@Turkish:
Where did he claim to be from the US?
I mean, I'm not sure what your point is since Americans quite often have atrocious English,
(anybody studying English as a second language should have realized that by now)
but other than coming off as passive aggressive, what is the point of that conjecture?
And yeah, he chose to use a different name for a corporate product rather than blindly follow what PR directed him to. So? You SOMEHOW managed to infer the topic he was discussing, so I don't see how his terminology is any worse than the corporate conformist approach...? What does not blindly following corporate dictate, but choosing to use one's one folk terminology have to do with bad grammar? Product names have nothing to do with grammar, many of them would in fact be poor grammatic constructions if evaluated on that level.
FYI: It's somewhat incoherent to spell out "lawl" since that derives from an acronym "lol" meaning "laugh out loud", thus changing the spelling destroys the reference. I mean, if one is inclined to waste one's brain space attacking strangers for comprehensible spelling errors, one should be concerned about such things, right? You might want to catch up on English refresher lessons as well, you missed that the contraction of "it is" is "it's" NOT "its". Likewise, you should have written "how the fuck do people not know THAT" not "not know it". Isn't English lovely?
