Harry Newton wrote:
On 10 Jan 2018 17:22:08 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

Since you are the one who originally stated "the user experience is
being impacted to mitigate the problems of a battery that is degrading
prematurely in order to avoid warranty replacements", the onus is on
you. So go right ahead and prove that's the case, if you can.

The user experience is *definitely* impacted when the phones shut down.

The feature in question prevents spontaneous shutdowns of devices with
dying batteries and extends runtime.

Blah blah blah blah

Get back to us when you have factual information to share rather than
useless blogger opinion pieces.

--
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

Harry Newton wrote:
On 10 Jan 2018 18:13:53 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

You don't even own an iPhone.

Even if we

Theres no €œwe€�, I wasnt talking to you.


--
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

Harry Newton wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 10:02:42 -0500, nospam wrote:

the batteries work perfectly fine in normal everyday use.

Which is why the iPhones suddenly shut down in use.

False.

--
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

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 12:49:25 -0500, nospam wrote:

except that most of the time, it won't improve anything because the
existing battery is perfectly fine.

While the other half-dozen Apple Apologists actually believe the Orwellian
doublething that 1+1=3, you simply say it without believing what you say.

You're too smart to believe that a battery that *needed* the CPU to be
secretly, permanently, and drastically throttled to less than half it's
performance (which Apple euphemistically calls "peak performance") is
"perfectly fine".

https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/11/16878412/iphone-slowdown-battery-replacement-wait-times-6-plus-supply-shortage
"In other words, Apple decided on behalf of its customers that they'd
prefer an iPhone that performed worse for the same amount of time,
than an iPhone that performed just as well for a shorter amount of
time. It's a decision that does nothing to dispel the characterization
of Apple as a company that does what it can to push customers into
buying new phones."

He who is Jolly Roger said on 11 Jan 2018 17:53:09 GMT:

Blogger opinion pieces aren+IBk-t facts. Try harder.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/11/16878412/iphone-slowdown-battery-replacement-wait-times-6-plus-supply-shortage
"In other words, Apple decided on behalf of its customers that they'd
prefer an iPhone that performed worse for the same amount of time,
than an iPhone that performed just as well for a shorter amount of
time. It's a decision that does nothing to dispel the characterization
of Apple as a company that does what it can to push customers into
buying new phones."

On 11 Jan 2018 18:35:16 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

The feature in question prevents spontaneous shutdowns of devices with
dying batteries and extends runtime.

"In other words, Apple decided on behalf of its customers that they'd
prefer an iPhone that performed worse for the same amount of time,
than an iPhone that performed just as well for a shorter amount of
time. It's a decision that does nothing to dispel the characterization
of Apple as a company that does what it can to push customers into
buying new phones."
https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/11/16878412/iphone-slowdown-battery-replacement-wait-times-6-plus-supply-shortage

On 11 Jan 2018 18:35:18 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

the batteries work perfectly fine in normal everyday use.

Which is why the iPhones suddenly shut down in use.

False.

"In other words, Apple decided on behalf of its customers that they'd
prefer an iPhone that performed worse for the same amount of time,
than an iPhone that performed just as well for a shorter amount of
time. It's a decision that does nothing to dispel the characterization
of Apple as a company that does what it can to push customers into
buying new phones."
https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/11/16878412/iphone-slowdown-battery-replacement-wait-times-6-plus-supply-shortage

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 16:54:28 -0500, nospam wrote:

state of charge is not the issue. it's aging to where it can't supply
peak loads anymore, even if it's at full soc.

For SMS, "peak loads" is Apple's Orwellian doublespeak for permanently
halving the CPU's possible performance.

In article , Harry Newton
wrote:

The user experience is *definitely* impacted when the phones shut down.

which is why apple has taken steps to avoid that from happening.

In article , Harry Newton
wrote:


There are ways to check if Apple secretly throttled the CPU on your phone.

none that end users can run.

On 10 Jan 2018 07:25:24 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

You misunderstand

Nah. You just suck ass as a human being.

I'm actually a very nice guy.
I just happen to be very well educated, logical, and intelligent.
Hence, we won't likely get along well.

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 12:06:34 -0500, nospam wrote:

there isn't anything to fix.

Rickman,

I was trying to hint to you that nospam is *different* than the other half
dozen fundamentalist Apple Apologists.
*Jolly Roger, Lewis, nospam, BKonRamp, Savageduck, Hemidactylus, etc.*

He actually doesn't believe a thing he says (because he knows the facts and
actually understands them, unlike the other Apple Apologists).

Always keep in mind that, while all half dozen of the die-hard Apple
Apologists have a belief system which is vulnerable to facts, nospam
actually *knows* his facts.

He simply has a propensity to flaty outright deny them.

Why?
You tell me why.

Here's what he does all the time:
rickman: Your equation of 1+1=3 is wrong; so it needs to be fixed.
nopsam: There isn't anything to fix.

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 13:35:46 -0800, sms wrote:

Or it can be designed with adequate passive cooling.

That would needlessly reduce performance in most use. A lot of devices
are now designed with thermal sensors that allow a performance level
that cannot be sustained for long periods of time under certain conditions.

Bear in mind that 'reduced performance' (aka permanently halving the CPU
speeds) is the solution that Apple came up with (secretly, of course)...

"Apple said it introduced this behavior last year, for the iPhone
6, 6S, and SE, as a way to prevent random shutdowns" of year old
phones.
https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/12/28/16825288/htc-motorola-dont-slow-processor-speeds-old-batteries-apple

Bearing in mind the Orwellian doublespeak of "peak performance" really
means halving the CPU speeds...

"In other words, Apple decided on behalf of its customers that they'd
prefer an iPhone that performed worse for the same amount of time,
than an iPhone that performed just as well for a shorter amount of
time. It's a decision that does nothing to dispel the characterization
of Apple as a company that does what it can to push customers into
buying new phones."
https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/11/16878412/iphone-slowdown-battery-replacement-wait-times-6-plus-supply-shortage

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 13:26:45 -0800, sms wrote:

So they don't work "fine".+AKA- My understanding is if Apple didn't install
software to throttle the CPU the battery would cause the phone to
shutdown. That's not working "perfectly fine".

No.

Whether the battery is brand new, or three years old, if it's in a low
state of charge it could shut down under heavy processor demand.

Here are the good choices:

1. Shut the phone down before the battery is discharged to a level that
would cause an unexpected shutdown if high demand were placed on the
battery. If this event occurs after an abnormally short amount of
operating time, inform the user that a battery replacement is needed.

2. Reduce performance only when the battery is discharged to a level
that would cause an unexpected shutdown if high demand were placed on
the battery.

3. Give the user the option of a "battery-saver" mode that would reduce
performance in order to increase the operating time.

For rickman, sms is NOT an Apple Apologist, so you can have a normal adult
conversation with him.

To sms, the fact that the very many sudden and unexpected shutdowns in the
first year of use blindsided Apple merely indicates that Apple made an
eggregious design mistake that they missed in their testing procedures.

"Apple could have also avoided this issue by designing phones with
bigger batteries that don't degrade as quickly."
https://gizmodo.com/now-the-senate-w...ott-1821975549

So, the better choice, IMHO, would have been for Apple to rectify the
design mistake, which may be as simple as using larger batteries for all we
know.

"Apple could have designed phones that didn't need these guardrails
just a year after their release."
https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/12/28/16825288/htc-motorola-dont-slow-processor-speeds-old-batteries-apple

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:13:16 -0700, Snit
wrote:

On 1/11/18, 9:15 AM, in article ,
" wrote:

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 09:53:36 -0600, Fox's Mercantile
wrote:

On 1/11/18 9:09 AM, Harry Newton wrote:
Bear in mind that Fox' Mercantile is the utter moron Snit

Wrong again you ignorant ****.

Could you repeat this message? I only have three of them. :-)

He is merely responding to Harry's lies, which are repeated far more than
just three times.

I was just pulling his chain.

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 13:53:45 -0500, nospam wrote:

There are ways to check if Apple secretly throttled the CPU on your phone.

none that end users can run.

You're funny because you love to contort facts, and we know you absolutely
*love* to quote *benchmarks* (especially cross-platform benchmarks) when it
suits your purpose.

Plus you know about the app CPU dasher X, which reputedly reports what you
call "peak cpu" speeds, which is like huge speedbumps put on a highway to
slow down your maximum CPU speed to less than half what is possible.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/cpu-dasherx/id1168527539?mt=8

There are a few ways to check to see if Apple halved the performance of
your iPhone after just a year of use:
How to check if Apple is throttling your iPhone
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-check-if-apple-slowing-down-your-iphone-2018-1
http://dsniggas.net/2018/01/04/have-a-slow-iphone-how-to-check-if-apple-is-throttling-your-iphone/
http://www.applegazette.com/iphone/apple-throttling-iphone-can-check/

Here+IBk-s a list of the average Geekbench scores for each iPhone model:
iPhone 6/6 Plus +IBQ- 1400
iPhone 6S/6S Plus +IBQ- 2300
iPhone SE +IBQ- 2400
iPhone 7/7 Plus +IBQ- 3400
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/apple-slowing-down-iphone-fix-221529035.html

You *love* to quote benchmarks, especially when they suit your need.
What's your aversion to benchmarks now, when they don't suit your fixed
belief system?

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 13:53:44 -0500, nospam wrote:

The user experience is *definitely* impacted when the phones shut down.

which is why apple has taken steps to avoid that from happening.

Indeed they did!

"Apple intentionally pushed iOS updates, including but not limited
to iOS 10 and 11 and their variants, despite knowing that the
updates imposed performance demands that the phones' hardware
could not meet, throttled the phones' performance, and otherwise
negatively impacted the performance and utility of the phones,"

http://www.zdnet.com/article/iphone-throttling-class-actions-pile-up-as-apple-hit-with-32nd-lawsuit/

On 1/11/18 12:56 PM, Harry Newton wrote:
I'm actually a very nice guy.

I doubt that.

I just happen to be very well educated, logical, and intelligent.

I doubt that even more.

Hence, we won't likely get along well.

This is the image I get from you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8SWMAQYQf0



--
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com

On 2018-01-11, harry newton wrote:
He who is Jolly Roger said on 11 Jan 2018 17:53:09 GMT:

Blogger opinion pieces aren+IBk-t facts. Try harder.

"In other words

Again, blogger opinion pieces aren't facts.

You think nobody will notice you just decided to switch nyms right in
the ****ing middle of this thread? You're a fool! Everyone sees your
trolling clearly. You can't even hide it anymore, senile old man.

Troll, troll, troll your boat...

--
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

On 2018-01-11, Harry Newton wrote:
On 11 Jan 2018 18:35:16 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

The feature in question prevents spontaneous shutdowns of devices with
dying batteries and extends runtime.

"In other words

Blogger opinion pieces aren't facts. The reality is most iPhones run
just fine for 3-5 years on the OEM battery, as anyone who has owned one
for more than a ****ing year knows. Try harder. Your trolls are useless
and lame.

--
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

On 2018-01-11, Harry Newton wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 13:53:44 -0500, nospam wrote:

The user experience is *definitely* impacted when the phones shut down.

which is why apple has taken steps to avoid that from happening.

Indeed they did!

And Apple's customers appreciate it. Meanwhile trolls like you can't
stand it, which is why you are here in the Apple newsgroups trolling
about it to begin with.

--
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

On 2018-01-11, Harry Newton wrote:

From what Apple stated, it's only the iPhone 6's and 7's, and perhaps
the 8's, and X'x that appareciably degrade in about a year

Apple didn't say anything even close to that silly claim, and you
haven't provided anything but blogger opinion pieces devoid of factual
information to back it up.

--
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

On 2018-01-11, Harry Newton wrote:
On 11 Jan 2018 18:35:18 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

the batteries work perfectly fine in normal everyday use.

Which is why the iPhones suddenly shut down in use.

False.

"In other words

Blogger opinion pieces devoid of facts aren't evidence of a widespread
battery failure in under a year. Anyone who has owned an iPhone for
longer than a year know you're full of ****.

--
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

On 2018-01-11, Harry Newton wrote:
On 10 Jan 2018 07:25:24 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

You misunderstand

Nah. You just suck ass as a human being.

I'm actually a very nice guy.

That's why you troll the Apple newsgroups incessantly attacking complete
strangers and switching nyms to avoid filtering. That's what "nice guys"
do. Momma must be so proud.

I just happen to be very well educated, logical, and intelligent.

You're a delusional old man who gets his only kicks antagonizing
complete strangers due to an irrational and obsessive hatred for Apple.

Hence, we won't likely get along well.

There's the first fact you've ever uttered in this thread.

--
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

On 11 Jan 2018 21:34:13 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

Again, blogger opinion pieces aren't facts.

Facts don't undermine my belief system like they do yours.

"Apple intentionally pushed iOS updates, including but not limited
to iOS 10 and 11 and their variants, despite knowing that the
updates imposed performance demands that the phones' hardware
could not meet, throttled the phones' performance, and otherwise
negatively impacted the performance and utility of the phones,"

http://www.zdnet.com/article/iphone-throttling-class-actions-pile-up-as-apple-hit-with-32nd-lawsuit/

On 11 Jan 2018 22:17:29 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

Apple didn't say anything even close to that silly claim, and you
haven't provided anything but blogger opinion pieces devoid of factual
information to back it up.

Facts threaten your belief system - not mine.

"Apple did not inform them of, or seek their consent to
installation of, performance-throttling software when presenting
them with the iOS 10.2.1 or 11.2 updates, or both of them,
plaintiff and the putative class members did not consent to
Apple's interference"

http://www.zdnet.com/article/iphone-throttling-class-actions-pile-up-as-apple-hit-with-32nd-lawsuit/

On 11 Jan 2018 21:37:25 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

Blogger opinion pieces aren't facts. The reality is most iPhones run
just fine for 3-5 years on the OEM battery, as anyone who has owned one
for more than a ****ing year knows. Try harder. Your trolls are useless
and lame.

Only you defend Apple's bonehead decisions to secretly "limit peak
performance" (aka "cap CPU speeds at less than half) on the iPhone.

"Who at Apple okayed the idea of throttling older iPhones in the
first place? Not only that, but they went a step further and decided
not to tell anyone that iOS contained code that deliberately slowed
down iPhones whose batteries were showing signs of wear. To say
that this was boneheaded is putting it mildly."

"The solution that Apple came up with for iPhones randomly restarting
was a clever one [but] the way it was implemented, and the fact that
it was kept a secret from users, leaves me shaking my head in
disbelief."

http://www.zdnet.com/article/can-apple-dig-itself-out-of-the-iphone-throttling-hole-it-created-for-itself/

On 11 Jan 2018 21:40:27 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

And Apple's customers appreciate it. Meanwhile trolls like you can't
stand it, which is why you are here in the Apple newsgroups trolling
about it to begin with.

I only speak facts.
Facts don't undermine my belief system - they support it.

Facts undermine *your* belief system - not mine.

"How no one at Apple thought that this would not come to light, and
that the revelation would later snowball into lawsuits and Senate
committee probes is just beyond me."

"Rather than saying sorry, [the apology] feels as though Apple is
lecturing users about how it knows best, and that pushing out
updates that quietly hobbled devices was the right thing to do.
It wasn't."

http://www.zdnet.com/article/can-apple-dig-itself-out-of-the-iphone-throttling-hole-it-created-for-itself/

On 11 Jan 2018 22:20:30 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

Blogger opinion pieces devoid of facts aren't evidence of a widespread
battery failure in under a year. Anyone who has owned an iPhone for
longer than a year know you're full of ****.

I realize facts hurt you because facts undermine your belief system.

"Trust in Apple is now shattered, and it feels like no one at
the company cares.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/can-apple-dig-itself-out-of-the-iphone-throttling-hole-it-created-for-itself/

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 19:07:02 +0000 (UTC), Harry Newton
wrote:


Bearing in mind the Orwellian doublespeak of "peak performance" really
means halving the CPU speeds...

"In other words, Apple decided on behalf of its customers that they'd
prefer an iPhone that performed worse for the same amount of time,
than an iPhone that performed just as well for a shorter amount of
time. It's a decision that does nothing to dispel the characterization
of Apple as a company that does what it can to push customers into
buying new phones."
https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/11/16878412/iphone-slowdown-battery-replacement-wait-times-6-plus-supply-shortage

Can you please keep this discussion about Apple products
out of comp.mobile.android? It's off topic here.

I also urge any responders to these apple threads to remove
comp.mobile.android from the "Newsgroups:" header.

Thanks in advance.
--
Kees Nuyt

On 1/11/18, 11:14 AM, in article , "Harry Newton"
wrote:

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:06:58 -0600, Fox's Mercantile wrote:

Damn,you're an ignorant ****.

Snit - try to add technical on-topic value for once in your life.

Let's see, from your very next post, whether you're even *capable* of
adding on-topic technical value to this thread.

You pretend to not value my input but repeatedly bring my name up to try to
pull me into conversations.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308

On 1/11/18, 11:20 AM, in article
, "Fox's Mercantile"
wrote:

On 1/11/18 11:28 AM, Harry Newton wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 09:52:42 -0600, Fox's Mercantile wrote:

Wrong again you ignorant ****.

Why is it that the Apple Apologists resort to patently untrue insults
whenever confronted with items that shake their belief system?

To wit, I have multiple higher degrees, and I don't have a vagina.




I am not Snit you ****ing moron.
**** you and your alleged degrees.

Harry values my input. As much as he attacks me and lies about me, he learns
from me.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308

On 1/11/18, 11:21 AM, in article
, "Fox's Mercantile"
wrote:

On 1/11/18 11:28 AM, Harry Newton wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 09:50:41 -0600, Fox's Mercantile wrote:

You ignorant ****. to paraphrase the replies during the
McCarthy witch hunts, "I am not now, nor have I ever been, Snit."

Unlike you, I do not hide behind an anonymous name that changes
constantly.

Although I'm touched that you find it necessary to attack me.
You are Snit.

What part of "I'm not snit" do you fail to grasp?


He merely wants me to post more so he can learn more. He will never directly
admit it but he knows my posts teach him a lot about technology.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308

On 1/11/18, 12:20 PM, in article ,
" wrote:

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:13:16 -0700, Snit
wrote:

On 1/11/18, 9:15 AM, in article ,
" wrote:

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 09:53:36 -0600, Fox's Mercantile
wrote:

On 1/11/18 9:09 AM, Harry Newton wrote:
Bear in mind that Fox' Mercantile is the utter moron Snit

Wrong again you ignorant ****.

Could you repeat this message? I only have three of them. :-)

He is merely responding to Harry's lies, which are repeated far more than
just three times.

I was just pulling his chain.

Of course.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308

On 1/11/18, 11:22 AM, in article
, "Fox's Mercantile"
wrote:

On 1/11/18 12:14 PM, Harry Newton wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:06:58 -0600, Fox's Mercantile wrote:

Damn,you're an ignorant ****.

Snit - try to add technical on-topic value for once in your life.

Let's see, from your very next post, whether you're even *capable* of
adding on-topic technical value to this thread.


You haven't added any since the beginning.

And I'm NOT Snit
Get that through your thick skull.

Harry claims to not lie, but he lies in his every post.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308

On 1/14/18 11:28 AM, Snit wrote:
On 1/11/18, 11:22 AM, "Fox's Mercantile" wrote:

And I'm NOT Snit
Get that through your thick skull.

Harry claims to not lie, but he lies in his every post.

Well yeah. And at least you're not claiming to be me. ;-)


--
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com

On 1/14/18, 11:08 AM, in article
, "Fox's Mercantile"
wrote:

On 1/14/18 11:28 AM, Snit wrote:
On 1/11/18, 11:22 AM, "Fox's Mercantile" wrote:

And I'm NOT Snit
Get that through your thick skull.

Harry claims to not lie, but he lies in his every post.

Well yeah. And at least you're not claiming to be me. ;-)

Not yet.



--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308

What is clear is that Jimmy Neutron, Alias Mr. Rogers, alias... and so on, has managed to generate 283 posts, including this one, to his bubbling slime. Including repeat business.

The horse is dead, thoroughly picked over, and should be allowed to dissipate into nothingness. Please do not be just another maggot and continue to feed on the rotting remains.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

Apple CEO Tim Cook Says Power Management Feature in Older iPhones Will Be
Able to Be Turned Off in Future Update
https://www.macrumors.com/2018/01/17/tim-cook-on-iphone-battery-controversy/

"Previously there was no clear notice that it would cause devices
to operate slowly."

"Cook says Apple will also allow customers to turn off the power
management feature ... first in a developer release that happens
next month."

"We will tell someone we're reducing your performance ...and if you
don't want it, you can turn it off."

Harry Newton wrote on 1/11/2018 2:02 PM:
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 12:06:34 -0500, nospam wrote:

there isn't anything to fix.

Rickman,

I was trying to hint to you that nospam is *different* than the other half
dozen fundamentalist Apple Apologists.
*Jolly Roger, Lewis, nospam, BKonRamp, Savageduck, Hemidactylus, etc.*

He actually doesn't believe a thing he says (because he knows the facts and
actually understands them, unlike the other Apple Apologists).

Always keep in mind that, while all half dozen of the die-hard Apple
Apologists have a belief system which is vulnerable to facts, nospam
actually *knows* his facts.

He simply has a propensity to flaty outright deny them.

Why?
You tell me why.

Here's what he does all the time:
rickman: Your equation of 1+1=3 is wrong; so it needs to be fixed.
nopsam: There isn't anything to fix.

I gave up reading this conversation some time back. I only read this
message out of idle curiosity. The conversation ended for all practical
purposes. There is no point in partaking in the meta-discussion, so I'm
out. If you keep arguing with them as to who is the bigger butt head,
that's on you.

--

Rick C

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms,
on the centerline of totality since 1998