Currently Being ModeratedAug 27, 2013 1:38 PM (in response to KiltedTim)
Of course I do, but since the context you're choosing to focus on is not the one I came to comment on but an attempt at a distraction from the actual point I'm making, I'm choosing to ignore it, exactly as you're doing with mine.
Currently Being ModeratedAug 27, 2013 1:43 PM (in response to Eduardo Gutierrez De O.)
And he sucessfully evades the issue yet again...
If you're under the impression that I meant you could physically damage the phone by attempting to sync it with more than one iTunes library, you're daft... It's clear to anyone with half a brain that that's not what was meant.
If you're trying to say something else, then please explain your logic, because that's the ONLY context I can see in which a thinking person could be making the statements you are.
Currently Being ModeratedAug 27, 2013 1:55 PM (in response to Eduardo Gutierrez De O.)
Eduardo Gutierrez De O. wrote:
My experience in the forums doesn't reflect my experience in real life, nor the years I have in my back providing support for macs or in general.
On the internet, anyone can claim to be an expert. Or a dog.
Currently Being ModeratedAug 27, 2013 1:55 PM (in response to KiltedTim)
I'm not evading, Tim. I'm quoting you.
You wrote this:
That's a good way to really screw up your phone...
And then you wrote this:
Why don't you give the good people here your address so that they can come and thank you personally when they screw up their phones following your advice?
(I urge you to note the tone of the second response, since you seem to take badly to be replied in kind)
Now. There's no way to screw up our phone by unlocking the screen while it's syncing and restaring iTunes (the steps mentioned by Geoff).
There's no issue to be evaded. All the time I've been saying the same thing: Your statements are factually incorrect and your passive aggressive warning along with the tone of your response are what prompted me to correct you.
If the issue, to you, is not that you're wrong then it's not my issue, as that's the only thing I came to clarify. I'll do it once more:
KiltedTim: You are WRONG in your assertion that an iPhone could be "screwed up" in any way, shape or form, be it physically or logically, in config or set-up, by following Geoff's instructions above.
Your way of propagating this bit of error uses a veiled warning, trying to sound like sage advice coming from someone that knows better; but the fact of the matter is that it's wrong advice, regardless of whether you know or acknowledge it. Obviously getting riled up because you're corrected in the same arrogant tone you used to dismiss someone that was in the right is irrelevant to that.
You may insist I'm evading the issue. In reality I have no interest in moving away from the only subject I came here to clarify, although I'll happily keep replying to you if you wish me to. I'll keep repeating myself, though.
Currently Being ModeratedAug 27, 2013 1:59 PM (in response to Eduardo Gutierrez De O.)
Look... Apple says not to do that. You can "screw up" your data, by trying to finagle your way around the way it's designed to work. Stating that you can't is stupid and irresponsible.
Repeat yourself all you want. It won't alter reality.
Currently Being ModeratedAug 27, 2013 2:01 PM (in response to Meg St._Clair)
Ah, good phrase. But I didn't claim any expertise.
I just pointed that points and posts in this forum don't reflect my knowledge. Something that is unarguably correct. You may choose to trust more someone with thousands of posts instead of someone who doesn't. I wouldn't blame you for it, as long as it's clear you're not choosing an actual way of measuring knowledge but, as should be obvious, an indicator of activity.
Not that I expect to be trusted more by you or Tim. My post didn't presume as much. I wrote it there, as the original message is, to clarify random users looking for an answer, not to trust voodo phrases that propagate unnecessary distrust on the platform.
Currently Being ModeratedAug 27, 2013 2:09 PM (in response to Eduardo Gutierrez De O.)
Eduardo Gutierrez De O. wrote:
I wouldn't blame you for it, as long as it's clear you're not choosing an actual way of measuring knowledge but, as should be obvious, an indicator of activity.
Apparently, you don't understand how points are earned on this forum. They are not earned for activity. They are awarded by the original poster in a thread who feels that a person (very often Tim, only once, you) has solved their problem. So yes, they are the best way we have of measuring expertise in this context.
Currently Being ModeratedAug 27, 2013 2:14 PM (in response to Meg St._Clair)
Apparently, you don't understand how points are earned on this forum.
Apparently you're too eager to find flaws in what I write to see that "activity" doesn't mean visiting the forums a lot, but participating in a useful matter, in this context.
I was not disparaging Tim nor "indicator of activity" is supposed to be a bad thing. On the contrary: As I said I consider it a valid measure of confidence and trust. My comment was not about people with points and posts but the prejudice against those that don't have them because they haven't chosen to participate more actively in these forums.
So yes, you can measure activity (positive activity, if you prefer and feel more comfortable putting it this way) on users with many points but you cannot do the opposite and judge users by their lack of points.
I hope this was clearer. I'll be happy to keep explaining if necessary. I came here to correct a single incorrect point (and in part I did so because of the arrogant way it had been made in, also the reason I chose to take the same tone and attitude to begin with). I haven't disparaged Tim, nor mentioned if he's usually wrong otherwise (I don't think so nor have I said so). I also haven't complained or said anything negative about the points karma. Only, to you, pointed out that lacking said karma is not an indication of anything other than lack of activity and that having said karma is an indicator of lots of activity (again, "positive of activity", if it's easier to understand).
Currently Being ModeratedAug 27, 2013 2:18 PM (in response to KiltedTim)
Yes. Apple used to advise against messing with the sync process. Since iOS 5 they have especifically coded the sync process to both run in the background (you can unlock and use your phone normally while it's syncing) and to stop gracefully if you quit iTunes while in the middle of it.
Since Geoff's suggestion wasn't to force-quit iTunes, to unplug a wired sync, to hard-reset the phone while mid-sync or any of the other ill-advised ways of stopping a sync, I corrected the error in calling him out.
He's right in that his instructions cause no harm (although I don't know if he's right in those instructions being an actual solution, which is why I'm not defending them as such).
As you say, reality is what it is.