|
|
Posted by Jay G. on 06/08/06 17:24
On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 02:33:32 GMT, Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Jun 2006 06:19:33 -0500, "Jay G." <Jay@tmbg.org> Gave us:
>
>>On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 05:39:06 GMT, Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
>>>
>>> It was NOT a competitor to std DVD... it was an
>>> attempt at competing with std DVD.
>>
>>I *love* this quote. "It's not a competitor, it was just competing with
>>it."
>
> That's not what I wrote, you illiterate twit. What part of the word
> "attempting" do you not understand?
Well, technically, you wrote "attempt," but aside from that, I don't think
there's any difference between "attempt at competing" and "competing" in
regards to a competition. Unless DIVX stayed theoretical and never entered
the market, it was obviously a competitor.
> Stop quoting out of context, dipshit.
Okay, here's your whole quote:
> They would have turned no matter. It was bound to flop... the very
> day it came out. It was NOT a competitor to std DVD... it was an
> attempt at competing with std DVD. That's all it ever was too.
Here, I'll even *add* context to it:
> {Disney and Fox] would have turned [to DVD] no matter. [DIVX] was bound to
> flop... the very day it came out. It was NOT a competitor to std DVD...
> it was an attempt at competing with std DVD. That's all it ever was too.
Aside from the poor grammar, what do the additional sentences you wrote add
to the statement I quoted "out of context"?
-Jay
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|