Except for by you it seems.

My point is that context matters. You picking a specific one in your "experiment" only demonstrates it. Pick a different context and there would be different results. That would also demonstrate my point. Between the two they prove my point.

They are single word sentences in a context of name calling. If instead a woman had said to her partner "Mmmm... I like it when you lick my cunt." there would have been no insult, no offence, and no reason not to use the word cunt.

You're proving yourself to be a moron. But then you'd already given that impression with the whole avoiding swear words and substituting a punctuation for letters thing.

Absolute nonsense. The real world has a multiplicity of possible contexts. You presented one very specific one.

The fact that you don't see how you are wrong doesn't make you right. What I said from the start was 100% correct. I've explained why 3 times now. And another poster has done too.

Note I'm being insulting without using swear words. Equally I could be non-insulting whilst using them. Another nice illustration of my point that it's not the individual words that matter but the meaning conveyed in a specific context.

Most clickable things on the web don't have boxes to make them look like physical buttons. No one has a problem with that. The only reason you think you need them in native apps is because you're used to them.

Are you determined to look like you haven't a clue yourself? Ives is probably the worlds foremost product designer, or certainly in the top 10. Who are you? What's your design claim to fame?

It's not just your Mac that's past it's sell-by date. It's your opinions. You're one of these people that will always be a reactionary against change. Not because it's bad but because you don't like the unfamiliar.

You haven't actually seen the screen yet have you.

It wasn't possible to appreciate the difference when MacBooks went Retina without actually seeing them. And it's just as impossible to do so now with the Retina iMac.

What's certainly true is it will be far better than the setup you describe as having at the moment. You just don't realise it.

Whether the difference is worth the money is a subjective choice for each person. There's no way of making an objective claim that it's a waste of money.

Your lashed together script that operates git is neither here nor there. If it uses git is does not automatically resolve conflicts, and it is not suitable for end users. So it's not solving the hard problems at all. That you have the gall to criticise Apple's real "iCloud" solution on the basis of this is laughable.

You don't even understand the problem of data sync.

Anyhow, this is pointless. You've moved beyond simple ignorance of proper data sync to empty insults. End of discussion.

Once again, you did not. You provided very specific context for the words. If that's your idea of an experiment, your scientific method is as flawed as as your grasp of linguistics.

The other posters point that in your scenario they were single sentence words is also true. Another fault with your experiment.

The point that it's the context that words are said in rather than the individual words that are offensive is absolutely true. If you make a list of sayable words and unsayable words, that's the action of a simpleton.

The acknowledgement of the part you said is in the word "correct". What you haven't realised is the difficult part is automatically resolving sync conflicts.

I didn't say it was new, I said it was hard. And it is.

It's never solved. This isn't a one solution fits all problem. Every scenario has it's own set of issues and solutions.

No it's not. That was a part of iCloud from the start. What's been introduced this time is hand off. Which is the notification from one machine to another that a task is in process, without having to explicitly load it on the second machine.

The word cloud wasn't used for this stuff when I was first working on it. Of course it was at the time iCloud was introduced. But I've been using the phrase data sync here, not cloud. So your accusation is even less grounded in rational thinking than the rest of what you say.

Since the 70s? No. In the 1970s, everything was working on client server model. Data sync started being a thing in the 1980s. But I wasn't involved till the late 90s.

The claim I responded to was that the Galaxy Note 4 was eclipsing the iPhone. You can't claim it's unfair to point out the facts that disprove it.

The whole idea of a hybrid device is a nonstarter. It's failed over and over again for Microsoft, so why would anyone want to repeat that mistake?

If someone want's an ultraportable OSX class device they already have it in the Macbook Air. And as you say, if they want an iOS device with hardware keyboard, that's already provided for by bluetooth keyboards. Some providing clever case/stand solutions.

A hybrid will only ever be the worst of both, not the best of both.

How is a device that most people have never heard of "eclipsing" the iPhone. It's certainly not outselling it.

Take a look at Samsung's sales figures and profits. They're both tanking. I'm not saying that's a result of the iPhone 6 though, they'd already started doing that before the iPhone 6 launch.

iOS was not a development of the iPod firmware. That was an embedded OS called Pixo. iOS is Unix.

After the iPhone Apple released an iPhone-with-the-phone, and called it the iPod touch. But that wasn't simply a music player.

No they are not. In the case of Mail, there's not even a theme in common. Yosemite Mail is photorealistic a stamp at a jaunty angle. In iOS it's a symbolic outline of an envelop in a rounded square.

Notes has the same theme of a notebook with a yellow binding and feint lines. But it's presentation is totally different in the two icons.

Don't know what you are looking at, but you've made a big mistake.

You can get the various open source services. But OSX Server installs them all correctly for OSX, out of the box, and gets you a powerful app to manage them all.

Doing this yourself for every package, and getting them to work via the command line in order to save $20 would be stupid.

In the hypothetical situation that you needed to do something that the app didn't allow for, you've still got the option to drop down to the CLI and scripts. Buying OSX server doesn't take that away.