Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.acorn.misc > #5376

Re: Wakefield (second attempt)

From Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk>
Newsgroups comp.sys.acorn.misc
Subject Re: Wakefield (second attempt)
Date 2012-05-05 16:36 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <b3e5298b52.chris@o2.co.uk> (permalink)
References <5289868527richtnews@uwclub.net> <109c238a52.thebears@sarno.freeserve.co.uk> <faa9118b52.BrianFerris@brferris.orpheusmail.co.uk> <4183138b52.chris@o2.co.uk> <9115198b52.BrianFerris@brferris.orpheusmail.co.uk>

Show all headers | View raw

In message <9115198b52.BrianFerris@brferris.orpheusmail.co.uk>
          Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> wrote:

> In message <4183138b52.chris@o2.co.uk>
>           Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> wrote:

>> In message <faa9118b52.BrianFerris@brferris.orpheusmail.co.uk>
>>           Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> wrote:


[snip]

>> Google have been rebranding a lot of stuff of late.
> Yes,fully aware of that as a very happy Android user.



>>> Google Store is :
>>> http://www.google-store.com/google/webcontents/default.aspx

>> That one is for the USA market not UK.
> Yes.But the term Google Store is used in the text in the article.


>>> Not for Android Tablets!

Technically its correct it used to be called Google App Store

>>> I like to get the majority of apps via Google Play.

>> Its available.
> Great.
>>> If Google Play is not available then the wording needs changing.What
>>> is Google Store?

>> Fine, why not actually email the company concerned and point out the
>> mistake.  Like I have just done since you can't.
> Mmm.That wording was by Rcomp in the email digest link I got and the
> link at the top of this page.

But there is nothing to stop you emailing them first to clarify, or 
are you just trolling!

>>>  At least use the correct names.
>>> I don't always want to sideload apps.
>>> The virus side and protection is vital if downloading from other '
>>> store's '

>> Google Play is no more secure then any of the others.
> Mmmm.Maybe?

Its not a maybe it officially is not. Read the lateste reviews in the 
magazines.

>>> It's just sloppy marketing and misleading for some?

>> No, its a simple human mistake. It happens in the rush and run up to a
>> major show. Do you want to run a show?
> Could be a mistake.

It is a mistake by not adding the word App between Google Store.

> Not really,not my choice.Yours and good luck to you.Well done.


> But don't tell a customer to run a show, or similar do you ask a
> customer to run a shop?

I would if they can't be bothered to actually clarify the matter 
direct. You behave as if everything is perfect everytime and no one 
can make an innocent mistake, which was very quickly clarified on 
asking direct.

> Unbelievable!

Yes you are.

> You are selling a product and you want people to buy it?

I am not selling it.

> However I only found out from another review and link from ebuyer that
> the tablet doesn't run Google Play,thus my original query.

The go back and re-read the reviews because it tells you in the posts 
by users you can.

>>> You could spend a little more money and buy a different Android
>>> Tablet?

>> You can spend a lot if you want but this one gets very good reviews.

> I have done.Thank you very much and look forward to upgrading to
> another Android product HTC One X or Galaxy III.

Hope you enjoy it then, so why are you moaning here?

> What reviews?

There are plenty of reviews of the model concerned - do a google!

> Has the RComp one been reviewed yet?

Since its a model sold by others why? It has been reviewed by others.

> No.

Yes.

> That's why originally I wanted to know what brand Tablet this was so I
> could make that choice and it was revealed on here what is was or have
> an idea what it may be?

So people have answered your questions as best they can.

> Not even any information on the Rcomp website?

Ok.

> So can pick it up around £170 from ebuyer.com hence why would I buy it
> from Rcomp for more?

Wrong price.

Support from a RISC OS supplier to ensure you have it working with 
RISC OS kit for one and many users are either not familar with Android 
etc..



-- 
Chris Hughes
Sorry you have missed the Wakefield Show now.
http://www.wakefieldshow.org.uk

Back to comp.sys.acorn.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-02 12:15 +0100
  Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-02 13:19 +0100
    Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-02 14:08 +0100
      Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-04 23:20 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 05:23 +0200
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-05 21:13 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-05 10:26 +0100
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 12:10 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Bryn Evans <d@a.invalid> - 2012-05-05 12:31 +0100
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:03 +0100
    Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:14 +0100
  Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Geoffrey Baxendale <thebears@sarno.freeserve.co.uk> - 2012-05-03 16:51 +0100
    Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-03 18:57 +0100
      Re: Wakefield (second attempt) M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2012-05-03 20:08 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Thomas Milius <Thomas-Milius@t-online.de> - 2012-05-03 21:46 +0200
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Thomas Milius <Thomas-Milius@t-online.de> - 2012-05-03 22:04 +0200
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-05-04 16:48 +0100
      Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2012-05-03 21:22 +0200
    Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-04 09:20 +0100
    Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 12:11 +0100
      Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-05 12:39 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:01 +0100
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-05 13:18 +0100
            Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-12 11:34 +0100
      Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 12:31 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:32 +0100
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:43 +0100
            Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 15:06 +0100
              Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-05 15:23 +0100
              Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 16:41 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 18:59 +0200
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2012-05-06 11:28 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Fred Bambrough <fred@[127.0.0.1]> - 2012-05-06 14:58 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Dev <spam-addy@no.spam.invalid> - 2012-05-06 15:04 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-06 20:00 +0200
              Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 18:50 +0200
              Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 19:43 +0100
            Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 15:18 +0100
              Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 15:48 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 17:54 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-12 12:12 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Matthew Phillips <spam2011m@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-12 22:05 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-05-13 06:53 +0100
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-13 13:14 +0200
                Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-15 11:40 +0100
          Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 16:36 +0100
            Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-12 11:54 +0100
        Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 18:28 +0200
  Re: Wakefield (second attempt) charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2012-05-03 17:36 +0100

csiph-web