But if you make it illegal for planes to fly on water, only illegal planes will fly on water!!
Possibly they are American. Cellphone doesn't cost anything, monthly data plan costs $300.
But then market economics isn't a great way to popularize these devices. The person who pays (passenger) is not the one who benefits (passenger in following years). Making the devices mandatory appears to be the only way.
Though the airline does say this particular aircraft had 4 independent ELT devices, of 2 different types each, at least one of which should have croaked.
No, these percentages are for native (aka first) language. Not directly related to the percentages of people who speak English.
Likely, you think that my question is a statement. It wasn't it was a question. You somehow seem obsessed with saying my question was a statement.
You admitted, nay boasted, in your last post, that your question was a statement. I am done with ping pong. If there is any other matter you want to discuss I would love to partake in it.
Certainly there is no correlation to the ongoing discussion about Apple and the nature of a downward slide postulated the the OP.
Downward slide could be of losses, profits, marketshare, negative marketshare, wavelength of dominant colour of product logo etc. Since it was unqualified, your statements about Apples finances were presumptuous in the context. That is all.
Firsty, asking a question and making the question a statement is a great technique
Yes, but then it makes it impossible to avail of the defence that the comment was only a question and not a statement. Which you tried to avail of, here : question I was asking which was what metrics was the OP using to make the determination that Apple is on a downhill slide.
Now you accept that you were not asking a question but making a statement, but in this post you were completely hiding behind the facade of your first post here that I replied to being a "question".
You can make a replacement post that does not harp on "question", and I will gladly consider it. But I refuse to play in this ping-pong between "it was just a question not a statement" and "nothing wrong in making a statement".
doesn't pertain to anything about the question I was asking which was what metrics was the OP using to make the determination
Ok, so you harp about your "question". I was not replying to your question. You said "When exactly do you expect Apple to suddenly go into the red?", which aside from being a question, is a statement that the commenter expects Apple to suddenly go into the red now or in the future. (Read this for how it is wrong). Followed by straight statements, undisguised as questions, like "People like to say Apple is declining, but there really isn't any financial indication this is so".
So your post to which I originally replied did not come across as a question at all and was full of statements made in the forms of explicit statements or questions.
In short, no, you cannot pretend you were asking a question.
What does arbitrarily multiplying things by -1 prove exactly?
Already explained. "Proof that unqualified downward slide need not mean financial woes, or any woes in general. "
Then the qualifier to your statement must be 'downward can never apply to all aspects (of Apple)?
First off this could be false and so your statement has a fallacy.
No. Profit and loss are definitely aspects of (slides of) Apple. If downward slide is of profits, it is by definition, an upward slide of losses. Losses could be negative in a particular instance, but unquestionably, slides of profits and losses must be in the opposite directions. Hence all aspects, which include both profit and loss, cannot have a downward slide. QED.
Second, my question never involved all aspects of Apple, but was a simply question of what metrics led the OP to make the statement Apple is on downhill slide.
I replied to your statements that the downward slide must mean financial woes as explained above - e.g. asking when the commenter expects Apple to post losses.
How more wide open can a question be than what metrics are you using to come to the conclusion you have stated?
If you actually just asked a question to the commenter, you would have let the question remain wide open, but you are not correct in retrospective conversion of your own post as a question.
But what is the point of arbitrarily multiplying marketshare by -1 and then saying Android is declining in negative marketshare?
1. It is true.
2. Proof that unqualified downward slide need not mean financial woes, or any woes in general. Remember you were asking people for evidence of Apple's financial woes when they said Apple was on a downward slide?
I could arbitrarily multiply Apple marketshare by Pi and Android marketshare by Pi and say Android's share of the Pi x Marketplace is bigger than Apples.
That also would say nothing about anything.
Yes, you being stupid, would do this even if it proved nothing. My multiplication by -1 proved a point, as I demonstrated above.
You say downward slide can never apply to all aspects?
Aspects of what?
Downward slide of what? Answer to this question of mine is the same as the answer to your above quoted question of yours.
Remember this all started with my asking a simple question in response the person who posted that apple was on a downward slide. ( a wide open general statement)
A wide open general statement which you interpreted in a narrow sense so asked evidence of Apple's financial problems, now or in near future. How about letting it remain wide open general ?
Marketshare is never negative. But everyone has a marketshare, which can be multiplied by -1 to yield negative marketshare. What is so hard about it?
Multiplication by -1 is under the usual principle of multiplication. Consult 6th standard mathematics book for details.
No one has a marketshare that is negative. But everyone has a negative marketshare, which is their marketshare multiplied by -1.
If marketshare is 30%, negative marketshare is -30%.
I've been using this term from my first reply to you.
It means the downward slide applies to at least one aspect.
Downward slide can never apply to all aspects - e.g. when it applies to marketshare, it does NOT apply to negative marketshare. So the only reasonable conclusion is that a downward slide, unqualified, applies to at least one aspect.
It's not a handheld device then. But DIY and open source community has always been ahead in versatility department. You being a developer have a choice of installing Ubuntu on your tablet. General public will get the choice in a decade or 3. Nothing surprising.
If it is "all over the forums", you can find specific instances where someone talked about Apple's financial woes and direct your rant there. Here, someone said Apple is declining, and that is correct w.r.t. marketshare. Android is declining w.r.t. negative marketshare.
Who said anything about changing the angle? The angle matters, not change in angle , nor any derivative of angle w.r.t. time.