I did accuse the OP of logical fallacy and he admitted such in his reply to me.
And yes, I have accused several people of using logical fallacies in their retorts. It is illogical to approve of a logical fallacy post. Hence my disapproval. If said persons created a retort that was not based on logical fallacy, I may have agreed with the post(s) in question.
Has it occurred to you, that the reason I have brought up logical fallacy, is because a lot of people are using it as the basis for their argument, and that is the reason for my reply? If that hasn't occurred to you, consider it, because that is why I do it.
There are several different kinds of logical fallacy arguments and many of them are regularly used on the forum.
And for those who don't really consider such when replying to a post, it may seem like I don't know the meaning of logical fallacy and just use it as some kind of feeble retort because I don't have anything else to retort with. Such is not the case.
Whether the OP, you or some others realize it, the OP is based on logical fallacy and he confirmed my post in his reply to me, even if he didn't realize it when he said, "No.."
If Steve were alive and in control of Apple today, he may or may not have the same product vision for thinness with the current models as he did previously. There is no way to say definitively. And there is no way to use said reasoning (in the declarative manner the OP did) as the basis for the argument that Apple is headed in the wrong direction. Such an argument, as foundationally solid as it may read to many here, is illogical; hence my post.