XPost: alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy, misc.phone.mobile   
   XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone   
   From: jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.con   
      
   On 21/01/2020 5:40 am, Arlen Holder wrote:   
   > On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 01:30:24 -0800, KWills Shill #2 wrote:   
   >   
   >>> If you compare all phones, including $100 phones like my Moto G7, your   
   >>> statement is valid - but you must think about Apple's price range phones.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>       You stated "A modern mobile device _must_ have it." (emphasis   
   >> yours). Eventually all will have it. But there is nothing to suggest   
   >> all MUST have it at this time.   
   >   
   > Hi KWill's Shill,   
   >   
   > FACTS + ASSESSMENT.   
   >   
   > You either understood what I said about "premium priced" phones...   
   > o Or you completely whooshed on what is meant by "premium priced" phones.   
   >   
   > Pick one.   
   >   
   >>> Think about the key fact that Apple is all MARKETING of "premium" devices.   
   >>> o How can a "premium" device sell, at premium prices, in 2020, without 5G?   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>       Why are you moving the goal post from all devices to some   
   >> specific devices from Apple? That is the real question.   
   >   
   > You either understood that there are zero Android newsgroups on this thread   
   > o Or you completely whooshed on that obvious-to-adults fact   
   >   
   > Pick one.   
   >   
   >>> Even the least technical person would have known that their thousand dollar   
   >>> iPhone was a fraction of the networking speed of a modern Android phone.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>       If your goal is to prove Android is better than iOS, you're   
   >> preaching to the choir. I much prefer Android.   
   >   
   > My main goal on the Apple newsgroups is to expose the apologists   
   > o For what they are.   
   >   
   > I do that with facts, logic, and reason.   
   > o Something that they're not.   
   >   
   >>       I don't have a problem with anyone who buys an iPhone. Though I   
   >> do wonder why they would spend so much more for something that does   
   >> the same thing as an Android device. But they have every right to   
   >> purchase the phone they want.   
   >   
   > I have _plenty_ of Android & iOS devices.   
   > o My goal here is simply to expose the apologists for what they are.   
   >   
   >>       And when you're called out on being wrong, you try to divert to   
   >> something else. Like your claim that, "A modern mobile device _must_   
   >> have it." When I pointed out the error in the claim, you tried to   
   >> divert the claim to mean only Apple's high end phones.   
   >   
   > You either realize Apple doesn't make a $100 phone, or you don't.   
   > o Pick one.   
   >   
   >>       But present your facts that "A modern mobile device _must_ have   
   >> it." Present the evidence that will show any devices with 4G will   
   >> suddenly cease working as intended.   
   >   
   > You just created a strawman of your own choosing.   
   > o You're the only one claiming devices with 4G will "suddenly cease".   
   >   
   >>> Apple spent upwards of 6 billion dollars to get their hands on 5G in 2020.   
   >>> o That's how important getting their hands on 5G was to Apple's business.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>       Which has what, exactly, to do with your claim about all devices?   
   >   
   > See prior adult context which you clearly repeatedly whooshed on.   
   > o What part of the fact Apple markets PREMIUM-PRICED phones did you miss?   
   >   
   >>> How many projects do you think Apple spend six billion dollars on anyway?   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>       I don't know. Mostly because what Apple does with its money is   
   >> its business. As long as it isn't infringing on the rights of others.   
   >   
   > The reason for bringing up the fact Apple surrendered to Qualcomm is that   
   > the apologists, nospam in particular, claimed Apple "wasn't worried" about   
   > 5G.   
   >   
   > My point is to expose the apologists for what they are.   
   > o In the case of nospam, he has only 7 responses to facts - none adult.   
      
   Tell me about it!   
      
      
      
      
      
   Michael Christ   
      
      
      
   >   
   >>       More important is you explaining why you're desperately trying to   
   >> divert from your initial claim?   
   >   
   > You can repeatedly build your own strawman and then shoot it down.   
   > o I find _all_ your claims trivial to shoot down, in fact ... with fact.   
   >   
   > I don't think you're an apologist - so why are you so unreasonable?   
   > o What part of "premium phones" are you so confused about anyway?   
   >   
   >> [Snip the remainder of your failed attempt to divert from the claim   
   >> that a modern mobile device _must_ have [5G]. when you know, and knew,   
   >> the claim is not true.]   
   >   
   > You have two _adult_ choices, as I see your options...   
   > 1. You can accept that you have no clue what "premium" means, or,   
   > 2. You can continue to prove you have no clue what "premium" means.   
   >   
   > Pick one.   
   >   
   > HINT: A premium phone, in 2020, _must_ have 5G.  Period.   
   > o Apple would have _died_ as a company if it didn't surrender to Qualcomm.   
   >   
      
      
   --   
   Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were   
   yet sinners, Christ died for us.   
      
   "If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything."   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)