The Photoshop Family

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Sandman, Feb 12, 2014.

  1. Sandman

    Guest Guest

    Guest, Mar 8, 2014
    1. Advertisements

  2. Sandman

    Tony Cooper Guest

    The points in your post, except the subscription issue, were addressed
    in my first reply, and the subscription issue was then discussed when
    you said it was ignored.

    Line-by-line responses are not necessary when the subject is
    discussed. Everything that merited response was responded to.
    Tony Cooper, Mar 8, 2014
    1. Advertisements

  3. Sandman

    Tony Cooper Guest

    Of course "buy" implies ownership. Once again, wrong word.

    What you are talking about are the instances where we "buy" something
    but do not end up owning what we "buy". There are examples of this.

    "Implies", though, is a word that means "strongly suggests", and the
    appearance of "buy" most certainly strongly suggests that the result
    will be ownership.

    You are treating "implies" as if it means "always results in". It
    Tony Cooper, Mar 8, 2014
  4. Sandman

    PeterN Guest

    On 3/8/2014 4:49 AM, Savageduck wrote:

    The promotion date has been extended until March 31st.
    PeterN, Mar 8, 2014
  5. Sandman

    PeterN Guest

    Snipped again to change context.
    PeterN, Mar 8, 2014
  6. Sandman

    PeterN Guest

    Just where did I say I want "it" fixed.
    PeterN, Mar 8, 2014
  7. Sandman

    PeterN Guest

    PeterN, Mar 8, 2014
  8. Sandman

    Tony Cooper Guest

    I don't use words like "retard" to describe other or in
    life outside newsgroups. While I think you have a limited ability to
    process certain concepts, and an unlimited ability to run on at the
    mouth in defending your erroneous positions, I would not relate that
    to your general level of mental capacity.
    I've addressed your misuse of "imply" in another post. As you develop
    your position, I'm beginning to wonder if you actually understand what
    ownership is. Ownership includes the owning of rights.

    There are some things that you buy but don't take title to, some
    things that you buy but don't take physical possession of, and some
    things that you can own that are not tangible. Nonetheless, you can
    have ownership as a result of buying them.

    If you buy a ticket to a play, you do not own the play but you do own
    the right to be admitted to watch the play. If you buy an airplane
    ticket, you do not own the airplane, but you do own the right to board
    that airplane. If you buy a software license, you do not own the
    software, but you own the right to use that software.

    Rights can be limited. You can be refused admittance to the theater
    if you arrive drunk and disorderly, you can be refused at the gate if
    you try to board an airplane in the nude, and you can be refused if
    you try to install your software on a third machine when there's a
    limitation on the number of machines. Software often has a more
    extended set of limitations than other things, but you still own the
    right to use that software within those limitations.

    Going back to a point I originally introduced, there are people who
    "buy" Photoshop that do not realize that they have purchased a license
    to use the product, and that the license is a right to use the product
    and that right has limitations.

    The use of the word "buy" implied (strongly suggested) that their
    ownership would be outright and unlimited. That would be their fault
    for not reading the EULA, but these people exist. Still, they have
    ownership of the right to use the software if they adhere to the
    Tony Cooper, Mar 8, 2014
  9. Sandman

    Sandman Guest

    Me neither.
    Me neither. I think your inability to understand English and the use of
    words is just pride and stubborness, not actual ignorance. Which, of
    course, would be the perfect description of a troll - someone that argues
    for the sake of argument.
    There is no such misuse.
    Which would be a relevant reply if I had said anything contradictory to
    that, which of course I haven't. There are tons of things you can buy that
    won't transfer neither a product or "rights" to you. You can buy a hair
    cut, you don't "own" anything after that, nor do you have the right to
    anything. Most services work this way.
    And some things you buy can't be owned, nor do you own them. I.e. the word
    "buy" does not imply ownership in itself.
    But they still bought it, which was the original point. Drunk Dave tried to
    make a big thing out of nospam using the word "buy", and I have provided
    ample support for the fact that the word "buy" is 100% legitimate in the
    case of Photoshop.
    This has never been under discussion or contention. Whether there exists
    people that misunderstand what they actually bought is of no concern to
    Dave's original comment.
    Sandman, Mar 8, 2014
  10. Sandman

    Sandman Guest

    Only if you don't fully understand the word (ironic, isn't it?)
    Of course it doesn't. Of the two of us, I am the one most likely to now the
    meaning of words, Tony. I have no idea why you think to post a message here
    telling *me* what a word means?

    I mean, sure, there are tons of words I may be ignorant about and wrong
    about, but between you and me, there really is no area where you can tell
    me what a word means - that's something you've displayed over and over
    again. I've always attributed it to that clown dictionary of yours, but
    thepart where you went on and on about words being "accepted" really
    cememented your ignorance (or rather, as I've said before - your pride and
    stubbornness) on the matter of word definitions.
    Sandman, Mar 8, 2014
  11. Sandman

    Guest Guest


    you were complaining, and now you're denying it. stop lying.
    Guest, Mar 8, 2014
  12. Sandman

    Tony Cooper Guest

    Continuous misuse of a word that means "strongly suggest" when "buy"
    does strongly suggest ownership.
    Buy a haircut? That's not a usage I've ever seen before...or want to
    see again.

    And, services *do* work this way as far as providing rights. At least
    in the US; I dunno about Sweden. If you pay for a service, you have
    the right to expect that service to be provided in the manner in which
    a reasonable person would expect that service to be provided. Our
    courts will uphold that right. We can take a barber to court if the
    service isn't provided as a reasonable person would expect it to be.

    You whinge about being followed around, but one reason I follow your
    posts is to see what oddity of English usage you'll come up with next.
    Tony Cooper, Mar 8, 2014
  13. Sandman

    Tony Cooper Guest

    Tony Cooper, Mar 8, 2014
  14. Sandman

    Sandman Guest

    Your ignorance is of no importance.
    Sandman, Mar 8, 2014
  15. Sandman

    Sandman Guest

    Yeah, it's pretty funny how your pride won't allow you to admit to your
    Not sure if you thought you had a point here, or what?
    Sandman, Mar 8, 2014
  16. Sandman

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Eric Stevens, Mar 8, 2014
  17. Sandman

    Tony Cooper Guest

    C'mon...tell me seriously that "buy a haircut" is an idiomatic
    expression in English.

    I suspect that your use of that expression has something to do with
    the translation of some word in Swedish to the English "buy", but I
    assure you that the expression is not an expression in English.

    If Google Translate works correctly, what we would say would be få
    håret klippt in Swedish.
    Tony Cooper, Mar 8, 2014
  18. Sandman

    PeterN Guest

    There is an obvious distinction between "buy a haircut," and buy a cut hare.
    PeterN, Mar 8, 2014
  19. Sandman

    Sandman Guest

    I am not talking about an expression, Tony. I am talking about you
    purchasing a service. You got your hair cut and your car waxed, but you
    purchased a haircut and waxing of your car. When your wife goes through
    your reciept and asked "What did you buy for $29 last wednesday" you're not
    going to reply "NOTHING!!!! I GOT AN HAIRCUT!!!!! I CAN'T BUY AN HAIRCUT

    You got an haircut, which you bought, for money. You purchased the service.
    It's not a matter of what you actually call it - it's still a transaction
    where you bought something. The expression "I got an haircut" actually
    implies the exact opposite of a monetary transaction, so we really can't
    use expressions to deem the aptness of words related to transactions of

    This was yet another case of Tony trying his hardest to nitpick on the
    smaller details while trying his hardest to ignore the actual topic under
    Sandman, Mar 9, 2014
  20. Sandman

    Tony Cooper Guest

    I understand that. Still, the expression you used is neither
    idiomatic nor normal. We "get a haircut".

    There you go.
    That's your problem. You make mistakes in what we actually call
    things, but this isn't about what anything is called. We call it a
    haircut. Your mistake was in the verb, not the noun.
    You still don't understand what "implies" means. "Got" does not in
    any way imply "free". "I got a new book last week" does not indicate
    in any way whether I paid for the book or obtained it for free.

    And you have provided an example of you trying to weasel out of
    something instead of simply processing the information that you erred
    and filing it away so you won't do it again. All this above from you
    instead of the simple solution that an adult would adopt.
    Tony Cooper, Mar 9, 2014
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.