If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
Snit wrote:
On 6/3/18 7:59 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote: Snit wrote: On 6/2/18 1:31 PM, nospam wrote: In article , Snit wrote: I'll stick to the one 90% of the population uses. More programs available yep (no I won't say "apps", those are for phones), app is short for application, a term that dates back at least to the 80s, probably even earlier Right. It is the term Apple has used since AT LEAST the start of the Mac. Who cares!? We're talking about the *real* world! (Just kidding!) FWIW, I only first encountered the term for mobile devices, yes Apples'. OTOH, 'applet' was known (to me) well before that time. You only encountered it with mobile devices so you think that means the term was not used... and more than that want to restrict how others use the term! Why? https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/10/14/the-rise-of-the-app/ But, unlike smartphones and tablets, app isnıt new. According to the OED?s historical entry for the word, app as a shortening of application (as in application program) first found its way into print in the 1980s. Back then it was mainly a colloquial term used in computing circles: the OED?s early quotations for it come from such computing trade publications as Info World and Dr. Dobbıs Journal. It often appeared not by itself but as part of the phrase killer app, meaning a software application which makes a new computing platform desirable or necessary. Later, it became part of webapp, meaning an application made available as a website, but as a word used on its own it remained relatively uncommon. Good to see you found where "application" has been in use for quite some time in this context. Heck, if you go to 1984 with the Macintosh it was the primary term used. Since then it has been often shortened to just "app", much as "Macintosh" itself has been shortened to "Mac". Huh? The discussion was not about the term 'application', but about the term 'app'. IME, the term 'application' has been in use at least as "App" as an abbreviation for "application" goes back to at least 1981. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/app ----- First Known Use of APP 1981 ----- It would have been nice if this part gave a actual reference. Not that I doubt it, but without a reference, it's just a date. The word itself, with any meaning, has been around a LOT longer, tjough in recent years spiking in 1991 and 2003: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/app (See the "Trends of 'app'" section. " But *because* the word "has been around a LOT longer", we have no indication whether or not that spike is (only) for the computer-related meaning of the word or (also) for the *non* computer-related meanings (appendix, applied, appointed, apprentice, approved, etc. (appetizer (Merriam-Webster)). Anyway, considering what this (non-)discussion is about, it's funny to see that both your references *do* confirm *our* (Jimmy Wilkinson Knife's and my) POV! :-) : [Emphasis mine:] MW *especially* : an application designed for a mobile device (such as a smartphone) /MW CD An app is a computer program that is designed for use on a mobile digital device. .... App in British .... *esp* downloaded to a mobile device /CD (AFAIC,) EOD. |
Ads |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
On 6/3/18 12:00 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Snit wrote: On 6/3/18 7:59 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote: Snit wrote: On 6/2/18 1:31 PM, nospam wrote: In article , Snit wrote: I'll stick to the one 90% of the population uses. More programs available yep (no I won't say "apps", those are for phones), app is short for application, a term that dates back at least to the 80s, probably even earlier Right. It is the term Apple has used since AT LEAST the start of the Mac. Who cares!? We're talking about the *real* world! (Just kidding!) FWIW, I only first encountered the term for mobile devices, yes Apples'. OTOH, 'applet' was known (to me) well before that time. You only encountered it with mobile devices so you think that means the term was not used... and more than that want to restrict how others use the term! Why? https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/10/14/the-rise-of-the-app/ But, unlike smartphones and tablets, app isnÂıt new. According to the OED?s historical entry for the word, app as a shortening of application (as in application program) first found its way into print in the 1980s. Back then it was mainly a colloquial term used in computing circles: the OED?s early quotations for it come from such computing trade publications as Info World and Dr. DobbÂıs Journal. It often appeared not by itself but as part of the phrase killer app, meaning a software application which makes a new computing platform desirable or necessary. Later, it became part of webapp, meaning an application made available as a website, but as a word used on its own it remained relatively uncommon. Good to see you found where "application" has been in use for quite some time in this context. Heck, if you go to 1984 with the Macintosh it was the primary term used. Since then it has been often shortened to just "app", much as "Macintosh" itself has been shortened to "Mac". Huh? The discussion was not about the term 'application', but about the term 'app'. IME, the term 'application' has been in use at least as "App" as an abbreviation for "application" goes back to at least 1981. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/app ----- First Known Use of APP 1981 ----- It would have been nice if this part gave a actual reference. Not that I doubt it, but without a reference, it's just a date. Path: uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!news.glorb.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!bord er1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local 2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!n ot-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 09:52:50 -0500 Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy From: Marek Novotny Subject: Microsoft cuts another 1,850 jobs References: Organization: The Linux Foundation Reply-To: Marek Novotny Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 07:52:51 -0700 User-Agent: slrn/1.0.2 (Linux) Message-ID: Lines: 14 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-ef9AJGoFG6bDdCsEmS5Q1jSDGxwO6A3m9hMS9CahQM+H9z8F4m KhD+j00iLkGyBGQSKcVam2f1v4l4T!FMGMyWQ0sotmN85rh1WE KdgVey3AQSFCQtETSVzHDRjeK++prkdpLwH9nwwmt2mdAV8JO0 U+Z2c= X-Complaints-To: The word itself, with any meaning, has been around a LOT longer, tjough in recent years spiking in 1991 and 2003: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/app (See the "Trends of 'app'" section. " But *because* the word "has been around a LOT longer", we have no indication whether or not that spike is (only) for the computer-related meaning of the word or (also) for the *non* computer-related meanings (appendix, applied, appointed, apprentice, approved, etc. (appetizer (Merriam-Webster)). Anyway, considering what this (non-)discussion is about, it's funny to see that both your references *do* confirm *our* (Jimmy Wilkinson Knife's and my) POV! :-) : [Emphasis mine:] MW *especially* : an application designed for a mobile device (such as a smartphone) /MW CD An app is a computer program that is designed for use on a mobile digital device. .... App in British .... *esp* downloaded to a mobile device /CD (AFAIC,) EOD. Wow... this is how Thunderbird shows me your post. What a garbage program. Anyway, back on topic... I showed you that the word in this context goes back to at least 1981. It is not as though it is new. YOU might not have encountered it. Fine. Not sure what other point you are trying to make. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308 |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
In article
Frank Slootweg wrote: Snit wrote: On 6/3/18 7:59 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote: Snit wrote: On 6/2/18 1:31 PM, nospam wrote: In article , Snit wrote: I'll stick to the one 90% of the population uses. More programs available yep (no I won't say "apps", those are for phones), app is short for application, a term that dates back at least to the 80s, probably even earlier Right. It is the term Apple has used since AT LEAST the start of the Mac. Who cares!? We're talking about the *real* world! (Just kidding!) FWIW, I only first encountered the term for mobile devices, yes Apples'. OTOH, 'applet' was known (to me) well before that time. You only encountered it with mobile devices so you think that means the term was not used... and more than that want to restrict how others use the term! Why? https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/10/14/the-rise-of-the-app/ But, unlike smartphones and tablets, app isnıt new. According to the OED?s historical entry for the word, app as a shortening of application (as in application program) first found its way into print in the 1980s. Back then it was mainly a colloquial term used in computing circles: the OED?s early quotations for it come from such computing trade publications as Info World and Dr. Dobbıs Journal. It often appeared not by itself but as part of the phrase killer app, meaning a software application which makes a new computing platform desirable or necessary. Later, it became part of webapp, meaning an application made available as a website, but as a word used on its own it remained relatively uncommon. Good to see you found where "application" has been in use for quite some time in this context. Heck, if you go to 1984 with the Macintosh it was the primary term used. Since then it has been often shortened to just "app", much as "Macintosh" itself has been shortened to "Mac". Huh? The discussion was not about the term 'application', but about the term 'app'. IME, the term 'application' has been in use at least as "App" as an abbreviation for "application" goes back to at least 1981. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/app ----- First Known Use of APP 1981 ----- It would have been nice if this part gave a actual reference. Not that I doubt it, but without a reference, it's just a date. The word itself, with any meaning, has been around a LOT longer, tjough in recent years spiking in 1991 and 2003: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/app (See the "Trends of 'app'" section. " But *because* the word "has been around a LOT longer", we have no indication whether or not that spike is (only) for the computer-related meaning of the word or (also) for the *non* computer-related meanings (appendix, applied, appointed, apprentice, approved, etc. (appetizer (Merriam-Webster)). Anyway, considering what this (non-)discussion is about, it's funny to see that both your references *do* confirm *our* (Jimmy Wilkinson Knife's and my) POV! :-) : [Emphasis mine:] MW *especially* : an application designed for a mobile device (such as a smartphone) /MW CD An app is a computer program that is designed for use on a mobile digital device. ... App in British ... *esp* downloaded to a mobile device /CD (AFAIC,) EOD. |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
On 2018-06-03, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
Intel graphics is pretty horrid, but it seems to be catching up with discrete graphics cards which have pretty much stayed still for the last few years. Intel graphics is awful for gaming, especially on older and lower-end chips. However it is perfectly fine for most general internet activities such as reading emails, browsing web sites, watching facetube videos, etc. The target market for the Wow and similar computers is probably not much interested in games beyond Solitaire and Mahjong. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.) NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com Don't talk to cops! -- http://www.DontTalkToCops.com Badges don't grant extra rights -- http://www.CopBlock.org ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
In article
Roger Blake wrote: On 2018-06-03, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote: Intel graphics is pretty horrid, but it seems to be catching up with discrete graphics cards which have pretty much stayed still for the last few years. Intel graphics is awful for gaming, especially on older and lower-end chips. However it is perfectly fine for most general internet activities such as reading emails, browsing web sites, watching facetube videos, etc. The target market for the Wow and similar computers is probably not much interested in games beyond Solitaire and Mahjong. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.) NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com Don't talk to cops! -- http://www.DontTalkToCops.com Badges don't grant extra rights -- http://www.CopBlock.org ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Snit wrote: *plonk* |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
Ant wrote:
In alt.comp.os.windows-10 Snit wrote: *plonk* |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
nospam wrote:
In article , Snit wrote: *plonk* |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
Roger Blake wrote:
On 2018-06-02, Snit wrote: *plonk* |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
On Fri, 08 Jun 2018 07:20:41 -0500, chrisv
wrote: Frank Slootweg wrote: Snit wrote: *plonk* Soon, the only things that won't be "plonked" are your own posts. |
#131
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
SilverSlimer wrote:
chrisv wrote: Frank Slootweg wrote: Snit wrote: *plonk* Soon, the only things that won't be "plonked" are your own posts. Nah. Today's batch of plonkees were all from other newsgroups. I just felt like making the point that troll feeding is not advisable behavior. -- 'I have noted before how the herd sees me as a god.' - the "Snit" thing |
#132
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
In article
chrisv wrote: SilverSlimer wrote: chrisv wrote: Frank Slootweg wrote: Snit wrote: *plonk* Soon, the only things that won't be "plonked" are your own posts. Nah. Today's batch of plonkees were all from other newsgroups. I just felt like making the point that troll feeding is not advisable behavior. |
#133
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
On Fri, 08 Jun 2018 10:38:37 -0500, chrisv
wrote: -- 'I have noted before how the herd sees me as a god.' - the "Snit" thing Damn, our standards must have dropped to critical levels! |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
On 06/08/2018 12:03 PM, SilverSlimer wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jun 2018 10:38:37 -0500, chrisv wrote: -- 'I have noted before how the herd sees me as a god.' - the "Snit" thing Damn, our standards must have dropped to critical levels! Yep, its a bitch when you have to dig *up* to find the bottom. Rene |
#135
|
|||
|
|||
Consumers' privacy concerns not backed by their actions
On 6/8/18 10:03 AM, SilverSlimer wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jun 2018 10:38:37 -0500, chrisv wrote: -- 'I have noted before how the herd sees me as a god.' - the "Snit" thing Damn, our standards must have dropped to critical levels! Hey, Carroll still claims I am a Hollywood Hacker who can do things it took he and Sandman years to figure out, AND that I hacked his Gmail account in a way Google and "several federal agencies" could not (and cannot) stop. Yeah, pretty much a god. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|