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


Groups > comp.mobile.android > #57883

Re: charging policy

From 123456789 <12345@12345.com>
Newsgroups comp.mobile.android
Subject Re: charging policy
Date 2018-11-25 19:37 -0700
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <ptfm8s$8n7$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (17 earlier) <241120181633272332%nospam@nospam.invalid> <ptcv8a$2vm$2@dont-email.me> <251120180042495307%nospam@nospam.invalid> <pteptm$e77$2@dont-email.me> <I8kioKxeKv+bFwV8@255soft.uk>

Show all headers | View raw


On 11/25/2018 12:06 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> 123456789 <12345@12345.com> writes:

> It [fanboy/fanboi] may be descriptive, but I've never seen it used
> other than > > in a negative manner

Here are a few non-negative examples:

New York Times
Media reporters Brian Stelter and David Carr go all fan boy on the iPad
and then take a breath...
https://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/media-decoded-a-video-discussion-of-the-ipad/?scp=2&sq=fanboy&st=cse

Christian Science Monitor
The machine is a good fit for the casual gamer – hardcore fanboys would
obviously look elsewhere...
https://www.csmonitor.com/Technology/Horizons/2010/0405/Nintendo-exec-scoffs-at-gaming-potential-of-Apple-iPad

And then there is a Fanboy.com, a Macfanboy.com, a Sonyfanboy.com, a
Nintendofanboy.com, and a Googlefanboy.com. with none of the titles
denoting negative connotations.

> I've never seen it used in an argument without thinking less of the
> user, rather than the usee.

Even when followed by a smiley? Even when it's true as described by the
official Webster dictionary definition?

> If nothing else, the spelling irritates me

Both spellings are in the dictionary. I'll try to remember to use the
other spelling next time so you will only be half as offended... ;)

> I normally dislike people who attack their attacker with
> words/phrases like ad > hominem

So he attacked me?? I had no clue...

> using "fanboi" was attacking him not his argument.

I saw it as me KIDDING, thus my WINKY SMILEY.

Now if I had called him an asshole...that would be an attack. But most
here on Usenet can take a little occasional rough and tumble fun. It's
certainly not the place for the overly sensitive.

Anyway, enough with this overly sensitive BS and back to the show.

> It [device slowing] might not motivate the undecided, but among those
> who had . > decided to stay with the same company anyway, it might
> make them upgrade sooner.

Agreed.

> Apple's claim was that they slowed older 'phones to prolong the
> on-time, as they knew that, on average, their batteries _would_ have
> reduced in capacity.

BUT battery physics was NOT what caused the Apple debacle.

> This would have been more believable if they'd (a) explained it in
> advance (b) made it optional (even if it was the default).

Apple needed to explain in advance AND make a switch to turn off the
slowdown. Because obviously those with NEW batteries installed had no 
need for the slowdown.

> Yes, the secrecy at best backfired on them, at worst might have been
>  dishonest.

It seems incredulous to me that Apple engineers didn't foresee people
having new batteries installed in their old iPhones and providing an off
switch for them. Since I doubt the engineers are that dumb the only
other likely logical conclusion is the dishonest one.

> I don't think _that_ many iPhone users _would_ have replaced their
> 'phone battery: since it's not easily replaceable

Replacing a battery is a fraction of the cost of a new
iPhone so likely many do it.

Apple stores replace iPhone batteries. And there are at least five
independent stores within a 10 mile range of me that replace iPhone
batteries. YMMV.

I replaced the wife's iPhone battery for $30 US (online) and it came
with the installation tools. That iPhone was later given to a grandson
and it's still working fine now over a year later.

Back to comp.mobile.android | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

charging policy "Linea Recta" <bleep.bleep@bleep.invalid> - 2018-11-21 18:24 +0100
  Re: charging policy Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2018-11-21 17:36 +0000
    Re: charging policy Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com.INVALID> - 2018-11-21 19:02 +0100
      Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-21 15:10 -0500
  Re:charging policy Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com.INVALID> - 2018-11-21 18:53 +0100
    Re: Re:charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-21 18:42 +0000
    Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-21 15:10 -0500
      Re: charging policy Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com.INVALID> - 2018-11-22 07:13 +0100
        Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 01:50 -0500
          Re: charging policy Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com.INVALID> - 2018-11-22 09:15 +0100
            Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 16:09 +0000
            Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 11:57 -0500
          Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 16:18 +0000
            Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 11:57 -0500
              Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 17:26 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 12:54 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 21:26 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 01:14 -0500
                Re: charging policy Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2018-11-23 09:28 +0000
                "tl; dr" (was: Re: charging policy) "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-23 15:28 +0000
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-22 18:39 -0700
            Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-22 10:22 -0700
              Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-22 18:45 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 13:47 -0500
                Re: charging policy "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-22 20:40 +0000
                Re: charging policy David Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2018-11-22 21:29 +0000
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-22 18:39 -0700
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-22 18:39 -0700
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 21:30 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 01:14 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-23 15:26 +0000
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-23 16:13 +0000
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-23 19:52 +0000
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-23 21:29 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 16:40 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-23 21:48 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 17:06 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-23 22:09 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 17:23 -0500
                Re: charging policy The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2018-11-23 21:00 -0800
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-24 09:05 -0500
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-24 15:46 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-24 10:51 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-24 10:01 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-24 12:55 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-24 13:07 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-24 16:33 -0400
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-24 18:52 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 00:42 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-25 11:33 -0700
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-25 19:06 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 14:46 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-25 19:37 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 22:07 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-26 04:46 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-26 00:32 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-25 22:37 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 14:46 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-25 19:37 -0700
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-26 15:45 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-26 10:49 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-26 16:04 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-26 19:11 -0500
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-24 20:14 +0000
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-24 18:52 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 00:42 -0500
    Re: charging policy Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2018-11-26 10:36 +0200
      Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-26 16:37 +0000
  Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-21 15:10 -0500
  Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-21 15:01 -0700

csiph-web