What is wrong with the Apple Apologists that they deny even what Apple admitted?

[Harold Newton]

What is wrong with the Apple Apologists that they deny even what Apple
admitted?

Notice this discussion today where Jolly Roger is the Apple Apologist
exasperating a normal adult, JF Mezei:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/zM-uvnUrSCk/jHT85o0ZBAAJ>

Then notice that the Apple Apologist Jolly Roger doing the same thing to
another normal person, Alan Browne:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/zM-uvnUrSCk/o5ZXhJgaBAAJ>

This happens only on the iOS newsgroups (not on Android, Windows, Linux,
newsgroups, as I've run multiple tests asking the *same* question of each,
where only on the iOS newsgroups do the Apple Apologists pull this stunt.)

This classic deflection is what I call the "kid with his hand in the cookie
jar" argument by the Apple Apologists.

Even Apple did it in their idiotic message about "batteries".

The deflection argument relies on people being inherently stupid.
Hence, they feel it works because they're not used to non-stupid people.

As you know, it's the classic Apple Apologists' tactic which goes like
this:

Mom: "Billy - is your hand in the cookie jar?"
Billy: No. (Pulls hand out of cookie jar.)
Mom: Is that chocolate on your face?
Billy: No. (Wipes face.)
Mom: Why did you eat those cookies?
Billy: I didn't eat the cookies! (Shakes crumbs off of clothing.)
Mom: Why are cookie crumbs all over you?
Billy: But Susan across the street hits her dog!
Mom: What does that have to do with you getting caught eating the cookies?
Billy: But Sammy next door threw a rock at the window!
(this goes on forever)

Why are the Apple Apologists not like normal people?
Answer: I don't know why - but they're not normal.

They exhibit absolutely no comprehension of logical fact.
What is wrong with the Apple Apologists that they can't comprehend facts?

[nospam]

In article <p2ece3$18qm$3...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harold Newton
<har...@example.com> wrote:

> What is wrong with...

...*you*, who incessantly trolls the same garbage over and over?

we get you hate apple. buy something else and move on.

[Harold Newton]

He who is nospam said on Mon, 01 Jan 2018 17:46:46 -0500:

> ...*you*, who incessantly trolls the same garbage over and over?
>
> we get you hate apple. buy something else and move on.

I *love* Apple products (remember, I buy them all the time, mostly as gifts
for kids who love them even more than I do).

I have my own iPads, and I have jailbroken an iPhone, and I loved using
Cydia on it.

I just happen to be on Usenet for two decades where I have always pondered
what is wrong with the Apple Apologists.

They're not normal people.

You can ask the *exact* same question on an Android & iOS newsgroup, and
only on the iOS newsgroup do the Apple Apologists destroy any semblance of
logic.

You know this because I've run that experiment many times.
And the result is always the same.

The Apple Apologists have no semblance of logic or fact.
In fact, they call any fact they don't like - a troll.

The Apple Apologists incessantly fabricate fictional functionality.
The Apple Apologists deny even what Apple already admitted.

In fact, *you* always point to the absolute *worst* price-to-performance
ratio when people state logical fact, which is that normally you can find
equivalent Android hardware for about half the price of Apple hardware.

Who does that?
Only Apple Apologists do that.

You're not normal people who use normal logical thought processes.
All I seek to understand is why.

[nospam]

In article <p2eff4$1ddh$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harold Newton
<har...@example.com> wrote:

>
> I *love* Apple products

bullshit.

if anyone loves apple products, it's the "ios apologists".

not you.

[harry newton]

He who is nospam said on Mon, 01 Jan 2018 18:18:54 -0500:

>> I *love* Apple products
>
> bullshit.
>
> if anyone loves apple products, it's the "ios apologists".
>
> not you.

You don't actually love Apple products because you can't stand to hear the
truth about them.

You debase Apple products by your contextual semantic distortions and
blatant fabrications of imaginary iOS functionality.

I only speak the truth about all product lines.

You hate the truth about Apple products.

[harry newton]

Notice how the other newsgroups instantly realize the Apple Apologists are
trolls, such as Jolly Roger is...
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/9laIXKhqyAA/LKReCqUeEQAJ>

He who is rickman said on Thu, 4 Jan 2018 17:03:08 -0500:

>> We each have a decision to make regarding trolls. In this case JR has
>> decided to point out the troll. That is effective in warning other
>> posters.
>
> JR has gone *far* beyond pointing out a troll. He has gone so far beyond
> that he has become the troll. To point out that you think someone is a
> troll only takes a single post of a few lines. His less annoying posts were
> the uneducating, "So few facts, so much time. Life's hard for an old troll!"
> and "Get some new material, old foolish troll." When I point out his
> excessive complaining he only comes back with much more annoying posts.
> These are not intended to be educational to anyone. These are the rantings
> of someone who feels he is on a mission, a very misguided mission.
>
> Just as bad are the many posts attempting to justify his behavior.

[harry newton]

He who is harry newton said on Fri, 5 Jan 2018 00:08:10 +0000 (UTC):

Reasonable adults have stated:

"JR has gone *far* beyond pointing out a troll. He has gone so far beyond
that he has become the troll. To point out that you think someone is a
troll only takes a single post of a few lines. His less annoying posts
were the uneducating, "So few facts, so much time. Life's hard for an
old troll!" and "Get some new material, old foolish troll."
When I point out his excessive complaining he only comes back with much
more annoying posts. These are not intended to be educational to anyone.
These are the rantings of someone who feels he is on a mission, a very
misguided mission."

To which, Jolly Roger replied, and I quote:
"Yes, yes, folks. I am the devil incarnate! I have dared to give
the troll a taste of his own fucking medicine! Surely this is a worse
offense than the attacks from the troll himself! I HAVE BECOME PURE
EVIL! MUAHAHAHAAA!! >: D

Let me assure you, coming from someone who is new to the Apple
newsgroups, your completely misguided opinion means OH SO MUCH!! Thank
you for enlightening the group with your supreme instant wisdom, Rick,
man!"

*I love Jolly Roger* because he consistently exhibits the canonical Apple
Apologist mentality.

[harry newton]

This is a copy of a post to "rickman" who seems like a reasonable adult,
where I describe the classic behavior of the Apple Apologists.

Hi rickman,

I too have been on Usenet since the early days, so we've seen groups
utterly devastated by this cancer, such as what happened here:
http://tinyurl.com/alt-free-newsservers

And yet, not to the (somewhat) related newsgroup:
http://tinyurl.com/news-software-readers

In many cases over the decades where we both have seen a newsgroup fall
into the cesspool, it's only a *handful* of viciously angry posters who
ruin the newsgroup for everyone else who is just trying to learn from the
immense tribal knowledge of all the members of the group, as a whole.

I don't know, offhand, whether you come from the android side or from the
electronics side (where I love Jeff Liebermann, who lives near me, but
we've yet to meet fact to face), so I apologize for the behavior of the
folks whom I call Apple Apologists (after having dealt with them for years
and trying to figure out why they act the strange way that they do).

Of the Apple Apologists you're dealing with, here's a characterization:
1. nospam - by far - the most clever and most knowledgeable of them all
2. Jolly Roger - nonsensically consumed by his own vitriol and rage
3. BKonRamp - if you find him ever adding value - I'll send you money!
4. Savageduck - he is knowledgeable (hence useful) on digital photography
but he hates iOS facts as much as the others - so he's unreasonable but
still very useful because he's expert at digital photography
REFERENCE: http://tinyurl.com/rec-photo-digital

Overall, they're useful, where, in my killfile, even after two decades on
Usenet, is only Snit (whom you haven't experienced yet, I think), who is a
*perfect* example of an Apple Apologists - in that he even created a public
video attempting to "refute" my facts (which are always correct since
they're all validated by references), which he trolled incessantly over 400
times, where even I had to plonk him.

You really need to listen to the first minute of this video before I tell
you the key facts about these Apple Apologists (who are not normal people):
Title: iOS showing Wi-Fi over time
URL: <https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo>

Once you listen to the first minute of that video, you then need to know
that the Apple Apologists here (nospam, Jolly Roger, BK, etc.) all *agreed*
with him, numerous times.
It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0%5B26-50%5D>

For example, here's a direct quote from "nospam" on the facts I presented:
"Harry can't back anything he says, mostly because it's false.
what's even worse, he continues with his bogus claims after being
proven wrong with actual facts (not the ones in his delusional head)."

Notice how the Apple Apologists (who are not normal adults), claim to have
facts, and they claim to have been providing proof all along, and they do
it in such as self-serving way that you have to wonder if they actually
*believe* a single word they utter (they're that different from normal
people!)...

But get this - none of them, even after all that vitriol, know the
difference between a megabit and a decibel!
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0/BK4Vtbg9BwAJ>

Yup. They whole time they've been just blatantly *fabricating* non-existent
iOS functionality. Why? They hate the bearer of facts!

Here's how I tried to respond to the Apple Apologists (with facsts):
"One look at the graph it outputs proves that it's just a speedtest app.
<http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifi_sweetspots.jpg>
The Apple Apologists insist it's a wifi signal strength app.
Why when it's a fact iOS apps can't graph wifi signal strength over time?
Meanwhile, the Android Fritz app clearly show Y-axis decibels (not Mbps).
<http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/fritzapp.jpg>
As does the Android WiFi Analyzer app wifi signal strength timeline:
<http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifianalyzer.jpg>

The problem here, which I've noticed over the decades happens in spades in
the Apple-related newsgroups, is that there is a clan of people who
viciously hate the bearers of facts that they just don't like.

What is wrong with the Apple Apologists that they deny even what Apple
admitted?

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/fyL1cQUVCp0>

So they react by *fabricating* functionality and then arguing for a billion
posts that what they claim exists, actually exists (when, in fact, it does
not). Just look at this thread, initiated by Jolly Roger himself:
Apple Is Being Slandered For What Chemistry Cannot Fix

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/zM-uvnUrSCk>

Any thread that deals with facts on the iOS newsgroups that the
iOS apologists don't like, follows this same formula.

1. Someone states a valid fact about Apple that they don't like (me)
2. They vehemently deny the fact - completely making everything up (Snit)
3. More facts are provided in response to the fake denials (me)
4. That incenses them so much they resort to vicious insults (JR)
5. Or they resort to extremely clever semantic contortions (nospam)
6. Or, they simply say that every fact is wrong (Savageduck)
7. And they pile on and high-five and support each other (JKonRamp)

Any casual reader of the thread gives up reading because of the cancer
above (which is exactly their goal).

It happens every time.
Just watch.
Why do the Apple Apologists deny facts & habitually fabricate imaginary
content?

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/eRTC23FyVDY>

That's the kind of people you're dealing with.

Years ago, I termed them "Apple Apologists"; but you can term them whatever
you think is appropriate.

They are not like normal adults in that viciously and repeatedly attack the
bearer of truthful facts they don't like.

[harry newton]

A response today to Fox Mercantile ...

He who is Fox's Mercantile said on Thu, 4 Jan 2018 14:39:11 -0600:

> It won't until you killfile harry newton.

You have to realize whom you're dealing with when you deal with these Apple
Apologists who claim everyone else is a troll but they themselves.

This single screenshot explains it all graphically in a way words can't:
<http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifi_sweetspots.jpg>

One Apple Apologist trolled this video *over 400* times alone:

itle: iOS showing Wi-Fi over time

URL: <https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo>]

In that video, the Apple Apologist Snit claims that iOS does have the
functionality that I proved long before it does not.

Worse - the Apple Apologists you're dealing with *congratulated* Snit for
"proving Harry wrong" when, in fact, absolutely none of the Apple
Apologists knew the difference between a decibel and a megabit!
<http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/fritzapp.jpg>
<http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifianalyzer.jpg>

And yet, there must have been at least *400 additional posts* where nospam
claims to have proven it to us numerous times, and where Jolly Roger claims
that we're all "old fools" for not believing their completely baseless
claims.

It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0%5B26-50%5D>

So that's something like 800 posts, almost all of which are the Apple
Apologists denying what is, to normal adults, obvious fact.

Why do the Apple Apologists act this way?
I do not know the answer.

Every single time they post, I have to ask myself:
a. Are they really clueless (they don't know a megabit from a decibel?)
b. Or, do they do this on purpose (since they post it 800 times!)

I still don't know the answer to that question.
Do you?

[Lloyd]

harry newton <ha...@at.invalid> Wrote in message:

> This is a copy of a post to "rickman" who seems like a reasonable adult,
> where I describe the classic behavior of the Apple Apologists.
>
> Hi rickman,

<< all irrelevant content snipped >>

--
Lloyd

[nospam]

In article <p2mkgm$1qum$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, harry newton

<ha...@at.invalid> wrote:

> It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time

yes they can and you've been told how.

why do you keep lying?

[Harry Newton]

On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 19:35:26 -0600 (CST), Lloyd wrote:

> << all irrelevant content snipped >>

Here's a snippet my log file of iOS posters...

JF Mezei: Sometimes reasonable and logical - like a real adult
Alan Browne: Sometimes reasonable and logical - like a real adult
Hemidactylus: Rarely reasonable - but once was reasonable (go figure)
nospam: Almost never reasonable but the most knowledgeable of all the AAs
Jolly Roger: Never adds value and is filled to the brim with hateful
vitriol
Snit: The most persistent AA of them all - can't fathom an adult discussion
*Lloyd: Rather dumb and has never once added any on-topic value yet*
Davoud: Thinks that telling the truth about Apple products is "Apple Envy"
etc.

[Harry Newton]

On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 20:41:30 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
>
> yes they can and you've been told how.
>
> why do you keep lying?

I used to wonder if your claim that everyone else is lying when you lie, is
just duplicity (ala Comey) or sheer inability to comprehend logic (ala
Snit).

You need the reader to be dumber than I am to believe your lies when
you blatantly state that iOS has a functionality which you *know* it does
not:
*It's a fact Apple iOS devices can't graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.ipad/-T7FEXIdU9Q/Dhy-LFH3AwAJ>

Why do you AAs incessantly *fabricate* functionality that doesn't exist?
Why do iOS apologists incessantly fabricate fictional iOS functionality?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.ipad/vcq3ESStmlc/bjhf9Z5vBAAJ>

Every post from you is a *perfect* example of an Apple Apologists.
You're not normal adults.

[nospam]

In article <p2msi9$4j7$2...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

>
> You need the reader to be dumber than I am

no such living being exists.

> to believe your lies when
> you blatantly state that iOS has a functionality which you *know* it does
> not:

not only do i know it does, but how to do it has been explained to you
already multiple times, and each time, you ignore it, say it was faked
or some other bullshit.

i can even write an app to do exactly what you describe in about a day.

so much for being impossible.

[Harry Newton]

On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 22:57:11 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> You need the reader to be dumber than I am
>
> no such living being exists.
>
>> to believe your lies when
>> you blatantly state that iOS has a functionality which you *know* it does
>> not:
>
> not only do i know it does, but how to do it has been explained to you
> already multiple times, and each time, you ignore it, say it was faked
> or some other bullshit.
>
> i can even write an app to do exactly what you describe in about a day.
>
> so much for being impossible.

What's amazing is that you blatantly lie, when *everyone* knows you're just
making it all up.

Let's see if there is a *single* other Apple Apologist who backs up your
lie.

Let's just see.

[joe]

I don't write iOS code so I can't speak about building an app to graph
wifi signal strength.

However, I can download an app from the App Store that will give me
signal strength (indicated in dbm) for all APs near me. It also shows
the history of the observed strengths in a tabular form for each (at
least the past couple of minutes).

So, with little effort I can get the wifi strength over time easily. It
may not be flashy graphs, but just as usable.

[nospam]

In article <p2o3m0$1tt8$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, joe <no...@domian.invalid>
wrote:

> >>
> >>> to believe your lies when
> >>> you blatantly state that iOS has a functionality which you *know* it does
> >>> not:
> >>
> >> not only do i know it does, but how to do it has been explained to you
> >> already multiple times, and each time, you ignore it, say it was faked
> >> or some other bullshit.
> >>
> >> i can even write an app to do exactly what you describe in about a day.
> >>
> >> so much for being impossible.
> >
> > What's amazing is that you blatantly lie, when *everyone* knows you're just
> > making it all up.
> >
> > Let's see if there is a *single* other Apple Apologist who backs up your
> > lie.
> >
> > Let's just see.
>
> I don't write iOS code so I can't speak about building an app to graph
> wifi signal strength.

i *do* write ios apps and it's trivial to do.

sample the value, then plot on a graph. less than a day to write.

> However, I can download an app from the App Store that will give me
> signal strength (indicated in dbm) for all APs near me. It also shows
> the history of the observed strengths in a tabular form for each (at
> least the past couple of minutes).
>
> So, with little effort I can get the wifi strength over time easily. It
> may not be flashy graphs, but just as usable.

that app *could* add graphing over time if there was customer demand.

there isn't.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-01-05, Harry Newton <harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 22:57:11 -0500, nospam wrote:
>
>>> You need the reader to be dumber than I am
>>
>> no such living being exists.
>>
>>> to believe your lies when
>>> you blatantly state that iOS has a functionality which you *know* it does
>>> not:
>>
>> not only do i know it does, but how to do it has been explained to you
>> already multiple times, and each time, you ignore it, say it was faked
>> or some other bullshit.
>>
>> i can even write an app to do exactly what you describe in about a day.
>>
>> so much for being impossible.
>
> What's amazing is that you blatantly lie, when *everyone* knows you're just
> making it all up.

LOL! Any iOS developer knows nospam is correct. You're in over way your
head, old man.

> Blah blah blah Apple Apologist blah blah blah blah

Get some new material, old fool.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[Harry Newton]

On 5 Jan 2018 16:50:25 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> LOL! Any iOS developer knows nospam is correct. You're in over way your
> head, old man.

I love when you post, Jolly Roger, because you are the childish side of the
Apple Apologists, where nospam is the clever side.

Nospam tries to argue that an app being easy or difficult to write has
anything to do with it not being on the app store - which is a red herring
that even he knows to be the case.

You... heh heh ... You actually believe what he wrote even when he isn't so
stupid as to believe it himself.

That's why I love when you post. You can't add value, but you show me how
the brain of a typical Apple user works. (Nodpam is not typical - he's
clever; you're typical.)

Thanks!

[Harry Newton]

On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 10:29:38 -0500, nospam wrote:

> that app *could* add graphing over time if there was customer demand.

You love red herrings.
You really should be a trial lawyer.

Nobody but you claims that an app doesn't exist on the App Store (when it
exists on *all* other platforms) because it's hard to write.

That's not the reason the New Pipe functionality doesn't exist on iOS, it's
not the reason File Redirect doens't exist on iOS, it's not the reason
Automatic Call Recorder doesn't exist on iOS, it's not the reason uTorrent
doesn't exist on iOS, it's not the reason CellTower Exporer doesn't exist
on iOS, it's not the reason WiGle WiFi doesn't exist on iOS, it's not the
reason an open-source Tor Browswer Bundle doens't exist on iOS, it's not
the reason that a freaking app drawer app doesn't exist on iOS (and the
list goes on forever of functionality on Android not on iOS).

You Apple Apologists love red herrings because they detract the gullible
from the truth.

The reason scores of useful functionality is on all the platforms but iOS
isn't because it's hard to write and never was.

The reason is that Apple made a decision.
It's that simple.

Now "why" Apple made that decision for scores upon scores of app
functionalities is not known - but we can summarize it as Apple has decided
to reduce the functionality available to the consumer to a bare bones set
of the very primitive basics.

That is a well-known fact.
It's only the why which is conjecture.

[Harry Newton]

On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 08:56:01 -0600, joe wrote:

> I don't write iOS code so I can't speak about building an app to graph
> wifi signal strength.

I don't think it would at all be difficult to write, just as the authors of
the screen-recording app wrote it - but Apple revoked the tool from the App
store - just as it wouldn't be hard to write a torrent app or an automatic
phone recording app or an app drawer app, etc.

Despite nospam's clever contortions claiming an app isn't difficult to
write so it must exist, it's not the difficulty of writing an app to graph
signal strengh over time which is the reason it's not available to the user
only on iOS.

> However, I can download an app from the App Store that will give me
> signal strength (indicated in dbm) for all APs near me. It also shows
> the history of the observed strengths in a tabular form for each (at
> least the past couple of minutes).

Bear in mind that you don't want to fall into the trap that Snit, nospam,
and Jolly Roger fell into ... so I just remind you gently that signal
strength over time is measured with the Y axis being decibels and the x
axis being time, and not, as claimed by the Apple Apologists, in Mbps.
<http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifi_sweetspots.jpg>

> So, with little effort I can get the wifi strength over time easily. It
> may not be flashy graphs, but just as usable.

This is a useful signal strength output for debugging WiFi at home:
<http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/2wifianalyzer.jpg>

As you move around the house, you get dynamic signal strength for all APs:
<http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/fritz_wlan.jpg>

It's clearly not hard to write the app; that's not the reason it's not in
the app store.

Why aren't hundreds of different functionalities in the App Store that are
useful and on Android (e.g., automatic backup to APK on the users own file
system)?

It's not that they're hard to write.
It's some other reason.

Maybe you can answer this question?

You can pick *any* functionality on Android that isn't on iOS (there are
scores of them - but just pick one that I've listed above) and ask why
isn't that functionality on iOS?

Q: Why doesn't Apple allow WiFi signal graphing over time?
A: Who the hell knows why. But it's not there on the Apple App Store.
And yet, *every* other platform has these apps.

[nospam]

In article <p2p00e$1iea$4...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

>
> > I don't write iOS code so I can't speak about building an app to graph
> > wifi signal strength.
>
> I don't think it would at all be difficult to write,

so you admit it's possible and that you've been lying all this time.

[nospam]

In article <p2p00c$1iea$3...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

> You really should be a trial lawyer.

be careful for what you wish for, because if i was, i'd prosecute *you*.

[joe]

On 01/05/2018 04:59 PM, Harry Newton wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 08:56:01 -0600, joe wrote:
>
>> I don't write iOS code so I can't speak about building an app to graph
>> wifi signal strength.
>
> I don't think it would at all be difficult to write, just as the authors of
> the screen-recording app wrote it - but Apple revoked the tool from the App
> store - just as it wouldn't be hard to write a torrent app or an automatic
> phone recording app or an app drawer app, etc.
>
> Despite nospam's clever contortions claiming an app isn't difficult to
> write so it must exist, it's not the difficulty of writing an app to graph
> signal strengh over time which is the reason it's not available to the user
> only on iOS.
>
>> However, I can download an app from the App Store that will give me
>> signal strength (indicated in dbm) for all APs near me. It also shows
>> the history of the observed strengths in a tabular form for each (at
>> least the past couple of minutes).
>
> Bear in mind that you don't want to fall into the trap that Snit, nospam,
> and Jolly Roger fell into ... so I just remind you gently that signal
> strength over time is measured with the Y axis being decibels and the x
> axis being time, and not, as claimed by the Apple Apologists, in Mbps.
> <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifi_sweetspots.jpg>

I said nothing about Mbps. I said dbm and also indicated the readings
over time are there. In other words, exact the same information
information you are talking about.

>
>> So, with little effort I can get the wifi strength over time easily. It
>> may not be flashy graphs, but just as usable.
>
> This is a useful signal strength output for debugging WiFi at home:
> <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/2wifianalyzer.jpg>
>
> As you move around the house, you get dynamic signal strength for all APs:
> <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/fritz_wlan.jpg>

The application I downloaded also gives me the same information. The
presentation is different, but it is the same information.

>
> It's clearly not hard to write the app; that's not the reason it's not in
> the app store.
>
> Why aren't hundreds of different functionalities in the App Store that are
> useful and on Android (e.g., automatic backup to APK on the users own file
> system)?
>
> It's not that they're hard to write.
> It's some other reason.

Yes, and you clearly ignore the reasons that have been previously presented.

>
> Maybe you can answer this question?
>
> You can pick *any* functionality on Android that isn't on iOS (there are
> scores of them - but just pick one that I've listed above) and ask why
> isn't that functionality on iOS?

I'm not playing your silly games.

>
> Q: Why doesn't Apple allow WiFi signal graphing over time?
> A: Who the hell knows why. But it's not there on the Apple App Store.
> And yet, *every* other platform has these apps.
>

Since wifi signal over time IS available on an iOS device, the same
functionality you are looking for does exist.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-01-05, Harry Newton <harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

> On 5 Jan 2018 16:50:25 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> LOL! Any iOS developer knows nospam is correct. You're in over way
>> your head, old man.
>
> I love when you post

Trying to change the subject yet again. Whenever you can't argue your
position you duck and run. Your routine is fucking boring and pathetic,
old man. Get a new one!

[Jolly Roger]

He'd never admit that. Like Trump, he refuses to be held accountable for
his own words - and likewise, he has zero integrity.

[Jolly Roger]

Yes, and he plays this dishonest little game trolling the Apple
newsgroups constantly (and I mean *constantly*, as in he spends hours
upon hours daily belittling Apple products and any complete strangers
here that use them), switching nyms (he's currently using two different
ones at the same time) to avoid kill filters, and insulting anyone who
calls him out on his lies. You're next. ; )

[Harold Newton]

On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 18:14:10 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> You really should be a trial lawyer.
>
> be careful for what you wish for, because if i was, i'd prosecute *you*.

Well spoken!

I'd truly worry if you were a trial lawyer prosecuting me, but you're never
going to be a prosecutor - you'd be a defense lawyer (prosecutors have to
follow the law).

If I did wrongly, then I would *love* to engage you as my trial lawyer,
because you'd defend me with aplomb using any and every possible twist and
turn and contortion of law and facts that would be possible.

So you are custom made for two vocations:
1. Apple lawyer
2. Defense lawyer

At those two jobs, you are the best there is and ever was.

[Harold Newton]

On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 18:14:09 -0500, nospam wrote:

>>> I don't write iOS code so I can't speak about building an app to graph
>>> wifi signal strength.
>>
>> I don't think it would at all be difficult to write,
>
> so you admit it's possible and that you've been lying all this time.

Again, you'd be a great defense lawyer trying to pin the prosecution
against the wall, where I never said Apple couldn't allow a wifi recording
app that graphs signal strength of all available access points over time.

They just don't.
That's a fact.

A good question is why Apple doesn't allow zillions of app functionalities,
from automatic phone recording to bit torrenting to accurate cell tower
identification to app launchers to app drawer apps to file redirectors to
the open source tor browser bundle (where the open source part is critical
in such an app) to the simple ability to organize your app icons on the
screen the way you want them to be organized.

Why doesn't Apple allow these apps while every other platform does?
I don't know why.

[nospam]

In article <p2tqgr$hnp$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harold Newton

<har...@example.com> wrote:

>
> >> You really should be a trial lawyer.
> >
> > be careful for what you wish for, because if i was, i'd prosecute *you*.
>
> Well spoken!
>
> I'd truly worry if you were a trial lawyer prosecuting me,

as you should

> but you're never
> going to be a prosecutor - you'd be a defense lawyer (prosecutors have to
> follow the law).

what an ignorant statement. so do defense lawyers.

and i'd definitely be a prosecutor and go after all of the sleazy
scumbags who rip people off, along with the slimeballs who work the
system to get away with murder (literally in some cases).

[nospam]

In article <p2tqqe$ibe$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harold Newton

<har...@example.com> wrote:

>
> >>> I don't write iOS code so I can't speak about building an app to graph
> >>> wifi signal strength.
> >>
> >> I don't think it would at all be difficult to write,
> >
> > so you admit it's possible and that you've been lying all this time.
>
> Again, you'd be a great defense lawyer trying to pin the prosecution
> against the wall, where I never said Apple couldn't allow a wifi recording
> app that graphs signal strength of all available access points over time.

yes you did, multiple times.

> They just don't.
> That's a fact.

as with all of your 'facts', that's absolutely wrong.

there is *no* prohibition on doing what you claim is impossible. as i
said, it would take maybe a day to write it, probably less.

[Harry Newton]

On 6 Jan 2018 01:15:27 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

>>>> I don't write iOS code so I can't speak about building an app to
>>>> graph wifi signal strength.
>>>
>>> I don't think it would at all be difficult to write,
>>
>> so you admit it's possible and that you've been lying all this time.
>
> He'd never admit that. Like Trump, he refuses to be held accountable for
> his own words - and likewise, he has zero integrity.

I even gave you guys an example of a screen-recording app that lasted a
month on the Apple Store and then was pulled by Apple (who, years later,
and many years after Android had it native), just this last September
finally added the screen recording native to iOS.

The fact that iOS is non functional in terms of app capabilities has never
been that the hardware is incapable of modern app functionalities such as
automatic call recorders, bit torrenting, app launchers, organizing your
screen any way you like, changing icon names to make sense, app drawer
apps, etc.

The hardware is about the same for Android and iOS high end devices.

The reason iOS is basically stuck in the primitive stone age of app
functionality is merely that Apple wants it that way.

Why did Apple pull that screen recording app?
I don't know why - but it's not because it was hard to write as you and
nospam claim.

The fact that iOS is non functional in terms of app capabilities compared
to Android is not because the apps are hard to write (as nospam claims).

You tell me why there are so many app functionalities on *all* other
platforms, but not on iOS.

[Harry Newton]

On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 17:31:25 -0600, joe wrote:

> I'm not playing your silly games.

Unless you name the app, you *are* playing silly games (just like Jolly
Roger and nospam do).

Remember, I have plenty of iOS devices myself.
If you're not playing silly games, just name the app.

Snit did. And I downloaded it. And I used it. And this is what I got:
<http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifi_sweetspots.jpg>

This is what he claimed it was reporting:
<http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/2wifianalyzer.jpg>
<http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/fritz_wlan.jpg>

Let's see what your un-named app is.

Just name the app if you're not playing silly games.

[Harry Newton]

On 6 Jan 2018 01:19:21 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> Yes, and he plays this dishonest little game trolling the Apple
> newsgroups constantly (and I mean *constantly*, as in he spends hours
> upon hours daily belittling Apple products and any complete strangers
> here that use them), switching nyms (he's currently using two different
> ones at the same time) to avoid kill filters, and insulting anyone who
> calls him out on his lies. You're next. ; )

Notice that this "Joe" Apple Apologist *claims* functionality but he hasn't
once listed the name or URL of the app he claims has that functionality.

I'd be *ecstatic* if there was an app on iOS that actually did what these
Android apps do.
Android: <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/2wifianalyzer.jpg>
Android: <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/fritz_wlan.jpg>

You can call me "dishonest" because I state the truth and I name the apps
that I claim do what they do.

Let's see how "honest" this "Joe" is who "claims" that iOS has apps that do
what those Android apps do.

I'd be ecstatic to test Joe's claims out as I have plenty of iOS devices.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-01-07, Harry Newton <harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:
> On 6 Jan 2018 01:19:21 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Yes, and he plays this dishonest little game trolling the Apple
>> newsgroups constantly (and I mean *constantly*, as in he spends hours
>> upon hours daily belittling Apple products and any complete strangers
>> here that use them), switching nyms (he's currently using two different
>> ones at the same time) to avoid kill filters, and insulting anyone who
>> calls him out on his lies. You're next. ; )
>

> Blah blah blah blah blah Apple Apologist blah blah blah blah

Get some new material, old fool.

[nospam]

In article <p2tre5$jef$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

> I'd be *ecstatic* if there was an app on iOS that actually did what these
> Android apps do.

bullshit.

you'd claim it isn't 'exactly' the same and therefore disqualify it, as
you have many, many times before.

[Harry Newton]

On Sun, 07 Jan 2018 14:04:35 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> I'd truly worry if you were a trial lawyer prosecuting me,
>
> as you should
>
>> but you're never
>> going to be a prosecutor - you'd be a defense lawyer (prosecutors have to
>> follow the law).
>
> what an ignorant statement. so do defense lawyers.
>
> and i'd definitely be a prosecutor and go after all of the sleazy
> scumbags who rip people off, along with the slimeballs who work the
> system to get away with murder (literally in some cases).

I have plenty of lawyers in my family, where they tell me that the
prosecutor is hampered. Sure the prosecution and defense both have to
follow the law, but the defense is basically in a different posistion with
a jury in that he just has to bring up a reasonable doubt while the
prosecution has to wipe out that reasonable doubt.

Those are two different things because you don't need facts to bring up a
reasonable doubt - you can bring up "conjecture" ... for example, "What if
he was in Spain at the time of the murder?" where the prosecution then has
to prove he wasn't in Spain at that time.

So they're basically two different types of lawyering, where I'd *love* to
have you as my defense lawyer (I mean that!). You're that good.

You're also very good at MARKETING since you never state the bad side of
anything, so there are three things you are PERFECT for:

1. Apple lawyer (because that's basically a defense lawyer)
2. Defense lawyer (you would make millions!)
3. Apple MARKETING (you only talk about the good - never the bad)

I truly mean it when I say you'd be GREAT at those jobs!

Me?
I'm better as a Ralph Nader type. Exposing lies and hypocrisy.

[joe]

AirPort Utility. You should be able to find it if you look.

Since I'm not playing games, here is the link.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/airport-utility/id427276530?mt=8

Here is the output showing visible Aps with strength in dbm.
https://support.apple.com/library/content/dam/edam/applecare/images/en_US/airport/iphone6-ios9.3.4-airport-utility-scan-initiated.png

Here is the output showing the strength over time.
https://support.apple.com/library/content/dam/edam/applecare/images/en_US/airport/iphone6-ios9.3.4-airport-utility-select-ssid.png

[Jolly Roger]

It's as if he actually thinks people can't read what he's actually
written previously. He's a fucking moron.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-01-07, joe <no...@invalid.com> wrote:
> On 01/07/2018 01:09 PM, Harry Newton wrote:
>> On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 17:31:25 -0600, joe wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not playing your silly games.
>>
>> Unless you name the app, you *are* playing silly games
>

> AirPort Utility. You should be able to find it if you look.
>
> Since I'm not playing games, here is the link.
> https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/airport-utility/id427276530?mt=8
>
> Here is the output showing visible Aps with strength in dbm.
> https://support.apple.com/library/content/dam/edam/applecare/images/en_US/airport/iphone6-ios9.3.4-airport-utility-scan-initiated.png
>
> Here is the output showing the strength over time.
> https://support.apple.com/library/content/dam/edam/applecare/images/en_US/airport/iphone6-ios9.3.4-airport-utility-select-ssid.png

Now he'll try to dispute this as "fake news". ; )

[nospam]

In article <p2trp2$k2n$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

> >> but you're never
> >> going to be a prosecutor - you'd be a defense lawyer (prosecutors have to
> >> follow the law).
> >
> > what an ignorant statement. so do defense lawyers.
> >
> > and i'd definitely be a prosecutor and go after all of the sleazy
> > scumbags who rip people off, along with the slimeballs who work the
> > system to get away with murder (literally in some cases).
>
> I have plenty of lawyers in my family, where they tell me that the
> prosecutor is hampered. Sure the prosecution and defense both have to
> follow the law,

you just contradicted yourself.

> but the defense is basically in a different posistion with
> a jury in that he just has to bring up a reasonable doubt while the
> prosecution has to wipe out that reasonable doubt.

for someone with 'plenty of lawyers in his family', you don't
understand the difference between criminal and civil trials.

[Harry Newton]

On Sun, 07 Jan 2018 14:04:36 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> Again, you'd be a great defense lawyer trying to pin the prosecution
>> against the wall, where I never said Apple couldn't allow a wifi recording
>> app that graphs signal strength of all available access points over time.
>
> yes you did, multiple times.

This is why you'd be a good defense lawyer, because you just make this
stuff up.

Maybe you wouldn't be good in marketnig though, because it's illegal to
just make this stuff up but you'd only be in trouble when you get caught.

But you make it up so often that you'd eventually get caught.

>
>> They just don't.
>> That's a fact.
>
> as with all of your 'facts', that's absolutely wrong.

You can prove me wrong in a second, just like I proved Snit wrong after
waiting for him (and warning him nicely twice) to realize that he was
talking about speed tests and not Wi-Fi strength (where even you high-fived
some of Snit's hundreds (and I mean hundreds) of posts).
iOS: <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifi_sweetspots.jpg>

All you have to do is *name a free iOS app* that I can download on my
non-jailbroken iOS devices that does what these free Android apps do:

Android: <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/2wifianalyzer.jpg>
Android: <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/fritz_wlan.jpg>

> there is *no* prohibition on doing what you claim is impossible. as i
> said, it would take maybe a day to write it, probably less.

You would be a good lawyer because you ignore that I already proved that
the effort to write an app isn't why Apple yanks them from the app store,
as I showed with the screen recording app.

Unlike you Apple Apologists, I prove what I say.

This screen-recoding app lasted a single day on the App Store:
Screen Recorder For iOS Vidyo Gets Yanked From App Store
<https://techcrunch.com/2016/01/07/screen-recorder-for-ios-vidyo-gets-yanked-from-app-store/>

Vidyo gets pulled from the App Store because iOS screen recording is
banned
<https://www.macworld.com/article/3020068/ios/vidyo-gets-pulled-from-the-app-store-because-ios-screen-recording-is-banned.html>

Note that screen recording has been native on Android for *years*, while
Apple only introduced native screen recording this past *September*.

I'm different than you.
I only speak fact.

You can't be trusted. Except as a defense lawyer. Then you'd be the best!

[Harry Newton]

On Sun, 07 Jan 2018 14:22:08 -0500, nospam wrote:

> for someone with 'plenty of lawyers in his family', you don't
> understand the difference between criminal and civil trials.

I was talking criminal, and the differences are immense, as you note,
particularly on the burden of proof (as you note).

Remember, OJ was convicted as a murderer only in the civil case, where not
only couldn't he plead the fifth, but the burden of proof was lower.

[nospam]

In article <p2ts9v$l1c$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

>
> But you make it up so often that you'd eventually get caught.

you've been caught making up stuff on countless occasions.

> You can prove me wrong in a second,

and i have, many times, as have others.

[Harry Newton]

On Sun, 07 Jan 2018 14:17:25 -0500, nospam wrote:

> you'd claim it isn't 'exactly' the same and therefore disqualify it, as
> you have many, many times before.

Heh heh heh ... notice nobody on iOS has yet to *name* the app they claim
exists!

[Harry Newton]

On 7 Jan 2018 19:18:22 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> It's as if he actually thinks people can't read what he's actually
> written previously. He's a fucking moron.

I think that's funny given you, Jolly Roger, high-fived some of the
*hundreds* of claims by Snit that this app actually displays WiFi signal
strength over time for all visible access points! :)

<http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifi_sweetspots.jpg>

[Harry Newton]

On 7 Jan 2018 19:21:10 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> Now he'll try to dispute this as "fake news". ; )

Jolly Roger, you were on the conversation about the Airport Utility *years*
ago, so even you know there is no real-time graphical capability.

You Apple Apologists are completely devoid of any facts!

You're like little babies.

You're not normal adults.

[Harry Newton]

On Sun, 7 Jan 2018 13:18:02 -0600, joe wrote:

> AirPort Utility. You should be able to find it if you look.

Apple Apologists again completely *fabricated* imaginary iOS capability!
Why do iOS apologists incessantly fabricate fictional iOS functionality?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/K_yBNZiPFYo/yekUPvIXAwAJ>

Jeeesus. You Apple Apologists don't have any memory of facts!

We covered the Airport utility in detail *years* ago (August 25, 2015)!
How are we supposed to read 5GHz WiFi signal strength bands?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sci.electronics.repair/-yVNcw_nVO8>

The word "graph" doesn't mean anything to you Joe, but even Snit knew that
the key was that the graphing of the information in real time was the
question.

As in all the screenshots (even those by Snit which at least were a graph):
iOS: <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifi_sweetspots.jpg>

Android: <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/2wifianalyzer.jpg>
Android: <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/fritz_wlan.jpg>

We never said the *hardware* didn't have the information.
We always said the app *functionalilty* of the real-time graph was missing.

There is no Wi-Fi signal strength over time graph in Airport. Period.

It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/IK0TZ3LxGgQ/kwhrUnzoBAAJ>

Yet again, every claim by the Apple Apologists begs the question:

What is wrong with the Apple Apologists that they incessantly and brazenly
fabricate iOS functionality that simple doesn't exist.

[Harry Newton]

On Sun, 7 Jan 2018 19:32:27 +0000 (UTC), Harry Newton wrote:

>> you'd claim it isn't 'exactly' the same and therefore disqualify it, as
>> you have many, many times before.
>
> Heh heh heh ... notice nobody on iOS has yet to *name* the app they claim
> exists!

What's hilarious is that when they finally name the app they claim graphs
signal strength in real time - it's - get this - it's Airport!

Hilariaous.

We covered Airport in detail *years* ago, and it fails the test
immediately.

How are we supposed to read 5GHz WiFi signal strength bands?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sci.electronics.repair/-yVNcw_nVO8>

Yet again, every claim by the Apple Apologists begs the question:

What is wrong with the Apple Apologists that they incessantly and brazenly

fabricate app functionality that simple doesn't exist.

[Harry Newton]

On Sun, 07 Jan 2018 14:30:22 -0500, nospam wrote:

> you've been caught making up stuff on countless occasions.

Name one (and provide a link like I do for your lies).

[joe]

On 01/07/2018 02:03 PM, Harry Newton wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2018 13:18:02 -0600, joe wrote:
>
>> AirPort Utility. You should be able to find it if you look.
>
> Apple Apologists again completely *fabricated* imaginary iOS capability!

I did not fabricate anything.

> Why do iOS apologists incessantly fabricate fictional iOS functionality?
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/K_yBNZiPFYo/yekUPvIXAwAJ>
>
> Jeeesus. You Apple Apologists don't have any memory of facts!
>
> We covered the Airport utility in detail *years* ago (August 25, 2015)!
> How are we supposed to read 5GHz WiFi signal strength bands?
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sci.electronics.repair/-yVNcw_nVO8>

Look at the channel number. It is displayed.

>
> The word "graph" doesn't mean anything to you Joe, but even Snit knew that
> the key was that the graphing of the information in real time was the
> question.

I never said that there was graphing. In fact, I indicated it did not
graph. But, your reading comprehension is rather limited.

>
> As in all the screenshots (even those by Snit which at least were a graph):
> iOS: <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifi_sweetspots.jpg>
> Android: <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/2wifianalyzer.jpg>
> Android: <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/fritz_wlan.jpg>
>
> We never said the *hardware* didn't have the information.
> We always said the app *functionalilty* of the real-time graph was missing.

The functionality of strength over time is there. That is what you
wanted, and that also meets your goal of wandering around the house to
look at different strengths. You are arguing a presentation detail. In
other discussions you dismiss details when they disagree with your bias.
But here a detail suits your bias. Hows does the output not meet the
need to determine what strength is observed?

>
> There is no Wi-Fi signal strength over time graph in Airport. Period.

I never said there was a graph.

>
> It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/IK0TZ3LxGgQ/kwhrUnzoBAAJ>
>
> Yet again, every claim by the Apple Apologists begs the question:
>
> What is wrong with the Apple Apologists that they incessantly and brazenly
> fabricate iOS functionality that simple doesn't exist.
>

No, the question is why do you persist in whining about a few select
things over and over and over again?

[Harry Newton]

On Sun, 7 Jan 2018 14:23:43 -0600, joe wrote:

> I never said that there was graphing.

The *entire point* was real-time graphing of all available access points!

It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/IK0TZ3LxGgQ/kwhrUnzoBAAJ>

You think none of us are aware of the Airport Utility for heaven's sake?

We covered that *years* ago.

So yet again, you Apple Apologists make silly claims.

Nobody ever said Apple *hardware* wasn't as capable as Android hardware
(although, we know Android hardware is more capable, in that some have
internal dual sims, 2TB internal sd slots, courageous headphone jacks,
integral stylus, FM radios, unthrottled modems, etc.)

The hardware is *always* capable of obtaining the Wi-Fi signal strength at
any time for any available access point. Everyone knew that. Everyone knew
that the Airport Utility doesn't graph anything.

I only speak fact.

It's simply a fact that Apple iOS devices lack the app functionality that
is on Android, and this lack of a graphical wi-fi reporting capability is
just one example out of scores upon scores of examples.

What this thread is asking what is so very *wrong* with Apple Apologists
who try to deny such basic and obvious facts with incredible brazen claims
of imaginary iOS functionality that only exists in their minds.

[Jolly Roger]

His own words betray him. He seems to truly believe people can't read all
of his previous trolls and see for themselves he has zero integrity.

[Jolly Roger]

Harry Newton <harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:
> On 7 Jan 2018 19:18:22 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> It's as if he actually thinks people can't read what he's actually
>> written previously. He's a fucking moron.
>
> I think that's funny

No, it's just fucking pathetic. An old man your age should have better
things to do than spend countless hours trolling complete strangers in
newsgroups for products from a company you clearly hate. You are sad.

[joe]

On 01/07/2018 02:38 PM, Harry Newton wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2018 14:23:43 -0600, joe wrote:
>
>> I never said that there was graphing.
>
> The *entire point* was real-time graphing of all available access points!
> It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/IK0TZ3LxGgQ/kwhrUnzoBAAJ>
>

I would have thought the point would be to have the information
available so that you could do something with it. But for you the
emphasis seems to be on presentation.

[Jolly Roger]

Harry Newton <harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:
> On 7 Jan 2018 19:21:10 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Now he'll try to dispute this as "fake news". ; )
>

> Blah blah Apple Apologists blah blah blah blah!

Broken record troll.

[Savageduck]

This is a multipart message in MIME format.

--HW.2002CA40026CCC977000068382CF
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On Jan 7, 2018, nospam wrote
(in article<070120181430223471%nos...@nospam.invalid>):

Here are a few apps, some of which are also available for Android, so he can
deny their existence, or deny that they do the job.

<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/netsignal-signal-strength-wifi-analyzer-
tools/id1255008505>
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/network-utility-pro/id1088015925>
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/dr-wifi-speed-signal-test/id1188167907>

The only reason I am responding to you, is the SNR in the Apple groups has
become intolerable due to the Santa Clara Nymshifter provocateur.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

[Savageduck]

On Jan 7, 2018, Savageduck wrote
(in article<0001HW.2002CA4002...@news.giganews.com>):

> This is a multipart message in MIME format.
>
> --HW.2002CA40026CCC977000068382CF
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>
> On Jan 7, 2018, nospam wrote
> (in article<070120181430223471%nos...@nospam.invalid>):
>
> > In article<p2ts9v$l1c$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton
> > <harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > But you make it up so often that you'd eventually get caught.
> >
> > you've been caught making up stuff on countless occasions.
> >
> > > You can prove me wrong in a second,
> >
> > and i have, many times, as have others.
>
> Here are a few apps, some of which are also available for Android, so he can
> deny their existence, or deny that they do the job.
>

> <https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/netsignal-signal-strength-wifi-analyzer-tools/id1255008505> or <https://tinyurl.com/ydgwmuca>

[Harry Newton]

On Sun, 07 Jan 2018 13:36:00 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

> Here are a few apps, some of which are also available for Android, so he can
> deny their existence, or deny that they do the job.

Thank you for being an adult and hence for trying to answer the question
since it's not a trait of the Apple Apologists to respond with facts on
anything.

> <https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/network-utility-pro/id1088015925>

Network Utility Pro, By Fausto Ristagno
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/network-utility-pro/id1088015925

This just has a "pretty graph" in milliseconds for the ping, seemingly for
only one access point, so it's not even close to a real-time WiFi signal
strength moving graph for all available access points, and it's not even in
decibels.
<http://is1.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Purple127/v4/da/7b/ac/da7bac39-e10b-9753-c62d-87e3676c53dd/source/392x696bb.jpg>

> <https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/dr-wifi-speed-signal-test/id1188167907>

Dr. Wifi: speed & signal test, By Trend Micro, Incorporated
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/dr-wifi-speed-signal-test/
<http://is4.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Purple128/v4/1c/d6/bc/1cd6bca3-270b-929d-b4a0-579713b513fc/source/392x696bb.jpg>

This just has a "pretty instantaneous signal strength meter" seemingly for
only one Wi-Fi access point, so it's closer, but it's still not a real-time
WiFi signal strength graph for all available access points - but at least
it's in decibels - so that is a step forward.

> <https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/netsignal-signal-strength-wifi-analyzer-
> tools/id1255008505>

NetSignal - signal strength, wifi analyzer, tools, By Natallia Kudzelka
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/netsignal-signal-strength-wifi-analyzer-tools/id1255008505>

That $4 app is the only app that even comes close to the app capabilities
on Android for a real-time moving graph of all access point signal strength
over time:

Android: <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/2wifianalyzer.jpg>
Android: <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/fritz_wlan.jpg>

The app does show what appears to be a signal graph for a *single* WiFi
hotspot over time in *decibels*, but the comments indicate Apple killed it
in iOS 11 (which we've seen before with the screen-recording apps).
<http://is1.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Purple128/v4/f3/38/d0/f338d030-54c2-c1d6-ccb0-3e91f4e12639/source/392x696bb.jpg>

Comment from Justin Hurleys:
"Starting from iOS11 Apple does not provide way to fetch cell signal
strength. None of existing apps would work. Please complain to Apple
and not to app developer !"

Comment from by Mmmfishies
Nice app, but crashes immediately on iPhone X
"Crashes immediately on my iPhone X with no response from the
device and a support link that goes to a non-existant Facebook page.
I'm now wondering if this is abandoned."

While this app isn't the same thing (it's not even close because it doesn't
show all access points, which is a key requirement), it definitely is the
*closest* ever anyone here has suggested that meets the stated
requirements, so kudos to you for finding it - although when I test it,
I'll find out if it works with current iOS devices.

Kudos to you, Savageduck, for finding *something* on iOS that is even
remotely close to the functionality that is already on Android. Apple may
have already killed it (based on the comments) so I won't know if it's
still working until I try it.

> The only reason I am responding to you, is the SNR in the Apple groups has
> become intolerable due to the Santa Clara Nymshifter provocateur.

The only reason I am responding to you is that you are actually acting like
a real adult in this post, which we all appreciate.

[Harry Newton]

On 7 Jan 2018 20:45:32 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> His own words betray him. He seems to truly believe people can't read all
> of his previous trolls and see for themselves he has zero integrity.

Except that none of you can find a *single* lie from me, out of perhaps
tens of thousands (maybe even a hundred thousand) posts over the years.

It's trivial for me to find lies, after lies, after lies, after lies, from
you Apple Apologists.

You Apple Apologists are not normal adults.

[Harry Newton]

On 7 Jan 2018 20:45:33 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> No, it's just fucking pathetic. An old man your age should have better
> things to do than spend countless hours trolling complete strangers in
> newsgroups for products from a company you clearly hate. You are sad.

If the Apple Apologists could just admit the truth, these threads would be
short indeed.

Remember, I post on a plethora of hardware & software newsgroups.

It's only the Apple ng's where the Apple Apologists can't admit the truth.

[Harry Newton]

On 6 Jan 2018 01:13:40 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> Trying to change the subject yet again. Whenever you can't argue your
> position you duck and run. Your routine is fucking boring and pathetic,
> old man. Get a new one!

The subject is *why* can't the Apple Apologists admit the truth?

[Harry Newton]

On 7 Jan 2018 21:29:46 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> Broken record troll.

The point, which was proven in this thread, and in all threads that contain
a truth the Apple Apologists don't like, is that Apple Apologists can't
ever admit the truth.

Why can't the Apple Apologists just admit the truth?

I don't know why. I just know they can't.

[Harry Newton]

On Sun, 7 Jan 2018 15:03:05 -0600, joe wrote:

> I would have thought the point would be to have the information
> available so that you could do something with it. But for you the
> emphasis seems to be on presentation.

My point in this thread is that the Apple Apologists deny every fact that
they don't like - even as you did.

The whole point of that one technical issue was the graphical reporting,
which you at least tried to answer with technical semblance - but -
remember - the Apple Appologists posted over 400 claims that the app that
showed a graph was a graph of WiFi signal strength.

The Apple Apologists are odd adults in that they deny facts that are facts.

[joe]

On 01/07/2018 04:52 PM, Harry Newton wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2018 15:03:05 -0600, joe wrote:
>
>> I would have thought the point would be to have the information
>> available so that you could do something with it. But for you the
>> emphasis seems to be on presentation.
>
> My point in this thread is that the Apple Apologists deny every fact that
> they don't like - even as you did.

In this thread, what fact did I deny?

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-01-07, Harry Newton <harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:
> On 7 Jan 2018 20:45:32 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> His own words betray him. He seems to truly believe people can't read all
>> of his previous trolls and see for themselves he has zero integrity.
>
> Except that none of you can find a *single* lie from me

We have - you just won't admit it. You are fooling nobody.

> You Apple Apologists

Get a new hobby.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-01-07, Harry Newton <harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

> On 7 Jan 2018 20:45:33 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> No, it's just fucking pathetic. An old man your age should have better
>> things to do than spend countless hours trolling complete strangers in
>> newsgroups for products from a company you clearly hate. You are sad.
>
> If the Apple Apologists

Troll, troll, troll your boat...

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-01-07, Harry Newton <harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

> On 7 Jan 2018 21:29:46 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Broken record troll.
>
> The point,

Troll, troll, troll your boat...

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-01-07, Harry Newton <harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

> On 6 Jan 2018 01:13:40 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Trying to change the subject yet again. Whenever you can't argue your
>> position you duck and run. Your routine is fucking boring and pathetic,
>> old man. Get a new one!
>
> The subject

[nospam]

In article <p2u0gc$sll$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

> It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time

it's not a fact, which you even admitted.

[nospam]

In article <p2tus8$pho$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

>
> > you've been caught making up stuff on countless occasions.
>
> Name one (and provide a link like I do for your lies).

just about everything you post.

whenever someone proves you wrong, you snip to alter context.

[Harry Newton]

On Sun, 07 Jan 2018 21:49:41 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
>
> it's not a fact, which you even admitted.

Show us, oh genius, where I said that iOS can graph WiFi signal strength
over time for all access points like the plethora of free Android apps do.

Might I remind you of your previous claims (which Snit trolled over 400
times): <http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifi_sweetspots.jpg>

This is what he was claiming iOS had the functionality of:

[Harry Newton]

On Sun, 7 Jan 2018 17:24:44 -0600, joe wrote:

>> My point in this thread is that the Apple Apologists deny every fact that
>> they don't like - even as you did.
>
> In this thread, what fact did I deny?

There is no app on iOS that does something as logically simple as the free
apps do on Android which is graph wifi signal strength in real time and
over time for all available access points.

Period.
It doesn't exist.

To claim that Airport is even close is utterly ridiculous.
That's like saying a motorcycle does close to what a truck does.

[Harry Newton]

On 7 Jan 2018 23:37:36 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

>> Except that none of you can find a *single* lie from me
>
> We have - you just won't admit it. You are fooling nobody.

Name a single one.

[Harry Newton]

On Sun, 07 Jan 2018 21:49:43 -0500, nospam wrote:

>>> you've been caught making up stuff on countless occasions.
>>
>> Name one (and provide a link like I do for your lies).
>
> just about everything you post.
>
> whenever someone proves you wrong, you snip to alter context.

I knew you couldn't name a single one.

I gave up long ago wondering how people like you could actually exist.

It's just sad that you do exist, and we have to leave it at that.

The amount of ill-logic in your head is astounding.

[nospam]

In article <p2uvfa$1lp$2...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

>
> >> It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
> >
> > it's not a fact, which you even admitted.
>
> Show us, oh genius, where I said that iOS can graph WiFi signal strength
> over time for all access points like the plethora of free Android apps do.

yesterday you admitted it was very easy to write an app to do it.

[Harry Newton]

On Mon, 08 Jan 2018 01:07:46 -0500, nospam wrote:

>>
>>>> It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
>>>
>>> it's not a fact, which you even admitted.
>>
>> Show us, oh genius, where I said that iOS can graph WiFi signal strength
>> over time for all access points like the plethora of free Android apps do.
>
> yesterday you admitted it was very easy to write an app to do it.

Oh my God, what a contortionist you are.

Of course the capability exists. The data exists. It's just the *app* that
doesn't exist.

Nobody ever said otherwise.

There is so much *app functionality* on Android that is *not* on iOS that
it's not funny (e.g., app drawer apps, launcher apps, backup to local disk
apps, automatic phone recording apps, torrenting apps, etc.).

Why doesn't tons of app functionality that exists for Android not exist for
Apple iOS devices.
I don't know.

I just know that it doesn't exist.
And when it does, Apple kills it fast.

For example, was that screen recording app on iOS but Apple killed it
quickly:
<https://9to5mac.com/2016/01/06/screen-recorder-ios/>

Meanwhile, Android has had native screen recording for *years* while Apple
just came up with it native last September.

The reason Apple kills apps has nothing to do with how easy it is to write
them. Who knows why Apple kills apps - but the fact is that there is so
much app functionality available for Android that is not on iOS that it's
not funny.

I only speak facts.

[nospam]

In article <p2v2d1$4r1$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

> >>
> >>>> It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
> >>>
> >>> it's not a fact, which you even admitted.
> >>
> >> Show us, oh genius, where I said that iOS can graph WiFi signal strength
> >> over time for all access points like the plethora of free Android apps do.
> >
> > yesterday you admitted it was very easy to write an app to do it.
>
> Oh my God, what a contortionist you are.
>
> Of course the capability exists. The data exists. It's just the *app* that
> doesn't exist.
>
> Nobody ever said otherwise.

you did. you said it was not possible. it is.

[joe]

On 01/07/2018 11:27 PM, Harry Newton wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2018 17:24:44 -0600, joe wrote:
>
>>> My point in this thread is that the Apple Apologists deny every fact that
>>> they don't like - even as you did.
>>
>> In this thread, what fact did I deny?
>
> There is no app on iOS that does something as logically simple as the free
> apps do on Android which is graph wifi signal strength in real time and
> over time for all available access points.

I made no such statement in this thread. You're assertion that I did is
a LIE on your part.

I some respect, I may have supported your claim.

My initial post, in this thread, concluded with "So, with little effort
I can get the wifi strength over time easily. It may not be flashy
graphs, but just as usable."

I clearly indicated there were no graphs.

But I also indicated I could get the information needed to understand
the strength of wifi signals which is really the key data needed when
surveying wifi.

Spending all your effort whining about the presentation of data that is
readily available seems rather petty.

>
> Period.
> It doesn't exist.
>
> To claim that Airport is even close is utterly ridiculous.

AirPort Utility does provide the information that allows one to
understand wifi signal strength from all visible APs.

> That's like saying a motorcycle does close to what a truck does.
>

Again, another pointlessly absurd analogy. They are significantly
different vehicles.

But, I will partially support one of your other claims. With respect to
discussing any issues with you in a reasonable manner, I just give up.

[Harry Newton]

On Mon, 08 Jan 2018 01:30:22 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> Nobody ever said otherwise.
>
> you did. you said it was not possible. it is.

First off, you're now speaking like a cornered rat who is just playing
silly semantic games - where I'd expect far better from my defense lawyer.

Secondly, I never once said that you couldn't find an app if you jailbroke
the device - so we specifically exclude jailbreaking because anything is
possible if you jailbreak.

Likewise, if you write your own app, anything is possible because I never
once said the hardware is not about the same for high end phones (in fact,
I've said this many times).

I've never once said the iPhone hardware doesn't *know* the signal strength
information for all available access points - and in fact - we have had
multiple threads in the past on Airport which you simply have forgotten
about.

What's not possible is for the basic user, on iOS, that which is possible
on Android, with respect to simple free useful (aka not miserable) wifi
debugging of signal strength over time with a moving graph of decibels (not
milliseconds, not megabits, but decibels) in real time over time.

Those free apps abound on the Android repositories.
They simply don't exist on the iOS app store (free or payware).

Only Savageduck found anything even somewhat resembling that spec, which I
commend him for, since he's not normally known to act like an adult - but
he did in that case - which is commendable.

[Harry Newton]

On Mon, 8 Jan 2018 07:06:52 -0600, joe wrote:

> Spending all your effort whining about the presentation of data that is
> readily available seems rather petty.

There are two kinds of tools.
a. Easy to use to get the job done
b. Miserable to use to get the job done

Another way of saying that is:
a. The tool can display useful data in a useful way
b. The tool can display useful data in a miserable way

Android Fritz! WLAN is easy.
iOS Airport is miserable

[Jolly Roger]

All of them.

[nospam]

In article <p307ng$4m6$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

> you're now speaking like a cornered rat who is just playing
> silly semantic games

that would be you.

> Secondly, I never once said that you couldn't find an app if you jailbroke
> the device - so we specifically exclude jailbreaking because anything is
> possible if you jailbreak.

jailbreaking is not required.

once again, you're moving the goalposts after having been cornered.

[nospam]

In article <p307ni$4m6$2...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

>
> There are two kinds of tools.

you, and the ones sold at the hardware store.

[Harry Newton]

On Mon, 08 Jan 2018 12:11:22 -0500, nospam wrote:

> once again, you're moving the goalposts after having been cornered.

What you don't understand is that it's impossible to "corner" me because I
only speak fact.

* It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
* <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0/3PHWnNWn
AQAJ>

What you do, so very often, is catch me not explicitly stating in every
single sentence what you *know* to be the points (e.g., non jailbroken)
which were all stated many times, so I don't state them in *every*
sentence.

Then, when you find a lax sentence, you pounce on it, like a hungry
vagabond, as if you found a jewel, but that's the only thing you *can* do,
since I only speak facts - hence - you can't "corner" me as it's not
possible.

Since facts are anathema to you, when I speak facts, you hunt for corners
in a sphere - and you never find them - because they don't exist except
when you play your silly semantic games.

What's strange with you, of all the Apple Apologists, is that you're the
*only* one whose intelligence matches that of mine in that you actually
*know* more about iOS than I do (the rest, e.g., Jolly Roger, BK, Snit,
etc., are shockingly clueless knaves).

The main problem with you is the subject line of this thread, which is that
you can never tell the truth.

Why?

I don't know why.

I used to think you're just a duplicitous liar (hence a troll), and you may
very well be - but you do have the propensity to understand (unlike Jolly
Roger who doesn't even understand the basic iOS concepts).

I also used to think you are simply defending an *idea* or a *feeling*,
which is probably more what you're doing. You can't stand facts that
detract from what you feel is your "idea of iOS" or your "feeling of iOS",
in that you want to think that it's actually functional, even though you
know the facts clearly show that it's not.

You want to think that Apple didn't throttle the CPU, and yet, deep in your
mind, you know they did.

You want to think that Apple devices are about the same cost as Android
devices but every time you posit a lousy price-to-performance example,
someone does the research that proves you wrong every time.

What you rely on, always, is that someone won't do the research.

That's your *only* real strength when you make all your bold-faced lies.

You hope, like Apple did, that you won't get caught in your lies.
Meanwhile, you can never catch me in a lie since I only speak facts.

We're different that way.
* You speak feeling of what you *wish* iOS was
* I speak facts of what iOS actually is

We're completely opposite.

[nospam]

In article <p30c55$dbe$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

>
> > once again, you're moving the goalposts after having been cornered.
>
> What you don't understand is that it's impossible to "corner" me

not only possible, but it happens with regularity. it's almost comical.

[Lewis]

And it takes so little effort.

--
all your snowflakes are urine and you can't even find the cat

[Harry Newton]

On Mon, 8 Jan 2018 20:23:07 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

> And it takes so little effort.

Oh no ... I forgot about the Lewis troll....

While Jolly Roger is dumb, at least he 'claims' to have coded.

Lewis is so brain dead that all he can ever do, for thousands of posts, is
simply +1 someone elses' thoughts.

Lewis - I realize this is a hard question for you (as are any questions);

Q: Have you Lewis, ever once, in your entire life, had an original thought?

[Harry Newton]

On Mon, 08 Jan 2018 13:27:00 -0500, nospam wrote:

>>> once again, you're moving the goalposts after having been cornered.
>>
>> What you don't understand is that it's impossible to "corner" me
>
> not only possible, but it happens with regularity. it's almost comical.

Even your attempts at insulting are just what you Apple Apologists *wish*
were the case.

At least my characterizations of you Apple Apologists is reasonably
accurate (e.g., you actually know when you're telling a mistruth because
you do it on purpose while Jolly Roger doesn't because he actually
*believes* what he writes - you don't believe what you write since you know
it to be false).

That's the difference between you and the other Apple Apologists (e.g.,
Snit).

You *knew* he was making a fool of himself by posting his video 400 times
of WiFi signal strength (although you high-fived him so it took you a while
to figure out what the Y axis was). Jolly Roger, to this day, still doesn't
know what the Y axis of that app was reporting.

So not all Apple Apologists act exactly alike - but all make up brazen
claims for what iOS can't do but they insist it can (e.g., reporting the
signal strength for all visible access points in a graphical timeline).

You Apple Apologists incessantly fabricate fictional funcdtionality.
Why?

You tell me why you do it.
All I know is you incessantly claim iOS can do that which even you know
that it can't and as a result, you are almost always wrong and you can
never prove a single statement you make.

I wonder, even though you're smart, if you don't have a formal education
where the basic approach of proving what you say is standard.

Clearly Jolly Roger and BKonRamp lack formal education, but I'm asking you.

Do you also lack a formal education?

If so, that could go a long way toward explaining why you make claims that
you hope nobody checks up on because your incessant fabrications of
imaginary iOS functionality have to have a root cause somewhere.

[nospam]

In article <p30kjl$tk4$3...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

>
> >>> once again, you're moving the goalposts after having been cornered.
> >>
> >> What you don't understand is that it's impossible to "corner" me
> >
> > not only possible, but it happens with regularity. it's almost comical.
>
> Even your attempts at insulting

it's not an insult when it's 'a fact'.

[sms]

On 1/1/2018 2:24 PM, Harold Newton wrote:

<snip>

I was over at the new Apple Visitor Center today with a visitor from out
of town and his two sisters. They both have iPhone 6 models, that have
slowed considerably, and asked about the battery replacement program.

The new Visitor Center has a store that sells all the Apple products,
but it does not have a Genius Bar or service facility. The employees
there were apologetic about the problem and advised them to make an
appointment at one of the Apple stores in the area. There were no
denials. Everyone knows that the issue is real and there is no upside in
denying it. So the Apple employees are not denying that the issue is
real. Who are you referring to that is in denial?

This was my second visit to the new Visitor Center, which is very well
done. Very classy. Very Apple. Minimalist but everything is
high-quality--the Japanese teak tables and chairs are especially nice.
It was raining both times I went, but we went up to the roof where you
have a good view of the new "spaceship" building. There are tables up on
the roof but no shelter from the weather. The first time I went was when
they opened it to local officials, and they served free coffee and
desserts. Now a latte is $5, which is a little high, but it's an iLatte,
and they do a really good job with their espresso drinks, so for Apple
aficionados it's worth a visit. It's a good place to buy all your Apple
products and swag, and enjoy coffee and pastries.

[Harry Newton]

On 8 Jan 2018 17:00:35 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

>>>> Except that none of you can find a *single* lie from me
>>>
>>> We have - you just won't admit it. You are fooling nobody.
>>
>> Name a single one.
>
> All of them.

Classic Apple Apologist maneuver when asked to back up his statements with
fact.

[Harry Newton]

On Mon, 08 Jan 2018 15:35:48 -0500, nospam wrote:

> it's not an insult when it's 'a fact'.

What I find interesting is your childish retorts that only you, Jolly
Roger, and Lewis think are 'witty'.

Whenever you or Jolly Roger or Lewis are asked to provide a single fact
backing up your claims, you respond with insults.

If you had a formal education, that wouldn't fly with a professor.

[Harry Newton]

On Mon, 8 Jan 2018 15:11:24 -0800, sms wrote:

> I was over at the new Apple Visitor Center today with a visitor from out
> of town and his two sisters. They both have iPhone 6 models, that have
> slowed considerably, and asked about the battery replacement program.

The Apple Apologists aren't the people at Apple.
Apple *admitted* what they did (sort of).

It's the people here who deny that the secret, drastic, and permanent
slowdown of the CPU 'harms' the consumer. These Apple Apologists play silly
games dancing around the truth, such as nospam does, Jolly Roger, Lewis,
BKonRamp, Savageduck, etc.

I was in Cupertino myself today, as I had an interview for a job as I'm
getting bored being retired. They don't hire old people, but maybe Apple
will hire me after all this as I have friends high up at Apple HQ who tell
me when suitable jobs arise.

> The new Visitor Center has a store that sells all the Apple products,
> but it does not have a Genius Bar or service facility.

That's interesting. You'd think this would be the place, being in the
center of the center of technical innovation!

> The employees
> there were apologetic about the problem and advised them to make an
> appointment at one of the Apple stores in the area.

I made appointments for all the recipients of my gift phones. What's odd is
that Apple refuses to tell you the price out the door. They won't even tell
you the tax. It's a rule with them. I spent hours on the phone, and every
person I called said the same thing. They refuse to tell you the price on
the phone, even though you can ask for specific things, like "it's just the
battery".

There's tax. There's sometimes shipping. There's the $29. But still, they
won't tell you the final price out the door.

Now you can *assume* a price, which is fine - but I think it's odd that
they have a rule not to tell the customer the expected final price (which
includes the tax which out here is a large percentage of the cost of
anything).

> There were no denials.

They must not be Apple Apologists! :)

In reality, there are likely only a half dozen Apple Apologists on this
newsgroup (nospam, Jolly Roger, Lewis, BKonRamp, etc.).

The rest are sane.

> Everyone knows that the issue is real and there is no upside in
> denying it. So the Apple employees are not denying that the issue is
> real. Who are you referring to that is in denial?

The Apple Apologists (nospam, Jolly Roger, Lewis, BKonRamp, etc.) are the
deniers. Not sane people.

Of course, Apple, for legal reasons, also didn't exactly admit the truth
(as you must be aware); but I don't expect them to do that until they
settle the lawsuits, which will pull the truth out of them by subpoena.

For example, I expect that Apple will have to make good the "harm" that
they caused their customers, and charging their customers $29 + $6.95 + tax
on the original price of the battery which adds another $10 or so, is not
making good on the harm that the lawsuits will most likely force Apple to
admit.

> This was my second visit to the new Visitor Center, which is very well
> done. Very classy. Very Apple. Minimalist but everything is
> high-quality--the Japanese teak tables and chairs are especially nice.

Did you hear the news about the Chicago Apple store? I didn't bother
posting it when it happened as it's not a technical issue. So it's good
that, at least in the easy weather of the Silicon Valley (although it is
raining today), that the Apple store is well designed.

> It was raining both times I went, but we went up to the roof where you
> have a good view of the new "spaceship" building. There are tables up on
> the roof but no shelter from the weather.

Yes. It's raining. And foggy today. Not as bad as a couple of days ago, but
the view would have been dampened measurably. Can you see the Google campus
in Mountainview?

> The first time I went was when
> they opened it to local officials, and they served free coffee and
> desserts. Now a latte is $5, which is a little high, but it's an iLatte,
> and they do a really good job with their espresso drinks, so for Apple
> aficionados it's worth a visit. It's a good place to buy all your Apple
> products and swag, and enjoy coffee and pastries.

An iLatte?

[nospam]

In article <p317oa$1pj5$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Harry Newton

<harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:

> What's odd is
> that Apple refuses to tell you the price out the door. They won't even tell
> you the tax.

nonsense.

>
> Did you hear the news about the Chicago Apple store? I didn't bother
> posting it when it happened as it's not a technical issue.

falling icicles happens with most buildings in chicago.

the drainage system for the roof on the apple store needed to be
tweaked a bit.

[Harry Newton]

On Mon, 08 Jan 2018 21:10:53 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> What's odd is
>> that Apple refuses to tell you the price out the door. They won't even tell
>> you the tax.
>
> nonsense.

Classic proof you are an Apple Apologist who denies patently obvious fact!
You Apple Apologists know absolutely nothing about facts.

The Apple Apologists will deny facts that anyone on this planet can easily
prove simply by calling up Apple and asking what the tax is (in a state
that has tax, and especially in a state that taxes on the full
non-discounted price and a state that taxes things are aren't normally
considered products, such as the CRV on bottles is actually taxed and
returning a tire for recycling is actually taxed, etc.).

Call Apple. Say you're in any zip code in California you want.
Then ask what the price is out the door, with tax.

Watch what happens.

You Apple Apologists deny any fact you simply don't like.

It's pretty clear to me, by now, you have no formal education, because with
your attitude of denying obvious facts, you'd get an F in any class.

[*Hemidactylus*]

Does anyone have a running count on how many times this broken record troll
has called others an Apple Apologist? Facts versus name calling ad hominem.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2018-01-09, *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
> Harry Newton <harryn...@AlliOSusersJustGiveUp.com> wrote:
>>
>> Blah blah blah blah *Apple Apologist* blah blah blah blah blah blah
>> blah!
>> Blah *Apple Apologists* blah blah blah blah blah blah.
>>
>> Blah *Apple Apologists* blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
>> blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah (blah blah
>> blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
>> blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.).
>>
>> Blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.
>> Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah.
>>
>> Blah blah blah.

>> Blah *Apple Apologists* blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.
>>
>> Blah blah blah blah, blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah
>> blah blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah blah.

>>
> Does anyone have a running count on how many times this broken record troll
> has called others an Apple Apologist? Facts versus name calling ad hominem.

Four times in the above post alone! I could scrape for an accurate
count, but I have *wayyyyyyy* better things to do. But if I had to
guess, I'd say he's used that phrase probably over a couple hundred
times in the past *week*.

[sms]

On 1/8/2018 6:00 PM, Harry Newton wrote:

>> The new Visitor Center has a store that sells all the Apple products,
>> but it does not have a Genius Bar or service facility.
>
> That's interesting. You'd think this would be the place, being in the
> center of the center of technical innovation!

Yeah, but the Apple stores with Genius bars don't have coffee bars! But
I agree, it would have been nice to have the Genius Bar, since it's an
easy place to get to, much less hassle than going to Valley Fair or
downtown Palo Alto, despite the endless stream of tour buses.

> I made appointments for all the recipients of my gift phones. What's odd is
> that Apple refuses to tell you the price out the door. They won't even tell
> you the tax. It's a rule with them. I spent hours on the phone, and every
> person I called said the same thing. They refuse to tell you the price on
> the phone, even though you can ask for specific things, like "it's just the
> battery".

I think it's like car service or any other repair service where they
don't want to tell you the price until they see what needs servicing.

<snip>

> The rest are sane.

Fortunately, there is a new service that is being rolled out to help:
<https://www.theonion.com/new-apple-friend-bar-gives-customers-someone-to-talk-at-1819594936>

<snip>

> Of course, Apple, for legal reasons, also didn't exactly admit the truth
> (as you must be aware); but I don't expect them to do that until they
> settle the lawsuits, which will pull the truth out of them by subpoena.

I think that they wanted to extend the run-time between recharging on
older phones rather than display a warning that the battery needed to be
replaced, since the latter would have generated complaints about them
trying to sell an $80 battery service.

On the other hand, displaying a warning that the battery capacity had
fallen beyond an acceptable level, and presenting a choice between
"Battery Saver Mode" or "Performance Mode" along with suggesting a
battery replacement, might have generated MORE new iPhone sales,
especially considering the high resale value of used iPhones.

After all this came to light, they also might have considered offering a
choice between a $29 battery replacement and a $300-$500 trade-in
credit, depending on old and new model, on a new iPhone. This would have
been a win-win since they could increase new iPhone sales and use the
traded-in iPhones for warranty replacements or sell them in their online
store where they sell used products.

<snip>

>> The first time I went was when
>> they opened it to local officials, and they served free coffee and
>> desserts. Now a latte is $5, which is a little high, but it's an iLatte,
>> and they do a really good job with their espresso drinks, so for Apple
>> aficionados it's worth a visit. It's a good place to buy all your Apple
>> products and swag, and enjoy coffee and pastries.
>
> An iLatte?

What else would you call it? They have people with iPads in front of the
coffee bar taking orders, rather than having iPads for self-service
ordering like many restaurants are putting in--it's classier than
self-service. Definitely a good place for Apple aficionados to visit
while on a trip to the Bay Area. If you don't have a car, and are coming
from San Francisco, take Caltrain to Santa Clara station then VTA 81
bus, or take Caltrain to Sunnyvale and then take Uber or Lyft.

I am speaking only for myself.

[Harry Newton]

On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 10:30:02 -0800, sms wrote:

> I think it's like car service or any other repair service where they
> don't want to tell you the price until they see what needs servicing.

I agree with you - and they said as much - where they said they give you a
quote only if you show up - but not over the phone - but my question was
merely what the *tax* was on.

As you may know, you live in California, this state taxes the wierdest
things. For example, there's a sales tax on top of the CRV, so, let's say,
for even numbers, you paid $100 in CRV over the year, you get your $100
back, but you actually pay about $110 (assuming 10% sales tax for an even
number), and you never get that sales tax back.

The sales tax is on the CRV (not on the soda - which has its own sales
tax). I called the state and asked about this directly, and they told me,
in essence, the CRV is considered "part of the product" so they tax the CRV
in addition to the rest of the product.

Likewise, I've called the state and discussed the repetitive tax on tires.
As you may know, I buy my tires and I mount and balance them myself at
home, where I pay a sales tax on the tire plus extra "taxes" for disposal,
and yet, after I install a new tire and I bring the old tire to any tire
shop to be recycled, not only do I pay their recycling fee (which is fine),
but I pay a *tax* on top of that.

WTF? I paid a sales tax on the tire, plus a recycling fee when I buy the
tire, and then I pay a sales tax on the recycling fee when I dispose of the
tire. That's California for you.

In another case which I haven't called Sacramento on in years because I buy
my phones for full price nowadays, but in the olden days, we'd get a "free"
phone which carrier valued at full MSRP, and then we'd have to pay $70 in
tax for that free phone becuase of the sales tax on the full price of the
phone, even though we never *paid* a penny for the phone (and you can rest
assured, the carrier made their money in the service contract, which itself
already has a hefty tax).

So, it's not unheard of for California to tax things you never thought
woudl be taxes.

But Apple *refuses* to state that they will tax on the phone.

What's funny is that you just heard nospam flatly deny this, even though
anyone can easily, with a single phone call, doublecheck what I say is a
fact.

The fact-hating Apple Apologist are what wrecks this newsgroup.

> I think that they wanted to extend the run-time between recharging on
> older phones rather than display a warning that the battery needed to be
> replaced, since the latter would have generated complaints about them
> trying to sell an $80 battery service.

I agree that Apple was trying to solve a problem after the fact that they
didn't catch in their testing of the product line (they admitted this
fact).

However, that service is a *lot* more than $80, if you count up the true
cost, especially if you opt for the $6.95 shipping (everything being likely
taxed at about 8% to 9% so add another 18 or so dollars to any price Apple
provides on the web to be factually true).

I think Apple was confronted with a dilemma, and they took the easy way
out, hoping they'd never get caught.

Remember also that zero Android manufacturers do what Apple did, where all
the big ones are on record for stating that flatly. (If you want links, I
just supplied a dozen links to that effect in another thread.)

> On the other hand, displaying a warning that the battery capacity had
> fallen beyond an acceptable level, and presenting a choice between
> "Battery Saver Mode" or "Performance Mode" along with suggesting a
> battery replacement, might have generated MORE new iPhone sales,
> especially considering the high resale value of used iPhones.

I agree with you that Apple, when they figured out that the problem was
defective batteries, should have provided their loyal customer with much
more information about the state of the battery.

In the end, Apple must do *something* because any rational person will have
to mentally halve any benchmark score they ever see for an Apple iPhone
ever again in the future, given that the claimed CPU speeds are only for
the first year.

> After all this came to light, they also might have considered offering a
> choice between a $29 battery replacement and a $300-$500 trade-in
> credit, depending on old and new model, on a new iPhone. This would have
> been a win-win since they could increase new iPhone sales and use the
> traded-in iPhones for warranty replacements or sell them in their online
> store where they sell used products.

Yup. I think the correct approach was not to hide a secret and permanent
throttling of CPU performance to half the original performance after just a
year of use.

The correct approach was to come clean, accept the fault, recall the
phones, and provide some kind of fix to the consumer. A company with
Apple's pockets could have given them all a newly designed phone for their
tradein and they would have lost no goodwill and they would have made their
customers whole on the defect.

As it stands, they have a dozen lawsuits with plenty of merit to settle,
which I predict they will settle out of court. Those settlements will
dictate what redress Apple provides to their loyal customer base.

BTW, it's refreshing to discuss facts with a normal adult!

I think, after long reflection, that the main issue with the fact-hating
Apple Apologists is that they lack a formal education and that any fact
they don't like about Apple shakes the foundation of their belief system.

You don't act at all like they do, so I assume you have a formal education
(as do I, as I have multiple higher-level degrees) and you aren't afraid of
facts, even those facts that you might not like.