to accept the use of the
noun data with either singular or plural verbs, and we hereby join
the majority.

<http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/data>
In Latin, data is the plural of datum and, historically and in
specialized scientific fields, it is also treated as a plural in
English, taking a plural verb, as in the data were collected and
classified. In modern non-scientific use, however, it is generally
not treated as a plural. Instead, it is treated as a mass noun,
similar to a word like information, which takes a singular verb.
Sentences such as data was collected over a number of years are now
widely accepted in standard English

> Major error in the paragraph: "their is data to back it up now"
> "their"?? Really? Also, it should be "are data", not "is data".

that's an error.

> Now that I've finished the article (after writing the above", he cites
> someone who contradicts his thesis: "Andrew Waber is a market analyst
> with Chitika and says it doesn't show iPhone users are smarter than say
> Android users, just that college graduates seem to prefer the iPhone."

it's a puff piece. slow news day.

[Michelle Steiner]

In article <dfmanno-5E8194...@news.albasani.net>, D.F.

Manno <dfm...@mail.com> wrote:

> > One minor error in the title: It should be "Data show", because "data"
> > is plural.
>
> Don't blame the writer for the headline. Writers almost never get to
> write the headlines for their own stories.

But he perpetuated that error in the article itself.

[Michelle Steiner]

In article <280120151330384289%nos...@nospam.invalid>, nospam

<nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> > One minor error in the title: It should be "Data show", because "data"
> > is plural.
>
> either is acceptable.
>
> <http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/07/05/is-data-is-or-is-data-aint-a-
> plural/>
> Most style guides and dictionaries have come to accept the use of the
> noun data with either singular or plural verbs, and we hereby join
> the majority.

WSJ: Rupert Murdoch. Need I say more?

[George Kerby]

On 1/28/15 10:00 AM, in article 280120150900481667%mich...@michelle.org,

So, there ya go: Your scrutiny and excellent observation CLEARLY illustrate
that iPhone users are far superior in intellectual prowess when compared to
the knuckle-dragger Android crowd. ;-))))

[Your Name]

In article <D0EEAF87.B3EA1%ghost_...@hotmail.com>, George Kerby

<ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/28/15 10:00 AM, in article 280120150900481667%mich...@michelle.org,
> "Michelle Steiner" <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
> > In article <D0EE607B.B3E96%ghost_...@hotmail.com>, George Kerby
> > <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> What say Ye?
> >>
> >> <http://www.ktrh.com/articles/houston-news-121300/data-shows-iphone-users-a
> >> re-smarter-13194058/>
> >
> > I read only the title and first paragraph, and concluded that the
> > author should not be publishing anything.
> >
> > One minor error in the title: It should be "Data show", because "data"
> > is plural.
> >
> > Major error in the paragraph: "their is data to back it up now"
> > "their"?? Really? Also, it should be "are data", not "is data".
> >
> > Now that I've finished the article (after writing the above", he cites
> > someone who contradicts his thesis: "Andrew Waber is a market analyst
> > with Chitika and says it doesn't show iPhone users are smarter than say
> > Android users, just that college graduates seem to prefer the iPhone."
> >
> > A better study would be of what phone Mensa members prefer. <snicker>
>
> So, there ya go: Your scrutiny and excellent observation CLEARLY illustrate
> that iPhone users are far superior in intellectual prowess when compared to
> the knuckle-dragger Android crowd. ;-))))

There are many, many, many surveys that "prove" Apple users are
smarter, sexier, better looking, have better jobs, etc. than Android /
Windoze / etc. users. Most of them are complete crap based solely on
the fact that Apple devices / computers "cost more" than the other
makers, therefore buyers are paying more, therefore they have better
jobs, therefore they are more intelligent, etc., etc. Anyone with more
than one braincell knows these things are not necessarily connected.
You can, for example, be a complete ugly dumbass who buys an Apple
device / computer on hire-purchase / rent-to-own terms paying it off
over 10 years.

[Michelle Steiner]

In article <290120151417503490%Your...@YourISP.com>, Your Name

<Your...@YourISP.com> wrote:

> You can, for example, be a complete ugly dumbass who buys an Apple
> device / computer

True. As an example, I submit Rush Limbaugh.

[George Kerby]

On 1/28/15 9:53 PM, in article 280120152053116310%mich...@michelle.org,

Yep. A guy who has a few billion bucks in the bank who started out as a
color man for the St Louis Cards from backwoods Ozarks is truly a "dumbass".

You betcha - Yeppers!

Umm, I would imagine the "genius" in the White House will be back to his
Blackberry in a couple of years...

[Jolly Roger]

On 2015-01-29, George Kerby <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/28/15 9:53 PM, in article 280120152053116310%mich...@michelle.org,
> "Michelle Steiner" <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
>
>> In article <290120151417503490%Your...@YourISP.com>, Your Name
>> <Your...@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>
>>> You can, for example, be a complete ugly dumbass who buys an Apple
>>> device / computer
>>
>> True. As an example, I submit Rush Limbaugh.
>
> Yep. A guy who has a few billion bucks in the bank who started out as a
> color man for the St Louis Cards from backwoods Ozarks is truly a "dumbass".

Yes, he is. Rush Limbaugh is living proof that money ain't everything.

> You betcha - Yeppers!
>
> Umm, I would imagine the "genius" in the White House will be back to his
> Blackberry in a couple of years...

Everything is political with you; you're a political sucker.

[George Kerby]

On 1/29/15 9:43 AM, in article civ2p8...@mid.individual.net, "Jolly

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

> On 2015-01-29, George Kerby <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 1/28/15 9:53 PM, in article 280120152053116310%mich...@michelle.org,
>> "Michelle Steiner" <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <290120151417503490%Your...@YourISP.com>, Your Name
>>> <Your...@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You can, for example, be a complete ugly dumbass who buys an Apple
>>>> device / computer
>>>
>>> True. As an example, I submit Rush Limbaugh.
>>
>> Yep. A guy who has a few billion bucks in the bank who started out as a
>> color man for the St Louis Cards from backwoods Ozarks is truly a "dumbass".
>
> Yes, he is. Rush Limbaugh is living proof that money ain't everything.
>
>> You betcha - Yeppers!
>>
>> Umm, I would imagine the "genius" in the White House will be back to his
>> Blackberry in a couple of years...
>
> Everything is political with you; you're a political sucker.

And Limbaugh isn't "political"?!? RIGHT!!!!

[Jolly Roger]

The comment about him (that he is a complete ugly dumbass) had nothing
to do with politics. You brought politics into the picture, because you
view everything through your politics lens, like a sucker.

[George Kerby]

On 1/29/15 10:43 AM, in article civ69q...@mid.individual.net, "Jolly

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

> On 2015-01-29, George Kerby <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/29/15 9:43 AM, in article civ2p8...@mid.individual.net, "Jolly
>> Roger" <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2015-01-29, George Kerby <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 1/28/15 9:53 PM, in article 280120152053116310%mich...@michelle.org,
>>>> "Michelle Steiner" <mich...@michelle.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <290120151417503490%Your...@YourISP.com>, Your Name
>>>>> <Your...@YourISP.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> You can, for example, be a complete ugly dumbass who buys an Apple
>>>>>> device / computer
>>>>>
>>>>> True. As an example, I submit Rush Limbaugh.
>>>>
>>>> Yep. A guy who has a few billion bucks in the bank who started out as a
>>>> color man for the St Louis Cards from backwoods Ozarks is truly a
>>>> "dumbass".
>>>
>>> Yes, he is. Rush Limbaugh is living proof that money ain't everything.
>>>
>>>> You betcha - Yeppers!
>>>>
>>>> Umm, I would imagine the "genius" in the White House will be back to his
>>>> Blackberry in a couple of years...
>>>
>>> Everything is political with you; you're a political sucker.
>>
>> And Limbaugh isn't "political"?!? RIGHT!!!!
>
> The comment about him (that he is a complete ugly dumbass) had nothing
> to do with politics. You brought politics into the picture, because you
> view everything through your politics lens, like a sucker.

"Yadda, yadda!" RIGHT!

Rush is not 'political' - in what world are you living....?

[Jolly Roger]

I'm sure everything and person in existence is "political" to those who
only see the world through political lenses. Suckers, all of them - you
included.

[George Kerby]

On 1/30/15 9:43 AM, in article cj1n4s...@mid.individual.net, "Jolly

Go the fuck AWAY! Goodbye - you have shown yourself to be a narrow-minded
asshole with NO sense of humor. Adios, Mo-Fo..

[Jolly Roger]

On 2015-01-31, George Kerby <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Go the fuck AWAY! Goodbye - you have shown yourself to be a narrow-minded
> asshole with NO sense of humor. Adios, Mo-Fo..

Nah, I just don't classify every single thing I see and hear in asinine
political boxes like you. People who view the world through political
lenses are pathetic suckers who only perpetuate and support the theft of
rights from the people. And I'm not going anywhere. Feel free to kill my
posts.

[tlvp]

I say if KTRH can't even get "their is data" spelled right, there, they're
not to be believed on much of anything else, either :-) . Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

[tlvp]

On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 13:30:38 -0500, nospam wrote:

> ... have come ...

grudgingly

> ... to accept the use ...

[tlvp]

On Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:17:50 +1300, Your Name wrote:

> Anyone with more
> than one braincell knows these things are not necessarily connected.

As does anyone with more than one brain :-) . cheers, -- tlvp