XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, comp.sys.mac.apps, comp.sys.mac.system   
   XPost: comp.mobile.ipad   
   From: arlen@arlen.com   
      
   On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 12:14:10 +0000 (UTC), badgolferman wrote:   
      
   > Lets just say what you claim is true.   
      
   Hi badgolferman,   
      
      
      
   You're not an Apologists, as you're generally (but not always) reasonable,   
   so we _can_ very likely have an adult discussion about two things that the   
   Apologists prove they can't:   
   1. Facts   
   2. Logic   
      
   Hence, you and I can both _learn_ from each other; if we wish to.   
      
   > Apple does not test their products sufficiently and releases them with bugs.   
      
   The facts are extremely clear that Apple doesn't test product sufficiently.   
      
   Some recent hardware examples are that _all_ iPhones (except the XS Max)   
   have evidence of huge flaws (i.e., they need to be throttled in "about a   
   year" or you face unacceptable stability).   
      
   Recent software examples abound, most (or maybe even _all_) of which could   
   be found by a mere child simply using the software, for example:   
   o Lockscreen exploit easily found only hours after iOS 12.1 released   
      
      
   > The same thing has been said about Microsoft products   
      
      
   While I have to infer what you're implying, I already know two things   
   you don't know because I know your argument inside & out, and yet,   
   you don't know mine (apparently).   
      
      
      
   I know EXACTLY where you're going with that sentence, and, better yet, I   
   know the flaws in your argument. The reason I know where you're going is   
   that EVERYONE thinks that, at first. It's sort of like why everyone thinks   
   the sun goes around the earth at first, or everyone thinks that you're   
   weightless when you're in orbit, or that everyone thinks glass flows such   
   that it's thicker at the bottom in old farmhouse windows, or that everyone   
   thinks that "high octane" gasoline is "better" than lower octane gasoline,   
   etc.   
      
   What you're thinking is along the lines of saying that acetaminophen (e.g.,   
   Tylenol) is better than acetylsalicylic acid (i.e., Aspirin) simply because   
   they MARKET Tylenol better than they market Bufferin.   
      
   FACT: *Tylenol is the brand doctor's recommend most!*   
   LOGIC: It's a MARKETING trick (a brilliant trick, but still a trick).   
      
   Don't fall prey to MARKETING of a tiger running across the screen making   
   you _think_ that high-octane Exxon gasoline is any better than low octane   
   Rotten Robbie gasoline (and yes, that's a real brand name in California).   
      
   *Here is the biggest _question_ for everyone on this newsgroup:*   
      
   FACT: Is your _brain_ that of an ADULT or that of a CHILD?   
   LOGIC: An adult can see right through  (even brilliant) MARKETING; a child   
   can't.   
      
   I posit there are a dozen "children" on this ng who cannot see through   
   marketing, in that they _always_ post _exactly_ what Apple Marketing   
   Propaganda teaches their (weak) minds.   
      
   Do you want me to _name_ those Apple Apologists with the weak mind?   
      
   The fact is that the fact that Tylenol outsells Bufferin does NOT   
   (inherently) mean that Tylenol is better than Bufferin; it just means that   
   people may _think_ it's better - but how many of those people _understand_   
   the differences.   
      
   The fact is that high-octane fuel costs more than lower-octane fuel, but   
   that alone (inherently) does not mean that high octane gasoline is any   
   better than low octane gasoline for your engine; it just means that people   
   may _think_ it's better - but how many of those people _understand_ what an   
   octane rating signifies?   
      
   The ADULT mind can COMPREHEND that the mere fact that product X sells at a   
   higher price than does product Y, in and of itself, is more due to   
   MARKETING than it's due to PRODUCT.   
      
   HINT: Did anyone here _ever_ take even a _single_ marketing class?   
   DOUBLEHINT: Product differentiation is a primary goal of marketing 101.   
      
   > yet Microsoft and now Apple have become dominant   
   > industry giants so there must be something appealing about their products   
   > regardless of how good their marketing departments are at projecting an   
   > image.   
      
   Aha! You're THINKING badgolferman!   
   o You're beginning to think like an adult thinks ... which is GREAT!   
      
   That's a great observation badgolferman, where it's only a single sentence   
   so there's not much to go on, but if I infer the facts & logic you implied,   
   then I know EXACTLY where you're going with that sentence.   
      
   HINT: I'm way (way) ahead of you on this one!   
   I'm so far ahead of you on the logic that we won't be able to cover it   
   sufficiently because I've spent about 10 years on _that_ question alone.   
      
   FACT/LOGIC: I've ASKED on the Microsoft newsgroups, for example, WHY   
   Microsoft still exists, given that it has (almost) nothing over Linux - as   
   just one example. (And the reason is astounding why M$ still exists!).   
      
   FACT/LOGIC: I've ASKED on the Microsoft newsgroups if we can come up with   
   even TEN functional things that we can do on Windows 10 that we can't do on   
   _every_ other Microsoft OS, where we couldn't even get to ten (we got   
   close, but barely).   
      
   FACT/LOGIC:   
   The fact is that Microsoft is successful - but not because it's a great   
   product (compared to Linux, which is free). In fact, I've said MANY TIMES   
   on the Microsoft & Linux newsgroups why I think Microsoft is successful   
   (and it's NOT because it's a great product).   
      
   FACT/LOGIC:   
   The fact is that iPhones & iPads & iPods are successful, where only ONE of   
   those three things is still arguably (by facts & logic) a great product.   
   (IMHO) The iPod _is_ one of the most fantastic products I've ever seen,   
   and, the _first_ (and only the first) set of iPhones _were_ absolutely   
   stunningly fantastic products (at the time) compared to the alternatives.   
      
   FACT/LOGIC:   
   Even today, when it's clear that all iOS mobile devices are primitive in   
   functionality compared to Android, many people THINK that iOS is a great   
   product ... but not for the reasons you might think.   
      
   > Projecting an image is not enough to make you a giant as we can see   
   > with the likes of Tesla and other companies.   
      
   Aha! I see where you're going, badgolferman.   
      
   Please remember that there is no argument anyone here can make that I can't   
   instantly comprehend - and - perhaps - since I have at least an average   
   intelligence (if that) - I haven't yet seen anyone promote an argument that   
   I haven't ALREADY thought about in asking MYSELF this basic question:   
      
   BASIC QUESTION:   
   Q: Why on earth do the Apple Apologists _believe_ what they believe?   
      
   > Now what? How will anyone in this newsgroup change Apple¢s practices? Why   
   > must you constantly belittle Apple users? Are you the conscience of the   
   > group?   
      
      
      
   This question, badgolferman, is an EXTREMELY RELEVENT question!   
      
   You can ask that _same_ question many ways, for example:   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)