We all knew this one was inevitable when the latest iPhone commercial
rolled out -- now didn't we?
"Oh joy! I can't wait for the next ground delay or long taxi due to
weather somewhere to get a smart ass with a freakin I-phone shoving it
in my face saying "It's NOT raining there... SEE !" Too late ... already
happened to me. We push back, get advised of a ground stop in MEM due
to storms in the area. Go to the penalty box and wait. My Captain does
the lecture over the PA... not one minute later, we get dinged from the
F/A "Some guy with an IPhone says the weather is good, and wants to know
what the real reason is for the delay. Is something wrong with the plane?"
I want to tell this clown what he can do with his IdiotPhone - but
the Captain does it even better. He gets on the PA and makes the
following announcement :
"If the passenger with the IPhone would be kind enough to use it to
check the weather at our alternate, calculate our fuel burn due to being
rerouted around the storms, call the dispatcher to arrange our release,
and then make a phone call to the nearest Air Traffic Control center to
arrange our timely departure amongst the other aircraft carrying
passengers with IPhones, then we will be more than happy to depart.
Please ring your call button to advise the Flight Attendant and your
fellow passengers when you deem it ready and responsible for this
multi-million dollar aircraft and its passengers to safely leave."
Needless to say, the pax was pretty embarrassed. The F/A later told
us the rest of the plane was outright laughing at this dude. What a clown."
You'll note, you total MORON, that this is not evidence against iPhone
in even the SMALLEST manner, but a demonstration of how people with
very, very little knowledge can behave like FOOLS.
Like you just did.
In article <pcKdnQ9gGMvnD9ranZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@speakeasy.net> , News
<News@Groups.com> wrote:
> We all knew this one was inevitable when the latest iPhone commercial
> rolled out -- now didn't we?
>
> "Oh joy! I can't wait for the next ground delay or long taxi due to
> weather somewhere to get a smart ass with a freakin I-phone shoving it
> in my face saying "It's NOT raining there... SEE !" Too late ... already
> happened to me. We push back, get advised of a ground stop in MEM due
> to storms in the area. Go to the penalty box and wait. My Captain does
> the lecture over the PA... not one minute later, we get dinged from the
> F/A "Some guy with an IPhone says the weather is good, and wants to know
> what the real reason is for the delay. Is something wrong with the plane?"
>
> I want to tell this clown what he can do with his IdiotPhone - but
> the Captain does it even better. He gets on the PA and makes the
> following announcement :
>
> "If the passenger with the IPhone would be kind enough to use it to
> check the weather at our alternate, calculate our fuel burn due to being
> rerouted around the storms, call the dispatcher to arrange our release,
> and then make a phone call to the nearest Air Traffic Control center to
> arrange our timely departure amongst the other aircraft carrying
> passengers with IPhones, then we will be more than happy to depart.
> Please ring your call button to advise the Flight Attendant and your
> fellow passengers when you deem it ready and responsible for this
> multi-million dollar aircraft and its passengers to safely leave."
>
> Needless to say, the pax was pretty embarrassed. The F/A later told
> us the rest of the plane was outright laughing at this dude. What a clown."
Clarification for you, moron: early iPhone adopter morons.
Mitch wrote:
> You'll note, you total MORON, that this is not evidence against iPhone
> in even the SMALLEST manner, but a demonstration of how people with
> very, very little knowledge can behave like FOOLS.
>
> Like you just did.
>
>
>
> In article <pcKdnQ9gGMvnD9ranZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@speakeasy.net> , News
> <News@Groups.com> wrote:
>
>
>>We all knew this one was inevitable when the latest iPhone commercial
>>rolled out -- now didn't we?
>>
>> "Oh joy! I can't wait for the next ground delay or long taxi due to
>>weather somewhere to get a smart ass with a freakin I-phone shoving it
>>in my face saying "It's NOT raining there... SEE !"
In article <XeGdnT7N0oQDgs_anZ2dnUVZ_qrinZ2d@speakeasy.net> , News
<News@Groups.com> wrote:
> Clarification for you, moron: early iPhone adopter morons.
>
>
>
> Mitch wrote:
> > You'll note, you total MORON, that this is not evidence against iPhone
> > in even the SMALLEST manner, but a demonstration of how people with
> > very, very little knowledge can behave like FOOLS.
> >
> > Like you just did.
> >
> >
> >
> > In article <pcKdnQ9gGMvnD9ranZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@speakeasy.net> , News
> > <News@Groups.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>We all knew this one was inevitable when the latest iPhone commercial
> >>rolled out -- now didn't we?
> >>
> >> "Oh joy! I can't wait for the next ground delay or long taxi due to
> >>weather somewhere to get a smart ass with a freakin I-phone shoving it
> >>in my face saying "It's NOT raining there... SEE !"
Okay; so help me out.
How does the incident show something about iPhones, something about
'early adopters,' or something about 'early iPhone adopters?'
It seems to show that people who saw that commercial felt that it
showed how pilots just need to check a weather report to start flying.
It wasn't about the device in the commercial, wasn't about how pilots
needed passengers to get information from them, and wasn't about how
little information an airline needs to start out -- but that's what the
person in the story got from it.
People can be foolish. It doesn't mean the devices they own are bad.
Mitch wrote:
> In article <XeGdnT7N0oQDgs_anZ2dnUVZ_qrinZ2d@speakeasy.net> , News
> <News@Groups.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Clarification for you, moron: early iPhone adopter morons.
>>
>>
>>
>>Mitch wrote:
>>
>>>You'll note, you total MORON, that this is not evidence against iPhone
>>>in even the SMALLEST manner, but a demonstration of how people with
>>>very, very little knowledge can behave like FOOLS.
>>>
>>>Like you just did.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>In article <pcKdnQ9gGMvnD9ranZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@speakeasy.net> , News
>>><News@Groups.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>We all knew this one was inevitable when the latest iPhone commercial
>>>>rolled out -- now didn't we?
>>>>
>>>> "Oh joy! I can't wait for the next ground delay or long taxi due to
>>>>weather somewhere to get a smart ass with a freakin I-phone shoving it
>>>>in my face saying "It's NOT raining there... SEE !"
>
>
>
> Okay; so help me out.
> How does the incident show something about iPhones, something about
> 'early adopters,' or something about 'early iPhone adopters?'
For starters:
NOAA and FAA weather radar maps have long been available on handhelds.
FAA ground stop and ground delay programs are independent of "weather".
Early adopter is obvious. Early iTrash adopter is obvious.
Not until the iTrash iPhone was this an issue, suggesting it was either
the iTrash commercial or the clueless early adopter iTrash passenger's
behavior, or both.
Clueless because the passenger is ignorant of factors other than
"weather at destination" that affect flight dispatch, ATC clearance and
Captain's authority and responsibility for the safe operation of the
aircraft.
The clueless early iTrash adopter was very lucky a Federal charge of
interfering with a flight crew was not lodged.
In article <usGdnUgQ1-rsWMHanZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@speakeasy.net>, News
<News@Groups.com> wrote:
> > Okay; so help me out.
> > How does the incident show something about iPhones, something about
> > 'early adopters,' or something about 'early iPhone adopters?'
>
> For starters:
>
> NOAA and FAA weather radar maps have long been available on handhelds.
>
> FAA ground stop and ground delay programs are independent of "weather".
Right -- but none of those are affected by iPhone.
Consumer behavior _is_ affected by commercials.
> Early adopter is obvious. Early iTrash adopter is obvious.
NO IT IS NOT!
I know why you are writing it; you want to say something against iPhone.
I know why you think it is relevant; the commercial cited was an iPhone
commercial.
But the commercial isn't about early adopters.
The incident isn't about early adopters.
The incident had nothing to do with being an early adopter.
> Not until the iTrash iPhone was this an issue, suggesting it was either
> the iTrash commercial or the clueless early adopter iTrash passenger's
> behavior, or both.
You don't know it wasn't an issue before this, and in fact I have been
told several similar incidents by pilots before iPhone came out. This
was made a story because of the commercial, not because no passenger
had ever challenged the airline's decisions before now!
In other words, the incident is infamous because of the commercial. The
incident probably happened because of the commercial. But it could have
happened for ANY device, and the iPhone (much less how long they owned
the device!) is not relevant to it.
> Clueless because the passenger is ignorant of factors other than
> "weather at destination" that affect flight dispatch, ATC clearance and
> Captain's authority and responsibility for the safe operation of the
> aircraft.
RIGHT! (Notice nothing there about cell phones, early adopters of tech,
or Apple products.)
> The clueless early iTrash adopter was very lucky a Federal charge of
> interfering with a flight crew was not lodged.
Uh... he didn't interfere if he didn't prevent them from doing their
jobs. A stupid question doesn't have to be answered; it was just funny.
We note that you insist on making yourself look stupid with 'iTrash.'
Mitch wrote:
> In article <usGdnUgQ1-rsWMHanZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@speakeasy.net>, News
> <News@Groups.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>Okay; so help me out.
>>>How does the incident show something about iPhones, something about
>>>'early adopters,' or something about 'early iPhone adopters?'
>>
>>For starters:
>>
>>NOAA and FAA weather radar maps have long been available on handhelds.
>>
>>FAA ground stop and ground delay programs are independent of "weather".
>
>
> Right -- but none of those are affected by iPhone.
> Consumer behavior _is_ affected by commercials.
>
>
>>Early adopter is obvious. Early iTrash adopter is obvious.
>
> NO IT IS NOT!
> I know why you are writing it; you want to say something against iPhone.
> I know why you think it is relevant; the commercial cited was an iPhone
> commercial.
> But the commercial isn't about early adopters.
> The incident isn't about early adopters.
> The incident had nothing to do with being an early adopter.
>
>
>>Not until the iTrash iPhone was this an issue, suggesting it was either
>>the iTrash commercial or the clueless early adopter iTrash passenger's
>>behavior, or both.
>
> You don't know it wasn't an issue before this, and in fact I have been
> told several similar incidents by pilots before iPhone came out. This
> was made a story because of the commercial, not because no passenger
> had ever challenged the airline's decisions before now!
> In other words, the incident is infamous because of the commercial. The
> incident probably happened because of the commercial. But it could have
> happened for ANY device, and the iPhone (much less how long they owned
> the device!) is not relevant to it.
>
>
>>Clueless because the passenger is ignorant of factors other than
>>"weather at destination" that affect flight dispatch, ATC clearance and
>>Captain's authority and responsibility for the safe operation of the
>>aircraft.
>
> RIGHT! (Notice nothing there about cell phones, early adopters of tech,
> or Apple products.)
>
>
>>The clueless early iTrash adopter was very lucky a Federal charge of
>>interfering with a flight crew was not lodged.
>
> Uh... he didn't interfere if he didn't prevent them from doing their
> jobs. A stupid question doesn't have to be answered; it was just funny.
>
> We note that you insist on making yourself look stupid with 'iTrash.'
And you are, of course, free to behave like an iTrash fashion victim and
acolyte that persists in looking the other way at bad behavior on the part
of your partisans.
IdiotPhone Phollies "What a clown"
Linear Mode
