Good to know - of course I dont personally consider calling a CSR line anywhere near good faith"
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Law Enforcement Reportedly Looking Into Circumstances of Lost Next-Generation iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Good to know - of course I dont personally consider calling a CSR line anywhere near good faith"
I find it rather interesting that Nick Denton's Twitter page has been on fire with smug tweets about their iPhone "scoop" since Monday. That is, until yesterday. So far, no more iPhone article tweets since the news broke regarding the criminal investigation:
http://twitter.com/nicknotned
Apparently, the cat has Nick's tongue.
Mark
http://twitter.com/nicknotned
Apparently, the cat has Nick's tongue.
Mark
Apparently, the cat has Nick's tongue.
Mark
My guess is that Gawkers favorite lawyer (the ex barrister from the UK) has told Nick to keep things down, and that he is not helping things by flapping his lips.
Not particularly necessary to tell me what you're not a fan of, but good for you ("Oh dear"
You'll also probably know that world does not revolve around yourself, and numerous entertaining ranters are available.
Now-now, no need to patronise them, although if your lucky they might try to give you a beer
Patron is usually used as a person in support of an organisation, aka worker rather than a customer here in the UK. For a regular customer, the word client is used.
You should have a look through my post history then decide if I an Apple fan or not. I am merely showing patronage towards Apple.
No problem. I'm used to it. Unfortunately I've studied Latin at advanced level to be sad enough to be able to write an essay on the derivation of terms and relate it to languages.
From dictionary.com
That is the very first usage. Sorry the word doesn’t mean the same thing in the UK, but you must forgive us for using words from a US perspective when we are both from the US and this is a US based forum...
ETA: Just stating for the record - I am not trying to be condescending here...
They knew it was stolen. They knew the guy found it and didn't return it to the owner (and did not go through the right avenues to make a real attempt to) and therefore it was not his to sell. Doesn't matter if it was a real iPhone or not. They could have just liked the really pretty fake and thought it was a fake. Doesn't make it any less of buying stolen goods.
The only way they could claim they didn't know it was stolen is if the guy claimed he rightfully owned it (that he didn't find it, that he legally bought it or went through all the right avenues to make sure it was legally his) or that for some reason he represented Apple computers and was given the power to sell the iphone from Apple and they wanted to sell this iphone to them.
In which case, I doubt they'd pay 5k cause he wouldn't rightfully own a prototype iphone (the guy who lost it didn't "own" it either) or do you really think they'd pay 5k for a random iPhone fake that they actually believed/knew was a fake? That's really stretching it. And I think anyone with common sense would know Apple wouldn't be trying to sell them the prototype iPhone (or that it at least wouldn't just involve one random person claiming he represented them).
I honestly think some one had a good theory when they said the guy may not have even tried to return the phone but Gizmodo told him a cover story (including calling Apple Customer service to have a paper trail) so that they could pretend it was legal. I mean who would wait around at a bar for an hour for the owner to return but not answer the phone if it rang or at least mention to the barkeep (Hey, I found this phone, I'm going to hold on to it but if the owner calls, I have got it right here). If he truly was trying to find the owner, he would have at least told the bar that he had the phone, maybe left a number with them for the phone's owner to call him if he came back looking for the phone. I mean I can understand the arguement of not trusting the barkeep to not steal the phone, but people who want to return something who don't trust a retail person, will tell the retail person they have the item and usually leave contact info. I know, I work retail and see it all the time.
Coincidently, I live in the UK and had no problem figuring out the meaning of the word at all. "patron" does not mean "worker" in the UK either.
I've also never heard of a regular customer at a drinking hole being referred to as a client, unless the staff do "extras", perhaps...
I'm really not that interested myself, but good for you either way
I understand. It was my fault for not considering this.
Coincidently, I live in the UK and had no problem figuring out the meaning of the word at all. "patron" does not mean "worker" in the UK either.
I've also never heard of a regular customer at a drinking hole being referred to as a client, unless the staff do "extras", perhaps...
I'm really not that interested myself, but good for you either way
Trust me, you were absolutely correct, it does
It has been used many times. Perhaps not as a definitive term, but is counted in many other dictionaries, such as the Mirriam-Webster (iirc). I will check, for you, on Monday at the reference dictionaries. You might not have heard of it, but the word patron can mean worker. The OED says, as you quoted:
That would be what I am referring to. There have been cases where patron is an antonym of employee, but not in all cases - a patron (of a business) is usually referred to as the business owner/manager etc.
Patron, (deriv. patron -> pater) can be a protector. Generally, an employee can function as a protector [of a business].
I've found stuff before and always returned it. Any moron who tries to return what is quite obviously a prototype iPhone to Apple through their support lines is a complete dick. And then he goes on to sell it to Gizmodo for $5k.
Completely obvious he went the route that he knew for sure would not get any results just as a feeble attempt at covering his own back.
Lock the prick up.
Does nobody agree that a simple message to sjobs@apple.com just saying I've got your prototype would have been the most obvious way to get it back to the right hands?
Yeah I'll be buying the next iPhone anyway. Call me a fanboy, I probably am but that's my business thanks. I don't need leaks to know what I want.
Completely obvious he went the route that he knew for sure would not get any results just as a feeble attempt at covering his own back.
Lock the prick up.
Does nobody agree that a simple message to sjobs@apple.com just saying I've got your prototype would have been the most obvious way to get it back to the right hands?
Yeah I'll be buying the next iPhone anyway. Call me a fanboy, I probably am but that's my business thanks. I don't need leaks to know what I want.
Searching google, 99% of the mentions and definitions indicate that a patron is external to the party receiving the patronage. However, one definition is "the proprietor of an inn."
Personally, I've never heard it refer to anything other than a customer, but in the U.S. we don't have a lot of "inns."
Personally, I've never heard it refer to anything other than a customer, but in the U.S. we don't have a lot of "inns."
I see most useage around restaurants and such, so this is probably why I instantly thought worker.
In the U.S. restaurants will sometimes have a sign: "Thanks for your continued patronage" They aren't thanking the employees
OK, let me Merriam Webster that for you, nope, not in the space year 2010 anyway. You are the only person I have ever known to transpose that word, anywhere in the world.
You never know, there might be an older paper edition with a reference somewhere, but it all seem a bit tenuous at the moment.
Tony - Going 31 mph in a 30 mph zone is not a felony - it is not a misdemeanor - it is not even a criminal violation. At most, it is a traffic ticket - with revenue to the State - and a couple of points on your license.
What happened in this case is a FELONY. The people of the State of California have determined, through their legislature, that what happened is worthy of being punished by up to a year in jail.
So, your logic is completely flawed - GRAND LARCENY is NOT the same thing as a TRAFFIC VIOLATION.
OK, let me Merriam Webster that for you, nope, not in the space year 2010 anyway. You are the only person I have ever known to transpose that word, anywhere in the world.
You never know, there might be an older paper edition with a reference somewhere, but it all seem a bit tenuous at the moment.
Ok obviously not that one, but I will find out on Monday, since I don't live with dictionaries. I do trust my own eyes. As said previously, the term may be more prevalent with inns/restaurants etc. I trust you will endeavour to be patient, and that it won't be too arduous, to wait until Monday.
OK, let me Merriam Webster that for you, nope, not in the space year 2010 anyway. You are the only person I have ever known to transpose that word, anywhere in the world.
You never know, there might be an older paper edition with a reference somewhere, but it all seem a bit tenuous at the moment.
Well, all I know is that I've been trying to figure out how to spend my afternoon. I live a few miles from the biergarten where Gray lost the phone, so I think I'll head on up and see if an iPad generation 2 falls into my lap.
http://gizmodo.com/5523623/steve-wozniak-has-a-message-for-gray-powell
The OTHER Steve weighs in.
I thought of everyone here, with all the attitude about how Giz should be arrested for it's reporting.
And then I looked at this picture
And I laughed my @** off
sorry for the borderline troll, but at this point I don't care. . . .Woz is the man!
The OTHER Steve weighs in.
I thought of everyone here, with all the attitude about how Giz should be arrested for it's reporting.
And then I looked at this picture
And I laughed my @** off
sorry for the borderline troll, but at this point I don't care. . . .Woz is the man!
Which won't show a paradigm shift on the UKs usage of the word, but no probs, don't put yourself out on my account though.
Transposing the context of words in the English language is quite normal, not a big deal.
Your complete right, working at retail and working in a court room are the exact samething.
Person who 'found' the iPhone : I called Apple and tried to return it
DA : what did they say?
Person : Apple Customer support doesn't take in lost iPhone in order to return them to there proper owners.
DA : 'sign'
Gizmodo : We bought an iPhone that could have been a prototype model.
DA : Did you know it was stolen
Gizmodo : NO, we never asked.
in a nutshell the DA can't prove anything so they are out of luck. The police investigation is just formality but it won't lead to any real charges.
You just proved the DA's case. In California, it doesn't matter if Gizmodo "knew." It's enough that they SHOULD HAVE known. Willful ignorance is not a defense. And paying $5000 is incredibly strong evidence that they knew it was stolen.