> I said and meant absolutely nothing like what you purport to respond to.
I responded to the following words of yours:
(1) "it is more proven than these other things being talked about." (2) "I'd like to know how far performance can be pushed on slow, low-wattage processor by way of more RAM and dedicated graphics chip, like PowerVR" (3) "it seems much more established to me than this other low-wattage, small stuff."
So you now say you didn't say or mean anything of that?
> I don't want to respond to these misrepresentations or anything else from you but > neither should my silence be read as acquiescence.
If you think I misrepresented what you said I can only appreciate your attempt at seeking dialogue.
> You're also using ellipsis incorrectly.
I don't think so.
> It's supposed to be used benignly for clarity
I use it to clarify reference, i.e. what I refer to in particular if the statement I respond to covers several aspects and I don't refer to all these aspects. To illustrate: Regarding your sentence
"I'd like to know how far performance can be pushed on slow, low-wattage processor by way of more RAM and dedicated graphics chip, like PowerVR"
...I only referred to your mention of "dedicated graphics chip, like PowerVR", not to "more RAM". That's why I used ellipsis for "more RAM". And that's a genuine use of ellipsis.
> not in such a way that the person you are quoting has to come > back and say "that's not what I said.
Then stop failing to clarify what exactly you *meant to say* by the words I quoted from you. I'm not able to *mind*-read, after all.
Did "other things being talked about" and "this other low-wattage, small stuff" include PowerQUICC II Pro, which was talked about? Yes or no? (That's been my simple question from the start.) What did you mean by "dedicated graphics chip, like PowerVR", if not a dedicated PowerVR (or similar) graphics chip?
> It's not supposed to resolve ambiguities in the quote in a way > to benefit your response
I didn't use it to resolve any ambiguities but only for clarification as to what I'm referring to in particular.
> Please just don't do it all with my words.
I'll continue to use ellipsis in the same proper way I've been doing it.
