On 2024-04-03 06:05, Steve Hayes wrote:
> A while back I was puzzled when a cousin of mine talked about "earls"
> in an inappropriate context, and it took me a while to realise she was
> treating "URL" as an acronym.
>
> I ran a poll on Twitter to see if anyone else did that, and 100% said
> they pronounced URL as "you are ell".
>
> So I wonder if anyone else has ever heard the "earl" pronunciation, or
> if it was just my cousin's idiolect.

I've heard it but not often.

> Another instance was a man I met who pronounced "UFOs" as "you foes".
>
> I'm running a poll in Twitter and Mastodon on that too, but I wonder
> if anyone here has heard that pronounciation.

Same.

--
"Is the epididymis like the urethra?"
"No. There's a vas deferens between them."

On 2024-04-03 06:05, Steve Hayes wrote:
> A while back I was puzzled when a cousin of mine talked about "earls"
> in an inappropriate context, and it took me a while to realise she was
> treating "URL" as an acronym.
>
> I ran a poll on Twitter to see if anyone else did that, and 100% said
> they pronounced URL as "you are ell".
>
> So I wonder if anyone else has ever heard the "earl" pronunciation, or
> if it was just my cousin's idiolect.
>
> Another instance was a man I met who pronounced "UFOs" as "you foes".
>
> I'm running a poll in Twitter and Mastodon on that too, but I wonder
> if anyone here has heard that pronounciation.

For the linuxers out there, do you pronounce the file 'cshrc' as
'cashrock' or 'seashark'?

--
Dogs actually won the space race.

On 2024-04-03 09:42, Sn!pe wrote:
> HVS <office@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>> So I wonder if anyone else has ever heard the "earl"
>>> pronunciation, or if it was just my cousin's idiolect.
>>
>> The "earl" pronunciation is what I defaulted to when I first saw it,
>> and it was quite a while -- probably a year or more -- before I heard
>> it spoken and discovered that "you are ell" was the accepted
>> pronunciation.
>
> Similarly, in my mind's ear, "http://www" is pronounced "hattipoo wow".

I seldom see it, as I have 'https only' set.

I guess that's more like 'hatapiss bang"

--
Unix is user friendly. It's just very particular who its friends are.

On 04/04/24 10:57, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> On 03-Apr-24 23:30, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> On 04/04/24 02:39, David LaRue wrote:
>>
>>> FWIW, I've been a software engineer since before email was
>>> standardized and a little before people knew of ARPAnet as the
>>> Internet. I've never used or trusted anything from a soial
>>> media source.
>>
>> There are plenty of people who believe that social media are the
>> entire content of the Internet.
>>
>> Yesterday I was trying to tell my wife the difference between the
>> Internet and the world-wide web. I must have done a bad job,
>> because she still can't see the difference.
>>
>> There are also people who try to use their phone as a computer.
>> Well, technically it is one, but who can take seriously a device
>> with such a tiny screen and a two-thumb keyboard?
>>
> You and I must be wrong.
>
> In order to contact the local Surgery I can now no longer use their
> website. I now have to use 'the App' - available only in iOS &
> Android flavours so I can't use this PC, with its proper keyboard &
> 25 inch display, I must squint at the tiny display on my phone &
> attempt that pretence of a keyboard it offers.
>
> At least I have a 'smart' phone. My wife clings on to her dumb
> phone, and cannot see why she should be forced to change to suit a
> strange fashion.

I am very much in sympathy with your wife.

My own wife has succumbed to the pressure to put her driver's licence on
her phone. Now, any time she has to produce identification, ten minutes
are wasted while she's trying to work out where it is on her phone.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

> On 2024-04-03 06:05, Steve Hayes wrote:
> > A while back I was puzzled when a cousin of mine talked about "earls"
> > in an inappropriate context, and it took me a while to realise she was
> > treating "URL" as an acronym.
> >
> > I ran a poll on Twitter to see if anyone else did that, and 100% said
> > they pronounced URL as "you are ell".
> >
> > So I wonder if anyone else has ever heard the "earl" pronunciation, or
> > if it was just my cousin's idiolect.
> >
> > Another instance was a man I met who pronounced "UFOs" as "you foes".
> >
> > I'm running a poll in Twitter and Mastodon on that too, but I wonder
> > if anyone here has heard that pronounciation.
>
> For the linuxers out there, do you pronounce the file 'cshrc' as
> 'cashrock' or 'seashark'?

Then, of course, there's fsck...

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator

My pet rock Gordon just is.

On 2024-04-04 01:40:56 +0000, Peter Moylan said:

> On 04/04/24 10:57, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> On 03-Apr-24 23:30, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>> On 04/04/24 02:39, David LaRue wrote:
>>>
>>>> FWIW, I've been a software engineer since before email was
>>>> standardized and a little before people knew of ARPAnet as the
>>>> Internet. I've never used or trusted anything from a soial
>>>> media source.
>>>
>>> There are plenty of people who believe that social media are the
>>> entire content of the Internet.
>>>
>>> Yesterday I was trying to tell my wife the difference between the
>>> Internet and the world-wide web. I must have done a bad job,
>>> because she still can't see the difference.
>>>
>>> There are also people who try to use their phone as a computer.
>>> Well, technically it is one, but who can take seriously a device
>>> with such a tiny screen and a two-thumb keyboard?
>>>
>> You and I must be wrong.
>>
>> In order to contact the local Surgery I can now no longer use their
>> website. I now have to use 'the App' - available only in iOS &
>> Android flavours so I can't use this PC, with its proper keyboard &
>> 25 inch display, I must squint at the tiny display on my phone &
>> attempt that pretence of a keyboard it offers.
>>
>> At least I have a 'smart' phone. My wife clings on to her dumb
>> phone, and cannot see why she should be forced to change to suit a
>> strange fashion.
>
> I am very much in sympathy with your wife.

Me too. I hate using my iPhone for anything apart from phoning. (Not
quite true: it's quite useful as a clock.)
>
> My own wife has succumbed to the pressure to put her driver's licence on
> her phone. Now, any time she has to produce identification, ten minutes
> are wasted while she's trying to work out where it is on her phone.

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

> On 03-Apr-24 16:45, Steve Hayes wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 17:08:15 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 2024-04-03 15:02:00 +0000, HVS said:
> >>> [1] I find it very difficult to talk about "ufologists" without
> >>> saying that it's pronounced "nutters".
> >>
> >> Well yes. That's why I think "flying saucers" is a better name.
> >
> > But once you've identified it as a flying saucer it's no longer a UFO
> > (or ufo, if you prefer).
> >
> That would be true only if they choose to self-identify as a flying saucer.

What? Has PC proceeded to the point that I am no longer allowed
to call those that come out LGM,
without asking them how they self-identify first?

Jan

On 2024-04-04, Sn!pe wrote:

> lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2024-04-03 06:05, Steve Hayes wrote:
>> > A while back I was puzzled when a cousin of mine talked about "earls"
>> > in an inappropriate context, and it took me a while to realise she was
>> > treating "URL" as an acronym.
>> >
>> > I ran a poll on Twitter to see if anyone else did that, and 100% said
>> > they pronounced URL as "you are ell".
>> >
>> > So I wonder if anyone else has ever heard the "earl" pronunciation, or
>> > if it was just my cousin's idiolect.
>> >
>> > Another instance was a man I met who pronounced "UFOs" as "you foes".
>> >
>> > I'm running a poll in Twitter and Mastodon on that too, but I wonder
>> > if anyone here has heard that pronounciation.
>>
>> For the linuxers out there, do you pronounce the file 'cshrc' as
>> 'cashrock' or 'seashark'?

I'd probably go for 'sea-shark' or 'sea-shirk', although I normally
use bash (cue flames).

> Then, of course, there's fsck...

For me that rhymes with "musk".

--
So you say I got a funny face
I ain't got no worries
And I don't know why
And I don't know why

On 2024-04-03, occam wrote:

> On 03/04/2024 17:08, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>> On 2024-04-03 15:02:00 +0000, HVS said:
>>
>>> On 03 Apr 2024, Steve Hayes wrote
>>>
>>>> A while back I was puzzled when a cousin of mine talked about
>>>> "earls" in an inappropriate context, and it took me a while to
>>>> realise she was treating "URL" as an acronym.
>>>>
>>>> I ran a poll on Twitter to see if anyone else did that, and 100%
>>>> said they pronounced URL as "you are ell".
>>>>
>>>> So I wonder if anyone else has ever heard the "earl"
>>>> pronunciation, or if it was just my cousin's idiolect.
>>>
>>> The "earl" pronunciation is what I defaulted to when I first saw it,
>>> and it was quite a while -- probably a year or more -- before I heard
>>> it spoken and discovered that "you are ell" was the accepted
>>> pronunciation.
>>>
>>> I switched to "you are ell" for the very few times I have to
>>> pronounce it in public, but my mind's ear still hears it as "earl"
>>> when I see it.
>>>
>>>> Another instance was a man I met who pronounced "UFOs" as "you
>>>> foes".
>>>
>>> I think I stumbled upon "you-foes" when people started to talk about
>>> "ufology" and "ufologist" as field of interest[1], but again, my
>>> mind's ear still hears "you eff oh" when I see it.
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] I find it very difficult to talk about "ufologists" without
>>> saying that it's pronounced "nutters".
>>
>> Well yes. That's why I think "flying saucers" is a better name.
>>
>
> No, sorry, it is not. UFOs are neither saucers, not are they necessarily
> 'flying'. This is why the current term used for UFOs is 'UAP'.
> Unexplained Aerial Phenomena.

ISTR reading somewhere that they weren't usually saucer-shaped until
after a particularly famous report of one like that.

> 'Phenomena', because it allows for the perceived entities to _not_ be
> 'objects'. They may be light reflections or merely optical illusions .
>
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/57344606

--
That was inedible muck, and there wasn't enough of it.
(Sir Henry Rawlinson)

Paul Wolff <bounceme@thiswontwork.wolff.co.uk> wrote:

> On Wed, 3 Apr 2024, at 17:28:10, occam posted:
> >On 03/04/2024 17:08, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> >> On 2024-04-03 15:02:00 +0000, HVS said:
> >>
> >>> On 03 Apr 2024, Steve Hayes wrote
> >>>
> >>>> A while back I was puzzled when a cousin of mine talked about
> >>>> "earls" in an inappropriate context, and it took me a while to
> >>>> realise she was treating "URL" as an acronym.
> >>>>
> >>>> I ran a poll on Twitter to see if anyone else did that, and 100%
> >>>> said they pronounced URL as "you are ell".
> >>>>
> >>>> So I wonder if anyone else has ever heard the "earl"
> >>>> pronunciation, or if it was just my cousin's idiolect.
> >>>
> >>> The "earl" pronunciation is what I defaulted to when I first saw it,
> >>> and it was quite a while -- probably a year or more -- before I heard
> >>> it spoken and discovered that "you are ell" was the accepted
> >>> pronunciation.
> >>>
> >>> I switched to "you are ell" for the very few times I have to
> >>> pronounce it in public, but my mind's ear still hears it as "earl"
> >>> when I see it.
> >>>
> >>>> Another instance was a man I met who pronounced "UFOs" as "you
> >>>> foes".
> >>>
> >>> I think I stumbled upon "you-foes" when people started to talk about
> >>> "ufology" and "ufologist" as field of interest[1], but again, my
> >>> mind's ear still hears "you eff oh" when I see it.
> >>>
> >>> [1] I find it very difficult to talk about "ufologists" without
> >>> saying that it's pronounced "nutters".
> >>
> >> Well yes. That's why I think "flying saucers" is a better name.
> >
> >No, sorry, it is not. UFOs are neither saucers, not are they necessarily
> >'flying'. This is why the current term used for UFOs is 'UAP'.
> >Unexplained Aerial Phenomena.
>
> OAP = Old Age Pensioner. Clearly then, UAP = Under Age Pensioner.

UAP fits in nicely with Dutch 'wap' 'wappie', if pronounced as a word.
'Wappies' are people who firmly believe in nonsense theories.
A recent coinage, yet origin unknown.

We are told by the well-meaning and the do-gooders
that we really should talk with them, try to undesrstand them,
instead of just telling them that they are crazie/loonies/crackpots.
(which indeed doesn't help either)

Jan
(with a limited capacity to suffer fools gladly)

On 04/04/24 19:49, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>
>> On 03-Apr-24 16:45, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 17:08:15 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-04-03 15:02:00 +0000, HVS said:
>>>>> [1] I find it very difficult to talk about "ufologists" without
>>>>> saying that it's pronounced "nutters".
>>>>
>>>> Well yes. That's why I think "flying saucers" is a better name.
>>>
>>> But once you've identified it as a flying saucer it's no longer a UFO
>>> (or ufo, if you prefer).
>>>
>> That would be true only if they choose to self-identify as a flying saucer.
>
> What? Has PC proceeded to the point that I am no longer allowed
> to call those that come out LGM,
> without asking them how they self-identify first?

Your bias is showing. Why should they not be LGW?

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

On 04/04/24 12:25, lar3ryca wrote:
> On 2024-04-03 06:05, Steve Hayes wrote:
>> A while back I was puzzled when a cousin of mine talked about "earls"
>> in an inappropriate context, and it took me a while to realise she was
>> treating "URL" as an acronym.
>>
>> I ran a poll on Twitter to see if anyone else did that, and 100% said
>> they pronounced URL as "you are ell".
>>
>> So I wonder if anyone else has ever heard the "earl" pronunciation, or
>> if it was just my cousin's idiolect.
>>
>> Another instance was a man I met who pronounced "UFOs" as "you foes".
>>
>> I'm running a poll in Twitter and Mastodon on that too, but I wonder
>> if anyone here has heard that pronounciation.
>
> For the linuxers out there, do you pronounce the file 'cshrc' as
> 'cashrock' or 'seashark'?

She sells C shells by the seashore.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

Adam Funk <a24061@ducksburg.com> wrote:

> On 2024-04-03, occam wrote:
>
> > On 03/04/2024 17:08, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> >> On 2024-04-03 15:02:00 +0000, HVS said:
> >>
> >>> On 03 Apr 2024, Steve Hayes wrote
> >>>
> >>>> A while back I was puzzled when a cousin of mine talked about
> >>>> "earls" in an inappropriate context, and it took me a while to
> >>>> realise she was treating "URL" as an acronym.
> >>>>
> >>>> I ran a poll on Twitter to see if anyone else did that, and 100%
> >>>> said they pronounced URL as "you are ell".
> >>>>
> >>>> So I wonder if anyone else has ever heard the "earl"
> >>>> pronunciation, or if it was just my cousin's idiolect.
> >>>
> >>> The "earl" pronunciation is what I defaulted to when I first saw it,
> >>> and it was quite a while -- probably a year or more -- before I heard
> >>> it spoken and discovered that "you are ell" was the accepted
> >>> pronunciation.
> >>>
> >>> I switched to "you are ell" for the very few times I have to
> >>> pronounce it in public, but my mind's ear still hears it as "earl"
> >>> when I see it.
> >>>
> >>>> Another instance was a man I met who pronounced "UFOs" as "you
> >>>> foes".
> >>>
> >>> I think I stumbled upon "you-foes" when people started to talk about
> >>> "ufology" and "ufologist" as field of interest[1], but again, my
> >>> mind's ear still hears "you eff oh" when I see it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [1] I find it very difficult to talk about "ufologists" without
> >>> saying that it's pronounced "nutters".
> >>
> >> Well yes. That's why I think "flying saucers" is a better name.
> >>
> >
> > No, sorry, it is not. UFOs are neither saucers, not are they necessarily
> > 'flying'. This is why the current term used for UFOs is 'UAP'.
> > Unexplained Aerial Phenomena.
>
> ISTR reading somewhere that they weren't usually saucer-shaped until
> after a particularly famous report of one like that.

A well known 'saucer' example is the Adamski fraud.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Adamski>

Jan

On 04/04/24 22:26, J. J. Lodder wrote:

> UAP fits in nicely with Dutch 'wap' 'wappie', if pronounced as a
> word. 'Wappies' are people who firmly believe in nonsense theories.
> A recent coinage, yet origin unknown.
>
> We are told by the well-meaning and the do-gooders that we really
> should talk with them, try to undesrstand them, instead of just
> telling them that they are crazie/loonies/crackpots. (which indeed
> doesn't help either)
>
> Jan (with a limited capacity to suffer fools gladly)

In the USA that could lead to people voting for Trump, which is hardly a
desirable outcome.

I have a couple of relatives who are brain-damaged, so I do understand
the importance of talking with them and understanding them. I don't
accept, though, that that should extend to suffering fools gladly.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 19:30:44 +0200, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

> Every Dane does that - with Danish pronunciation. The same with "ufo". I
> have never heard anything else in Danish. Those pronunciation do not
> sound like another word.

So, "ufåå" or something? Same in Swedish. Nobody says u-eff-o.

But we do say u-err-ell and not "urrl" as one word.

--
Cri-Cri

On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 09:24:05 +1100, Peter Moylan wrote:

> UFO for unidentifiable frying objects.

....or un-effable offenses.

--
Cri-Cri

On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 19:25:45 -0600, lar3ryca wrote:

> For the linuxers out there, do you pronounce the file 'cshrc' as
> 'cashrock' or 'seashark'?

I'm on Manjaro, I don't have it so I haven't reflected on the name.
But .bashrc rhymes with hardy har see.

--
Cri-Cri

On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 22:33:28 +1100, Peter Moylan wrote:

> She sells C shells by the seashore.

Ismo said: "she shells shee shells by the shee shore" Which he thought was
stupid, since they are right there, for free, on the "shee shore."

--
Cri-Cri

On 04-Apr-24 12:30, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 04/04/24 19:49, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 03-Apr-24 16:45, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 17:08:15 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2024-04-03 15:02:00 +0000, HVS said:
>>>>>> [1] I find it very difficult to talk about "ufologists" without
>>>>>> saying that it's pronounced "nutters".
>>>>>
>>>>> Well yes. That's why I think "flying saucers" is a better name.
>>>>
>>>> But once you've identified it as a flying saucer it's no longer a UFO
>>>> (or ufo, if you prefer).
>>>>
>>> That would be true only if they choose to self-identify as a flying
>>> saucer.
>>
>> What? Has PC proceeded to the point that I am no longer allowed
>> to call those that come out LGM,
>> without asking them how they self-identify first?
>
> Your bias is showing. Why should they not be LGW?
>
LGP is the only possible valid term. Do you really need to stick gender
labels on everyone?

--
Sam Plusnet

On 04-Apr-24 1:34, Sn!pe wrote:
> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
> [...]
>>> There are also people who try to use their phone as a computer. Well,
>>> technically it is one, but who can take seriously a device with such a
>>> tiny screen and a two-thumb keyboard?
>>>
>> You and I must be wrong.
>>
>> In order to contact the local Surgery I can now no longer use their
>> website.
>> I now have to use 'the App' - available only in iOS & Android flavours
>> so I can't use this PC, with its proper keyboard & 25 inch display, I
>> must squint at the tiny display on my phone & attempt that pretence of a
>> keyboard it offers.
>>
>> At least I have a 'smart' phone. My wife clings on to her dumb phone,
>> and cannot see why she should be forced to change to suit a strange fashion.
>
> [UK specific]
> I can contact my doctor's surgery via the NHS website, which works
> on my desktop. The NHS smartphone app. is quite slick to use but
> I do agree about the horrid 'phone "keyboard".
>
The NHS app might sometimes be 'slick', but _NOT_ when it gets into the
hands of my dearly beloved.
She has the sort of talent that causes software to do things that the
designers would swear could never happen.

--
Sam Plusnet

Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote in news:1RCPN.132658$_a1e.267@fx16.iad:

> On 04-Apr-24 1:34, Sn!pe wrote:
>> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> There are also people who try to use their phone as a computer. Well,
>>>> technically it is one, but who can take seriously a device with such
>>>> a tiny screen and a two-thumb keyboard?
>>>>
>>> You and I must be wrong.
>>>
>>> In order to contact the local Surgery I can now no longer use their
>>> website.
>>> I now have to use 'the App' - available only in iOS & Android flavours
>>> so I can't use this PC, with its proper keyboard & 25 inch display, I
>>> must squint at the tiny display on my phone & attempt that pretence of
>>> a keyboard it offers.
>>>
>>> At least I have a 'smart' phone. My wife clings on to her dumb phone,
>>> and cannot see why she should be forced to change to suit a strange
>>> fashion.
>>
>> [UK specific]
>> I can contact my doctor's surgery via the NHS website, which works
>> on my desktop. The NHS smartphone app. is quite slick to use but
>> I do agree about the horrid 'phone "keyboard".
>>
> The NHS app might sometimes be 'slick', but _NOT_ when it gets into the
> hands of my dearly beloved.
> She has the sort of talent that causes software to do things that the
> designers would swear could never happen.

There are those of us that cling to our dumb phones because we can
understand what they will do with a conversation. A smrt phone can hide
many things along with giving the illusion of a simple conversation. If it
was a simple conversation, why add complexity to the conversation?

One of my doctors web confirmation registration processes does that. I try
to answer it, but the app wants more info that it won't ask for. I simply
show up for the appointment they notified me of and all is well.

I'll use a web site from my computer but not from a phone. I don't even
tell my computer my email address or name, so it is fairly easy to tell
what such a site is really after.

Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

> On 04/04/24 19:49, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 03-Apr-24 16:45, Steve Hayes wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 17:08:15 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 2024-04-03 15:02:00 +0000, HVS said:
> >>>>> [1] I find it very difficult to talk about "ufologists" without
> >>>>> saying that it's pronounced "nutters".
> >>>>
> >>>> Well yes. That's why I think "flying saucers" is a better name.
> >>>
> >>> But once you've identified it as a flying saucer it's no longer a UFO
> >>> (or ufo, if you prefer).
> >>>
> >> That would be true only if they choose to self-identify as a flying saucer.
> >
> > What? Has PC proceeded to the point that I am no longer allowed
> > to call those that come out LGM,
> > without asking them how they self-identify first?
>
> Your bias is showing. Why should they not be LGW?

You, a representative of the so-called 'mankind'
dares to say that?

Jan

On 05-Apr-24 1:55, David LaRue wrote:
> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote in news:1RCPN.132658$_a1e.267@fx16.iad:
>
>> On 04-Apr-24 1:34, Sn!pe wrote:
>>> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> There are also people who try to use their phone as a computer. Well,
>>>>> technically it is one, but who can take seriously a device with such
>>>>> a tiny screen and a two-thumb keyboard?
>>>>>
>>>> You and I must be wrong.
>>>>
>>>> In order to contact the local Surgery I can now no longer use their
>>>> website.
>>>> I now have to use 'the App' - available only in iOS & Android flavours
>>>> so I can't use this PC, with its proper keyboard & 25 inch display, I
>>>> must squint at the tiny display on my phone & attempt that pretence of
>>>> a keyboard it offers.
>>>>
>>>> At least I have a 'smart' phone. My wife clings on to her dumb phone,
>>>> and cannot see why she should be forced to change to suit a strange
>>>> fashion.
>>>
>>> [UK specific]
>>> I can contact my doctor's surgery via the NHS website, which works
>>> on my desktop. The NHS smartphone app. is quite slick to use but
>>> I do agree about the horrid 'phone "keyboard".
>>>
>> The NHS app might sometimes be 'slick', but _NOT_ when it gets into the
>> hands of my dearly beloved.
>> She has the sort of talent that causes software to do things that the
>> designers would swear could never happen.
>
> There are those of us that cling to our dumb phones because we can
> understand what they will do with a conversation. A smrt phone can hide
> many things along with giving the illusion of a simple conversation. If it
> was a simple conversation, why add complexity to the conversation?
>
> One of my doctors web confirmation registration processes does that. I try
> to answer it, but the app wants more info that it won't ask for. I simply
> show up for the appointment they notified me of and all is well.
>
> I'll use a web site from my computer but not from a phone. I don't even
> tell my computer my email address or name, so it is fairly easy to tell
> what such a site is really after.

Certainly, where you have the choice.
My point was that more and more 'services' are now _only_ accessible via
their 'App' which may be a horribly constructed pile of %^&*.

--
Sam Plusnet

Sam Plusnet wrote:

> Certainly, where you have the choice.
> My point was that more and more 'services' are now _only_ accessible via
> their 'App' which may be a horribly constructed pile of %^&*.

Just today I read at a webpage with a service that I use (forgotten
which) that they discontinue their app and refer to their webpage.

More of that!

--
Bertel
Kolt, Denmark

Fri, 5 Apr 2024 21:05:13 +0200: Bertel Lund Hansen
<gadekryds@lundhansen.dk> scribeva:

>Sam Plusnet wrote:
>
>> Certainly, where you have the choice.
>> My point was that more and more 'services' are now _only_ accessible via
>> their 'App' which may be a horribly constructed pile of %^&*.
>
>Just today I read at a webpage with a service that I use (forgotten
>which) that they discontinue their app and refer to their webpage.
>
>More of that!

Fully agree!: https://rudhar.com/sfreview/appgekte/en.htm