Yes, in the same way that tomatoes meet the definition of a fruit. (And before you say "but tomatoes are a fruit"—exactly.†)
I respect your desire to be precise, but the problem is that it makes conversations super difficult. Detailing Apple's convoluted policies every time the topic comes up is tiresome and needlessly derails the conversation.
> I respect your desire to be precise, but the problem is that it makes conversations super difficult.
Respectfully, this isn’t about being precise, it’s about being factually correct. I feel your tomato example is off the mark. A more fair (albeit not precise) analogy would be someone saying “there is no sun in the sky” and someone correcting them by saying “yes there is, it’s just behind that cloud” and then the person arguing back that “only suns that aren’t behind clouds count”.
Yes, in the same way that tomatoes meet the definition of a fruit. (And before you say "but tomatoes are a fruit"—exactly.†)
I respect your desire to be precise, but the problem is that it makes conversations super difficult. Detailing Apple's convoluted policies every time the topic comes up is tiresome and needlessly derails the conversation.
† See also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmxIK9p0SNM