In article <sgtmdd$m1e$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
<Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:

>
> What I'm trying to do here is _understand_ operating system differences.

you're not trying at all.

you're deliberately refusing to learn about anything, including android.

Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> asked
> They lead to absolutely nothing and do not change anything by a yota.

Intelligent people can learn what the Apple apologists can't.

There's a fundamental _difference_ between Apple owners and the owners of
the normal operating systems (mostly Windows & Android by the numbers).

The Window/Android people do not believe every word from the mother ship.
The Apple owners do.

Worse, the Apple owners have imbibed the purely imaginary OS Apple
advertises such that they can't imagine that it's _only_ iOS that doesn't
allow them the anonymity of the Tor Browser.

Only iOS lacks this privacy functionality.
Only iOS.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> you're deliberately refusing to learn about anything, including android.

Name it.

Given I've written, oh, I can't count how many tutorials on Android, name
the common functionality that every user does, that I "refuse to learn".

Name it.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>> What you hate is the facts are always wrong (because everyone disproves what I say).
>
> ftfy

See #7 where nospam is increasingly _desperate_ to deflect from the facts.

1. nospam will first brazenly call every fact he hates "false" or "lies";
2. nospam will then fabricate the existence of the imaginary functionality;
3. nospam then blames everyone else but Apple for the missing capability;
4. nospam fabricates that he told you already even though he couldn't have;
5. nospam says you should write your own apps if you want functionality;
6. nospam accuses you of being too stupid to write all your own iOS apps;
*7. nospam finally resorts to an infinity of ftfy & ad hominem deflections;*

In article <sgtmp0$r36$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
<Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:

> Intelligent people can learn

that rules you out

In article <sgtmu0$tc3$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
<Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:

> Given I've written, oh, I can't count how many tutorials on Android,

i can. zero.

you have no idea what a tutorial even is.

> name
> the common functionality that every user does, that I "refuse to learn".

it's been done. you ignore it, assuming you even understand it, that is.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> i can. zero.

The adults notice when I'm challenged by someone for facts, they get them,
and yet, when you're challenged for facts - you provide absolutely nothing.

You fail to own an adult belief system, every time.
> you have no idea what a tutorial even is.

The reason you _never_ come up with the facts is your entire belief system
is imaginary (it's like those of the trumpists, or the flat earthers).

>> name
>> the common functionality that every user does, that I "refuse to learn".
>
> it's been done. you ignore it, assuming you even understand it, that is.

And yet, you _always_ fail the simplest of adult tests.
Three words. (1) Name (2) Just (3) One

Name just one fact that underlies your _entire_ belief system.
--
nospam always fails that simple 3-word adult test

In article <sgunm5$1tlk$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Robin Goodfellow
<Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote:

>
> The adults notice when I'm challenged by someone for facts, they get them,

they notice that they get lunatic rants.

On Sat, 4 Sep 2021 at 03:03:35, Robin Goodfellow
<Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote (my responses usually follow points
raised):
>nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
[snip]
PLEASE don't reply (at least publicly) to nospam.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The squeamish will squeam a lot.
(Barry Norman on the film "300", in Radio Times 30 March-5 April 2013.)

On 03/09/2021 19.44, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>> you're deliberately refusing to learn about anything, including android.
>
> Name it.
>
> Given I've written, oh, I can't count how many tutorials on Android, name
> the common functionality that every user does, that I "refuse to learn".
>
> Name it.
>

No, you haven't written anything. Maybe your predecessor, Arlen, did,
but /you/ certainly did not.

Besides, what website collects them? No, don't tell me "usenet", that
doesn't count.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 2021-09-07 1:35 p.m., J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Sep 2021 at 03:03:35, Robin Goodfellow
> <Ancient-of-Days@Heaven.Net> wrote (my responses usually follow points
> raised):
>> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> [snip]
> PLEASE don't reply (at least publicly) to nospam.

Has the newsgroup come to a consensus that it doesn't want nospam to
participate in any of its conversations?

--
@RabidHussar

On 2021-09-07 11:33 a.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 03/09/2021 19.44, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
>> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
>>> you're deliberately refusing to learn about anything, including android.
>>
>> Name it.
>>
>> Given I've written, oh, I can't count how many tutorials on Android, name
>> the common functionality that every user does, that I "refuse to learn".
>>
>> Name it.
>>
>
> No, you haven't written anything. Maybe your predecessor, Arlen, did,
> but /you/ certainly did not.
>
> Besides, what website collects them? No, don't tell me "usenet", that
> doesn't count.
>

Yeah... ...he kind of fucked up his whole "I'm not Arlen!" routine
there, didn't he?

In article <news:eYPZI.9840$Im6.786@fx09.iad>, RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar>
wrote:
> Has the newsgroup come to a consensus that it doesn't want nospam to
> participate in any of its conversations?

The nospam troll is _different_ than other Apple apologists, Lewis, Jolly
Roger, Joerg Lorenz, Alan Browne, et. al in that nospam is less ignorant.

The key to understanding nospam is mainly to recognize nospam will defend
Apple's position to the death, like loyal Samurai defending Daimyo lords.

You can predict _every_ word out of nospam's mouth once you know that fact.
(Even decades in advance of him saying it - as he is merely a matryoshka.)

The main weakness of nospam is he expects his user base to be idiots.
This expectation of nospam's works fine in the child-like Apple newsgroups.

But on the adult OS newsgroups, nospam always gets his head handed to him.
Because his key defense to facts about Apple he hates is to deflect them.

1. nospam will first brazenly call every fact he hates "false" or "lies";
2. nospam will then fabricate the existence of the imaginary functionality;
3. nospam then blames everyone else but Apple for the missing capability;
4. nospam fabricates that he told you already even though he couldn't have;
5. nospam says you should write your own apps if you want functionality;
6. nospam accuses you of being too stupid to write all your own iOS apps;
7. nospam finally resorts to an infinity of ftfy & ad hominem deflections.

Just watch.

On 2021-09-07 4:51 p.m., allspam wrote:
> In article <news:eYPZI.9840$Im6.786@fx09.iad>, RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar>
> wrote:
>> Has the newsgroup come to a consensus that it doesn't want nospam to
>> participate in any of its conversations?
>
> The nospam troll is _different_ than other Apple apologists, Lewis, Jolly
> Roger, Joerg Lorenz, Alan Browne, et. al in that nospam is less ignorant.
>
> The key to understanding nospam is mainly to recognize nospam will defend
> Apple's position to the death, like loyal Samurai defending Daimyo lords.
>
> You can predict _every_ word out of nospam's mouth once you know that fact.
> (Even decades in advance of him saying it - as he is merely a matryoshka.)
>
> The main weakness of nospam is he expects his user base to be idiots.
> This expectation of nospam's works fine in the child-like Apple newsgroups.
>
> But on the adult OS newsgroups, nospam always gets his head handed to him.
> Because his key defense to facts about Apple he hates is to deflect them.
>
> 1. nospam will first brazenly call every fact he hates "false" or "lies";
> 2. nospam will then fabricate the existence of the imaginary functionality;
> 3. nospam then blames everyone else but Apple for the missing capability;
> 4. nospam fabricates that he told you already even though he couldn't have;
> 5. nospam says you should write your own apps if you want functionality;
> 6. nospam accuses you of being too stupid to write all your own iOS apps;
> 7. nospam finally resorts to an infinity of ftfy & ad hominem deflections.
>
> Just watch.

One has to wonder why nospam insists on being in this newsgroup if he
has no interest in Windows 10 or Windows in general for that matter.

--
@RabidHussar

In article <bpQZI.56123$g81.46927@fx33.iad>, RabidHussar
<rabid@huss.ar> wrote:

>
> One has to wonder why nospam insists on being in this newsgroup if he
> has no interest in Windows 10 or Windows in general for that matter.

i use win10, plus the thread is crossposted to several groups.

On 2021-09-07 1:51 p.m., allspam wrote:
> In article <news:eYPZI.9840$Im6.786@fx09.iad>, RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar>
> wrote:
>> Has the newsgroup come to a consensus that it doesn't want nospam to
>> participate in any of its conversations?
>
> The nospam troll is _different_ than other Apple apologists, Lewis, Jolly
> Roger, Joerg Lorenz, Alan Browne, et. al in that nospam is less ignorant.
>
> The key to understanding nospam is mainly to recognize nospam will defend
> Apple's position to the death, like loyal Samurai defending Daimyo lords.
>
> You can predict _every_ word out of nospam's mouth once you know that fact.
> (Even decades in advance of him saying it - as he is merely a matryoshka.)
>
> The main weakness of nospam is he expects his user base to be idiots.
> This expectation of nospam's works fine in the child-like Apple newsgroups.
>
> But on the adult OS newsgroups, nospam always gets his head handed to him.
> Because his key defense to facts about Apple he hates is to deflect them.
>
> 1. nospam will first brazenly call every fact he hates "false" or "lies";
> 2. nospam will then fabricate the existence of the imaginary functionality;
> 3. nospam then blames everyone else but Apple for the missing capability;
> 4. nospam fabricates that he told you already even though he couldn't have;
> 5. nospam says you should write your own apps if you want functionality;
> 6. nospam accuses you of being too stupid to write all your own iOS apps;
> 7. nospam finally resorts to an infinity of ftfy & ad hominem deflections.
>
> Just watch.
>

Hi, Arlen!

RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
> One has to wonder why nospam insists on being in this newsgroup if he
> has no interest in Windows 10 or Windows in general for that matter.

Someone once said nospam is in it for the argumentation, which he loves.

The best way to understand nospam is to assume he works for Apple marketing.
(figuratively)

He will always defend _everything_ Apple does to the death; but he also
knows a teeny tiny bit about Windows 10, and even less about Android.

Given that, *nospam is the _least ignorant_ of the Apple apologists*
(Lewis, Jolly Roger, Joerg Lorenz, Alan Baker, Chris, Wolffran, et. al).

On 2021-09-07 2:12 p.m., Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
>> One has to wonder why nospam insists on being in this newsgroup if he
>> has no interest in Windows 10 or Windows in general for that matter.
>
> Someone once said nospam is in it for the argumentation, which he loves.
>
> The best way to understand nospam is to assume he works for Apple marketing.
> (figuratively)
>
> He will always defend _everything_ Apple does to the death; but he also
> knows a teeny tiny bit about Windows 10, and even less about Android.
>
> Given that, *nospam is the _least ignorant_ of the Apple apologists*
> (Lewis, Jolly Roger, Joerg Lorenz, Alan Baker, Chris, Wolffran, et. al).
>

LOL!

On 9/7/2021 2:12 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
>> One has to wonder why nospam insists on being in this newsgroup if he
>> has no interest in Windows 10 or Windows in general for that matter.
>
> Someone once said nospam is in it for the argumentation, which he loves.
>
> The best way to understand nospam is to assume he works for Apple marketing.
> (figuratively)

The LAST thing anyone at Apple would want is to be associated with
someone like nospam. They'd probably be thrilled if he would stop trying
to "help" them!

On 2021-09-07 3:16 p.m., sms wrote:
> On 9/7/2021 2:12 PM, Robin Goodfellow wrote:
>> RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
>>> One has to wonder why nospam insists on being in this newsgroup if he
>>> has no interest in Windows 10 or Windows in general for that matter.
>>
>> Someone once said nospam is in it for the argumentation, which he loves.
>>
>> The best way to understand nospam is to assume he works for Apple
>> marketing.
>> (figuratively)
>
> The LAST thing anyone at Apple would want is to be associated with
> someone like nospam. They'd probably be thrilled if he would stop trying
> to "help" them!

But you'll happily associate with an asshole like "Arlen".

In article <sh8obe$7tf$2@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> The LAST thing anyone at Apple would want is to be associated with
> someone like sms. They'd probably be thrilled if he would stop trying
> to "help" them!

ftfy

what i say is extensively backed up by facts, cites and most of all,
actual experience with the devices in question.

you spew all sorts of crazy bullshit that's easily shown to be false,
such as your absurd claim that face id requires room lights to be on
(it doesn't and actually works better in the dark) or that apple pay
requires first unlocking the phone and then launching an app (it only
requires authentication for the transaction, not unlocking).

you claim to own iphones, yet you get so much wrong about them that
many people question whether you actually do own one.

On 2021-09-07 5:12 p.m., Robin Goodfellow wrote:
> RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
>> One has to wonder why nospam insists on being in this newsgroup if he
>> has no interest in Windows 10 or Windows in general for that matter.
>
> Someone once said nospam is in it for the argumentation, which he loves.

Shit is another Mac die-hard who loves starting arguments for the sake
of it.

> The best way to understand nospam is to assume he works for Apple marketing.
> (figuratively)
>
> He will always defend _everything_ Apple does to the death; but he also
> knows a teeny tiny bit about Windows 10, and even less about Android.
>
> Given that, *nospam is the _least ignorant_ of the Apple apologists*
> (Lewis, Jolly Roger, Joerg Lorenz, Alan Baker, Chris, Wolffran, et. al).

I have most of those filtered except for Alan Baker and nospam. The
rest's posts are just worthless.

--
@RabidHussar

RabidHussar <rabid@huss.ar> asked
> I have most of those filtered except for Alan Baker

WTF?

*Everyone has Alan Baker filtered* (along with Snit & Rod Speed).

If you don't filter Alan Baker, by God, please don't respond to him.
--
(If Alan Baker's IQ is above 30 or 40 it would be rather shocking.)

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> asked
> what i say is extensively backed up by facts, cites and most of all,
> actual experience with the devices in question.

I'm always trying to figure out what drives these strange people so.
a. *Does nospam actually _believe_ anything he incessantly fabricates*?
b. *Or does nospam simply wallow in fabrications for their shock value*?

I don't know.
Do you?

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> asked
> The LAST thing anyone at Apple would want is to be associated with
> someone like nospam. They'd probably be thrilled if he would stop trying
> to "help" them!

I'm not sure of nospam's motives other than he denies all facts about Apple.

Why?
I don't know why.

*Is it that he _hates_ facts show that Apple is not what they advertise?*