Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 4th Aug 2012 00:54 UTC
Google This tweet from Tom Warren made me smile. So, it's 2012 and tablets are finally able to do what the Amiga did in 1985. Seems like a bit of a stretch to be excited about that, right? Sure, until I caught myself getting excited - only a bit, but still - by this piece of news. Update: removed me being an annoyed child.
Thread beginning with comment 529616
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Random idea
by flake on Sat 4th Aug 2012 09:03 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Random idea"
flake
Member since:
2012-08-04

It's not a matter of reading comprehension when the material in question doesn't actually state its meaning. You only referred to a tweet obliquely, you didn't actually mention what the tweet was about.

I read that bit about the Amiga the same way. You can't expect everyone to click on every link you post. If people did that, anyone who visited Wikipedia would die of exhaustion after spending 5 days at their computers reading every article that branched off the first one.

When one writes as casually as you do (let's face it, your writing is a far cry from any sort of journalistic standard), their readers are bound to misinterpret something every now and then.

Reply Parent Score: 9

v RE[5]: Random idea
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 4th Aug 2012 09:34 in reply to "RE[4]: Random idea"
RE[6]: Random idea
by WereCatf on Sat 4th Aug 2012 10:34 in reply to "RE[5]: Random idea"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Reading the links is expected on OSNews. This isn't Engadget. When a link is in a story, it's part of the story. Don't complain if you don't understand what a story is about if you only read half of it. That's no my fault - it's yours. I'm not going to spell everything out.


Don't be so hostile, not everything is meant as an insult or an attack on you. The fact is that many people just look at the title and the intro and then proceed to follow the comments -- something that I do, too -- for various reasons, so it might behoove to keep that in mind in the future, aye? Instead of only looking at the article as a whole why not also look at just the title and the intro as a separate entity and check that it conveys enough information about what's going on.

I am not complaining, don't really know about the other commenters, but there's no need to get terribly worked over my comment. I am actually fairly certain I would've made the same mistake, something that one should just take as a learning experience and move on; mistakes and failures and the acceptance of those is the way we grow and improve ourselves.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[5]: Random idea
by WereCatf on Sat 4th Aug 2012 09:35 in reply to "RE[4]: Random idea"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

It's not a matter of reading comprehension when the material in question doesn't actually state its meaning. You only referred to a tweet obliquely, you didn't actually mention what the tweet was about.


I actually find myself agreeing; the title specifically talks about multi-user support and the small excerpt doesn't mention anything to the contrary, so I , too, thought he was talking about multi-user.

Reply Parent Score: 8