Subject: Re: Apple played digital liberal nanny-stater, now faces severallawsuits
Full headers:
From: PeterN <"peter,newdelete">
Subject: Re: Apple played digital liberal nanny-stater, now faces several
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 22:10:20 -0500
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $23.95
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
<p248eo$k65$> <281220172121547215%nospam@nospam.invalid>
<p249kd$lh1$> <281220172150561716%nospam@nospam.invalid>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
In-Reply-To: <281220172150561716%nospam@nospam.invalid>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2977627054
X-Received-Bytes: 3171
Print Article
Forward Article
On 12/28/2017 9:50 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <p249kd$lh1$>, Mayayana
><mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>> | more nonsense. the iphone x (not 10)
>>     Do you know what x stands for? (Hint: Roman.)
> the name of the device is iphone x, not iphone 10.
>> | is selling *very* well.
>> ent-forecasts-citing-lukewarm-demand
> that's nothing more than the usual analysts talking out their ass in an
> attempt to manipulate the stock price for personal gain and that of
> their clients.
> last october, the same idiot analysts were saying the iphone 8/8+ were
> a flop, that lines were short and no backlog of orders, it's not enough
> of a jump over the 7 so people were opting for the 7 instead, little to
> no customer excitement, blah blah blah.
> at the earnings call in early november, apple stated the iphone 8/8+
> were the two most popular models sold. the iphone x had not yet shipped
> at that point.
> it happens every quarter.
> apple's next earnings call is in mid-february, where *actual* numbers
> will be announced.
>>    But don't worry. Once it gets down to $40 I'll buy one
>> to use as a camera...
> you wouldn't use one if it was given to you for free.
>> if they can demonstrate to me
>> that the camera is usable without activating the phone.
> there is *no* need to activate an iphone with cellular service.
> you'll just need wifi for any connectivity (and you can also turn that
> off if you prefer).
> older iphones are commonly given to kids for exactly that purpose,
> since the parents don't want to sign them up for their own cellphone
> plan.

I do not disagree with much of what you say. but, back up what you say 
with authenticated facts, and logic.
You really ought to distinguish fact from opinion. You would gain a lot 
of respect, if you did.