Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote in news:1RCPN.132658$_a1e.267@fx16.iad:

> On 04-Apr-24 1:34, Sn!pe wrote:
>> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> There are also people who try to use their phone as a computer. Well,
>>>> technically it is one, but who can take seriously a device with such
>>>> a tiny screen and a two-thumb keyboard?
>>>>
>>> You and I must be wrong.
>>>
>>> In order to contact the local Surgery I can now no longer use their
>>> website.
>>> I now have to use 'the App' - available only in iOS & Android flavours
>>> so I can't use this PC, with its proper keyboard & 25 inch display, I
>>> must squint at the tiny display on my phone & attempt that pretence of
>>> a keyboard it offers.
>>>
>>> At least I have a 'smart' phone. My wife clings on to her dumb phone,
>>> and cannot see why she should be forced to change to suit a strange
>>> fashion.
>>
>> [UK specific]
>> I can contact my doctor's surgery via the NHS website, which works
>> on my desktop. The NHS smartphone app. is quite slick to use but
>> I do agree about the horrid 'phone "keyboard".
>>
> The NHS app might sometimes be 'slick', but _NOT_ when it gets into the
> hands of my dearly beloved.
> She has the sort of talent that causes software to do things that the
> designers would swear could never happen.

There are those of us that cling to our dumb phones because we can
understand what they will do with a conversation. A smrt phone can hide
many things along with giving the illusion of a simple conversation. If it
was a simple conversation, why add complexity to the conversation?

One of my doctors web confirmation registration processes does that. I try
to answer it, but the app wants more info that it won't ask for. I simply
show up for the appointment they notified me of and all is well.

I'll use a web site from my computer but not from a phone. I don't even
tell my computer my email address or name, so it is fairly easy to tell
what such a site is really after.

On 05-Apr-24 1:55, David LaRue wrote:
> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote in news:1RCPN.132658$_a1e.267@fx16.iad:
>
>> On 04-Apr-24 1:34, Sn!pe wrote:
>>> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> There are also people who try to use their phone as a computer. Well,
>>>>> technically it is one, but who can take seriously a device with such
>>>>> a tiny screen and a two-thumb keyboard?
>>>>>
>>>> You and I must be wrong.
>>>>
>>>> In order to contact the local Surgery I can now no longer use their
>>>> website.
>>>> I now have to use 'the App' - available only in iOS & Android flavours
>>>> so I can't use this PC, with its proper keyboard & 25 inch display, I
>>>> must squint at the tiny display on my phone & attempt that pretence of
>>>> a keyboard it offers.
>>>>
>>>> At least I have a 'smart' phone. My wife clings on to her dumb phone,
>>>> and cannot see why she should be forced to change to suit a strange
>>>> fashion.
>>>
>>> [UK specific]
>>> I can contact my doctor's surgery via the NHS website, which works
>>> on my desktop. The NHS smartphone app. is quite slick to use but
>>> I do agree about the horrid 'phone "keyboard".
>>>
>> The NHS app might sometimes be 'slick', but _NOT_ when it gets into the
>> hands of my dearly beloved.
>> She has the sort of talent that causes software to do things that the
>> designers would swear could never happen.
>
> There are those of us that cling to our dumb phones because we can
> understand what they will do with a conversation. A smrt phone can hide
> many things along with giving the illusion of a simple conversation. If it
> was a simple conversation, why add complexity to the conversation?
>
> One of my doctors web confirmation registration processes does that. I try
> to answer it, but the app wants more info that it won't ask for. I simply
> show up for the appointment they notified me of and all is well.
>
> I'll use a web site from my computer but not from a phone. I don't even
> tell my computer my email address or name, so it is fairly easy to tell
> what such a site is really after.

Certainly, where you have the choice.
My point was that more and more 'services' are now _only_ accessible via
their 'App' which may be a horribly constructed pile of %^&*.

--
Sam Plusnet

Sam Plusnet wrote:

> Certainly, where you have the choice.
> My point was that more and more 'services' are now _only_ accessible via
> their 'App' which may be a horribly constructed pile of %^&*.

Just today I read at a webpage with a service that I use (forgotten
which) that they discontinue their app and refer to their webpage.

More of that!

--
Bertel
Kolt, Denmark

Fri, 5 Apr 2024 21:05:13 +0200: Bertel Lund Hansen
<gadekryds@lundhansen.dk> scribeva:

>Sam Plusnet wrote:
>
>> Certainly, where you have the choice.
>> My point was that more and more 'services' are now _only_ accessible via
>> their 'App' which may be a horribly constructed pile of %^&*.
>
>Just today I read at a webpage with a service that I use (forgotten
>which) that they discontinue their app and refer to their webpage.
>
>More of that!

Fully agree!: https://rudhar.com/sfreview/appgekte/en.htm

Steve Hayes:

> A while back I was puzzled when a cousin of mine talked
> about "earls" in an inappropriate context, and it took me
> a while to realise she was treating "URL" as an acronym.

And I am not puzzled, but outright annoyed by this
malacroymisation. One of my ill-time favourites is
pronouncing `SQL' as `sequel'. The sequel to what? SQL is
no longer the Structured English QUEry Language.

--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

lar3ryca:

> For the linuxers out there, do you pronounce the file
> 'cshrc' as

What, is `linuxoid' considered harmful?

--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> writes:
> On 2024-04-03 06:05, Steve Hayes wrote:
>> A while back I was puzzled when a cousin of mine talked about "earls"
>> in an inappropriate context, and it took me a while to realise she was
>> treating "URL" as an acronym.
>>
>> I ran a poll on Twitter to see if anyone else did that, and 100% said
>> they pronounced URL as "you are ell".
>>
>> So I wonder if anyone else has ever heard the "earl" pronunciation, or
>> if it was just my cousin's idiolect.
>>
>> Another instance was a man I met who pronounced "UFOs" as "you foes".
>>
>> I'm running a poll in Twitter and Mastodon on that too, but I wonder
>> if anyone here has heard that pronounciation.
>
> For the linuxers out there, do you pronounce the file 'cshrc' as
> 'cashrock' or 'seashark'?

As someone who's only ever used cshrc on SunOS and Solaris, that's
a not-as-well-aimed-as-it-could-have-been question. There's more to
Unix than just Linux.

When I did have to refer to it (well over 30 years ago) I, and everyone
around me used the former, with both vowels schwaed into almost
nothingness. Anyone know any czechs, I guess they'd have a pretty good
grip on pronouncing such clusters.

I'm somewhat perturbed by the latter. You've broken it in a completely
illogical place. It's the csh's rc, not the c's shrc. Anyone pronouncing
it way I would consider some kind of poorly trained Microsoft spy.
How does Lennart Poettering pronounce it?

Phil
--
We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have
gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast
aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization.
-- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/

Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> writes:
> Steve Hayes:
>> A while back I was puzzled when a cousin of mine talked
>> about "earls" in an inappropriate context, and it took me
>> a while to realise she was treating "URL" as an acronym.
>
> And I am not puzzled, but outright annoyed by this
> malacroymisation. One of my ill-time favourites is
> pronouncing `SQL' as `sequel'. The sequel to what? SQL is
> no longer the Structured English QUEry Language.

But it is. It changed its acronym purely because of a trademark issue.
Just because you drop some vowels doesn't mean you need to radically
reform its pronunciation. The new pronunciation adds new vowels, there's
nothing intrinsically purer about it. It's a change for no good reason.

Phil
--
We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have
gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast
aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization.
-- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/

Phil Carmody to Anton Shepelev:

> > And I am not puzzled, but outright annoyed by this
> > malacroymisation. One of my ill-time favourites is
> > pronouncing `SQL' as `sequel'. The sequel to what? SQL
> > is no longer the Structured English QUEry Language.
>
> But it is. It changed its acronym purely because of a
> trademark issue.

Yes, and it changed the acroym to an abbreviation.

> Just because you drop some vowels doesn't mean you need to
> radically reform its pronunciation.

This is irrelevant: nobody dropped any vowels from a word,
but rather an adjective was removed from the term, making
the previous acronym unfit to describe it. Not to mention
that it was bad to begin with, for nobody remembers the
sequel to (or improvement over) what SQL is; they say
`sequel' merely because it is less effort on the tongue.
They are not referring to any sequel! Things should be
named according to what they are, rather than to what they
supercede (cf. `Paracelsus').

Whereas, SEQL is begging to be pronounced as `sequel', but
SQL does not.

> The new pronunciation adds new vowels, there's nothing
> intrinsically purer about it. It's a change for no good
> reason.

The reason is that words should be used according to their
meaning rather than sound. For example, `SMART' in `SMART
goals' is rightly pronounced as the word `smart', for they
are: Specific, Measurable, Quantiable, Assignable, and
Realistic. In short -- smart.

--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments