Re: Connecting phone to computer

[Andy Burns]

Steve Hayes wrote:

> Sometimes I plug my phone into the computer and a little boc pops up
> asking it I want to treat the phone like a USB drive, and all is well.
>
> But if the box doesn't pop up, how do I find it?

perhaps the times it doesn't pop up are when you're using a
charging-only cable with no data pins?

[Oliver]

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 10:33:03 +0000, Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> wrote

Most of the time it's the cable but you can also connect by wifi.

[Arno Welzel]

Oliver, 2024-01-05 15:15:

But not to transfer data between the phone and the computer without
additional software.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

[Dave Royal]

On 05 Jan 2024 11:52:01 +0200 Steve Hayes wrote:
>Is there any sure way of getting a phone and computer to connect?

>
>Sometimes I plug my phone into the computer and a little boc pops up
>asking it I want to treat the phone like a USB drive, and all is well.
>
>But if the box doesn't pop up, how do I find it?

Too little information.
Windows? Mac?
OS - Win 10?
What make of phone (and model preferably)?
Android version? (Which is important.)
Box appears where? On the PC, phone...
Does it really say 'treat as a USB Drive' or is that your interpretation
of 'mass storage device'?
What appears on the phone screen eg at the top - assuming the box is on
the PC?


--
(Remove numerics from email address)

[sms]

On 1/5/2024 1:52 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:
> Is there any sure way of getting a phone and computer to connect?
>
> Sometimes I plug my phone into the computer and a little boc pops up
> asking it I want to treat the phone like a USB drive, and all is well.
>
> But if the box doesn't pop up, how do I find it?

I see the same thing, sometimes there's a pop-up, sometimes there's not.

On my Pixel, with Android 14:

Settings > System > USB Preferences then tick "File transfer/Android Auto."

If you go into "Developer Options" then you can set "File
transfer/Android Auto" as the default. This eliminates the need to go
through authorization every time you connect. To become a developer:
Settings > System > "About Phone" > then click "Build Number" seven times.

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

[Andrew]

Steve Hayes wrote on Fri, 05 Jan 2024 17:49:45 +0200 :

>>> perhaps the times it doesn't pop up are when you're using a
>>> charging-only cable with no data pins?
>>
>>Most of the time it's the cable but you can also connect by wifi.
>

> My phone sometimes shows up on my computer when connected by cable,
> but it *never* shows up on the the home network (wifi for the phone,
> but the computer is connected by ethernet cable).

It will if you set it up to show up on the home network over wifi.

> What I want to know is why it only shows up sometimes and not every
> time I want to connect.

You were already told why which is a bad connection in 9 out of 10 cases.

[Newyana2]

"Steve Hayes" <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote

| Is there any sure way of getting a phone and computer to connect?
|
| Sometimes I plug my phone into the computer and a little boc pops up
| asking it I want to treat the phone like a USB drive, and all is well.
|

Assuming you mean an Android cellphone, and assuming that you want
to transfer files, such as images, it should work if you have a compatible
cable. Another option is bluetooth. Enable BT on both and then on Windows
(assuming Windows) use the GUI to connect. I did this a few days ago
on Win10 but don't exactly remember the process. I think I found the
bluetooth options in PC Settings, but it's not very obvious. There should
be a dedicated program on the Start Menu.

[sms]

On 1/5/2024 7:49 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:

> What I want to know is why it only shows up sometimes and not every
> time I want to connect.

I don't think that you'll ever know why you don't always get the pop-up
as soon as you connect. It's just an Android thing and I've noticed the
same thing.

One thing to be aware of is that if the screen lock comes on then you
won't see any files on the computer until you unlock it, you'll only see
"This folder is empty."

It's highly unlikely that it's a bad connection or a bad cable.

[Dave Royal]

On 06 Jan 2024 05:31:22 +0200 Steve Hayes wrote:

>On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 17:01:33 -0000 (UTC), Dave
>Royal<da...@dave123royal.com> wrote:
>
>>On 05 Jan 2024 11:52:01 +0200 Steve Hayes wrote:
>>>Is there any sure way of getting a phone and computer to connect?
>>>
>>>Sometimes I plug my phone into the computer and a little boc pops up
>>>asking it I want to treat the phone like a USB drive, and all is well.
>>>
>>>But if the box doesn't pop up, how do I find it?
>>
>>Too little information.
>>Windows? Mac?
>>OS - Win 10?
>

>Windows XP

>
>>What make of phone (and model preferably)?
>

>Samsung SM-A-260F

>
>>Android version? (Which is important.)
>

>8.1.0

>
>>Box appears where? On the PC, phone...
>

>On the phone, when it does, The problem here is what one can do to
>make it appear when it doesn't appear.

>
>>Does it really say 'treat as a USB Drive' or is that your interpretation
>>of 'mass storage device'?
>

>Since the problem is that I can't see it I cannot say what it "really
>says". That is roughly what I remember it giving as an option after
>using several generations of Android phones for this purpose.
>
>Ha, this morning it appeared:
>
>It says
>
>Use this to
>
>- Charge phone
>- Transfer file
>- Transfer images

I thought you remembered the message wrong.

(Important) Are those choices (select one) or is XP just saying "I see a
phone - do you wan't to connect it?" (select 'yes' or do nothing)?

When the box _doesn't_ appear did you look in Explorer to see if it was
mounted anyway - as a drive (E: or something)?

>I'd still like to know whaty made it appear this morning when it
>didn't appear yesterday.

>
>
>>What appears on the phone screen eg at the top - assuming the box is on
>>the PC?

You didn't answer. There may be an icon top left with a pull-down menu.

Use the same USB port next time, btw.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2024-01-06 01:07, sms wrote:
> On 1/5/2024 7:49 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:
>
>> What I want to know is why it only shows up sometimes and not every
>> time I want to connect.
>
> I don't think that you'll ever know why you don't always get the pop-up
> as soon as you connect. It's just an Android thing and I've noticed the
> same thing.

It never happens to me.

>
> One thing to be aware of is that if the screen lock comes on then you
> won't see any files on the computer until you unlock it, you'll only see
> "This folder is empty."
>
> It's highly unlikely that it's a bad connection or a bad cable.

It is very probably a bad cable or a bad connection.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Arno Welzel]

Steve Hayes, 2024-01-05 16:49:

> My phone sometimes shows up on my computer when connected by cable,
> but it *never* shows up on the the home network (wifi for the phone,
> but the computer is connected by ethernet cable).

Define "shows up". If you expect the phone to be visible as a device on
your computer, where you can copy files from or to it, this will *never*
happen when using WiFi.

When using USB with a data connection (and not only power), the computer
will see the device as storage device depending on what protocols are
supported by the computer and by the smartphone (usually PTP or MTP).
However this has to be enabled in the smartphone *and* the cable has to
work properly.

> What I want to know is why it only shows up sometimes and not every
> time I want to connect.

Most likely because the cable is defect or low quality or the connectors
are dirty or otherwise damaged in some way, so the connection is not
reliable.

[Arno Welzel]

Andrew, 2024-01-05 20:25:

> Steve Hayes wrote on Fri, 05 Jan 2024 17:49:45 +0200 :
>
>>>> perhaps the times it doesn't pop up are when you're using a
>>>> charging-only cable with no data pins?
>>>
>>> Most of the time it's the cable but you can also connect by wifi.
>>
>> My phone sometimes shows up on my computer when connected by cable,
>> but it *never* shows up on the the home network (wifi for the phone,
>> but the computer is connected by ethernet cable).
>
> It will if you set it up to show up on the home network over wifi.

How? I mean how will a smartphone show up on a *computer* in the same
network when connected to WiFi?

[Arno Welzel]

Steve Hayes, 2024-01-05 16:45:

> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 10:33:03 +0000, Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk>

> No, it worked a couple of weeks ago.

Then I would try a different cable. If you are using MicroUSB also check
the connector in the phone if it is dirty - sometimes dust builds up in
MicroUSB sockets and causes the plugs not to sit in the socket properly.
You may need a fine needle and maybe pressurized air to get the dust out
there.

[Andy Burns]

Arno Welzel wrote:

> If you are using MicroUSB also check the connector in the phone if it
> is dirty - sometimes dust builds up in MicroUSB sockets and causes
> the plugs not to sit in the socket properly. You may need a fine
> needle

I'm wary of using metal needles inside USB connectors, wooden cocktail
sticks are better if you can find ones thin enough. Also use a bright
torch to shine into the socket, it only takes a bit of fluff to block
the connection ...

[Andrew]

Arno Welzel wrote on Sat, 6 Jan 2024 15:40:07 +0100 :

>> It will if you set it up to show up on the home network over wifi.
>
> How? I mean how will a smartphone show up on a *computer* in the same
> network when connected to WiFi?

Lots of ways. With this your phone will show up as a Windows drive letter.
https://play.google.com/store/search?q=webdav%20server&c=apps

[Wolf Greenblatt]

On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 13:41:41 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> It never happens to me.

Every once in a while the phone doesn't show up when I connect it to the
USB cable where usually it's a bad connection.

>> One thing to be aware of is that if the screen lock comes on then you
>> won't see any files on the computer until you unlock it, you'll only see
>> "This folder is empty."

After a Windows update, sometimes I get the stock phone icon for a few
days. Then after a few days, the official OEM icon shows up. I suspect
that's due to drivers being overwritten or replaced during the update.

>> It's highly unlikely that it's a bad connection or a bad cable.
>
> It is very probably a bad cable or a bad connection.

It could also be lint in the cable port hole. Or a bad cable.

[Oliver]

On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 15:38:57 +0100, Arno Welzel <use...@arnowelzel.de> wrote

> When using USB with a data connection (and not only power), the computer
> will see the device as storage device depending on what protocols are
> supported by the computer and by the smartphone (usually PTP or MTP).
> However this has to be enabled in the smartphone *and* the cable has to
> work properly.

If the OP really wanted to debug the issue he'd run a USB debugger.
Here are two debuggers which have been mentioned many times in this group.
https://www.uwe-sieber.de/usbtreeview_e.html
https://www.nirsoft.net/utils/usb_devices_view.html

[Bradley]

On 1/6/2024 9:45 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
> I'm wary of using metal needles inside USB connectors, wooden cocktail
> sticks are better if you can find ones thin enough. Also use a bright
> torch to shine into the socket, it only takes a bit of fluff to block
> the connection ...

Metal is a really bad idea.
Sharp is also a really bad idea.
Take a guess as to how bad using sharp metal will be?

Most people use those little cans of compressed air to blow it out.

[Oliver]

On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 08:04:13 -0000 (UTC), Dave Royal <da...@dave123royal.com>
wrote

> When the box _doesn't_ appear did you look in Explorer to see if it was
> mounted anyway - as a drive (E: or something)?

Sometimes, rarely - but sometimes, the person fat fingers the "will you
love me forever" request when a new phone is connected to the computer.

In that case, it's best to wipe out your old USB connections (which are a
good idea to wipe out anyway) using one of the two Windows tools I listed.

[david]

Using <news:un9dpf$7k62$1...@dont-email.me>, sms wrote:

> If you go into "Developer Options" then you can set "File
> transfer/Android Auto" as the default. This eliminates the need to go
> through authorization every time you connect. To become a developer:
> Settings > System > "About Phone" > then click "Build Number" seven times.

Speaking of Developer options, the OP can also reset the encryption key
stored on the phone which might get rid of a possible stale encryption key.
Settings -> Developer options -> Revoke USB Debugging authorizations

There's also a default usb configuration setting in Developer options.
Settings -> Developer options -> Default USB configuration
which for my device is set to "Transfer files/Android Auto."

[sms]

On 1/6/2024 4:55 PM, david wrote:

<snip>

> There's also a default usb configuration setting in Developer options.
> Settings -> Developer options -> Default USB configuration
> which for my device is set to "Transfer files/Android Auto."

Yes, that's what I did.

But the original poster is using a very old phone running a very old
version of Android, and may not have that option.

[Larry Wolff]

On 5/1/2024, Newyana2 wrote:

> Assuming you mean an Android cellphone, and assuming that you want
> to transfer files, such as images, it should work if you have a compatible
> cable. Another option is bluetooth. Enable BT on both and then on Windows
> (assuming Windows) use the GUI to connect. I did this a few days ago
> on Win10 but don't exactly remember the process. I think I found the
> bluetooth options in PC Settings, but it's not very obvious. There should
> be a dedicated program on the Start Menu.

You're right that Bluetooth alone works as an ad hoc network if both the
phone and the computer have it but the OP's computer is XP so maybe not.

A wi-fi solutions though could be Nitro Share, Kies and KDE Connect.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.nitroshare.android
https://www.samsung.com/au/support/kies/
https://kdeconnect.kde.org/download.html

[david]

Using <news:unctgn$qapf$1...@dont-email.me>, sms wrote:

>> There's also a default usb configuration setting in Developer options.
>> Settings -> Developer options -> Default USB configuration
>> which for my device is set to "Transfer files/Android Auto."
>
> Yes, that's what I did.
>
> But the original poster is using a very old phone running a very old
> version of Android, and may not have that option.

If the original poster's phone is old, then "Microsoft Phone Link" should
work on Android OS 7.0 or later (formerly named "Microsoft Your Phone").

The "Your Phone" app was written by Samsung but they gave it to Microsoft
at the time of the rebranding (as far as I know) so it works on everything.

It's preinstalled on Windows PCs nowadays but maybe not on the older XP.
https://apps.microsoft.com/detail/9NMPJ99VJBWV

It's preinstalled on Samsung phones but you need this for all the rest.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.microsoft.appmanager

In looking that up for you and for the original poster, I noticed it has
been downloaded over a billion times so it must be working for people.

It's pretty simple to use once you install the app on each device.
With both devices on your LAN, you run the Phone Link app on Windows and
connect (pair) to your Android phone by the QR code that pops up.

After pairing you transfer files by dragging and dropping either direction.

Like KDE Connect, the MS Phone link does more than just transfer files.
For example, you can make calls from your PC using the phone link.

Much more here if the original poster is interested in wi-fi transfer.
https://www.androidpolice.com/2020/06/27/the-ultimate-guide-to-using-windows-your-phone-with-android/

[Oliver]

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 15:53:18 +0100, Arno Welzel <use...@arnowelzel.de> wrote

>> Most of the time it's the cable but you can also connect by wifi.
>
> But not to transfer data between the phone and the computer without
> additional software.

Not if you use WebRTC.

[Carlos E.R.]

It does, it you are running something that presents some type of server.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Joerg Walther]

Steve Hayes wrote:

>Is there any sure way of getting a phone and computer to connect?

Since noone has mentioned the solution that I use, here it is:
I ftp into my phone. I use the free version "Wifi FTP Server", which I
only start on demand, set username/pw and then you can use an ftp
programme of your choice on your computer (here it is Total
Commander/Double Commander for Linux), but you also could use Filezilla
or whatever ftp programme you would like to use. No cable required, your
phone just has to be in the same home network as your computer. Always
works.

-jw-

--

And now for something completely different...

[Oscar Mayer]

On Sun, 07 Jan 2024 11:35:45 +0100, Joerg Walther wrote:

>>Is there any sure way of getting a phone and computer to connect?
>
> Since noone has mentioned the solution that I use, here it is:
> I ftp into my phone. I use the free version "Wifi FTP Server", which I
> only start on demand, set username/pw and then you can use an ftp
> programme of your choice on your computer (here it is Total
> Commander/Double Commander for Linux), but you also could use Filezilla
> or whatever ftp programme you would like to use. No cable required, your
> phone just has to be in the same home network as your computer. Always
> works.

FTP has issues due to the fact it uses ports 21/22 but if you want to use
FTP to mount Android as a Windows drive letter over Wi-Fi, you can do that.

There are many ways, most of which will even work on the OP's old WinXP PC.
https://serverfault.com/questions/6079/how-can-i-mount-an-ftp-to-a-drive-letter-in-windows

[Joerg Walther]

Oscar Mayer wrote:

>FTP has issues due to the fact it uses ports 21/22

Which "issues" are you talking about? It is not encrypted, of course,
but this is done on the user's home network, not on the internet. BTW, I
am not suggesting to keep the ftp server on the phone running all the
time.

>but if you want to use
>FTP to mount Android as a Windows drive letter over Wi-Fi, you can do that.

The OP did not specifically ask for a drive letter, he just wanted to
"connect" his phone to his PC.

[Newyana2]

"Larry Wolff" <larry...@larrywolff.net> wrote

| You're right that Bluetooth alone works as an ad hoc network if both the
| phone and the computer have it but the OP's computer is XP so maybe not.
|

Yes. I think I've used a bluetooth antenna on XP, but
a cable is easier than anything else. I had used the bluetooth
with Win10 only because I didn't have a USB-to-USB-C cable.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2024-01-07 14:05, Joerg Walther wrote:
> Oscar Mayer wrote:
>
>> FTP has issues due to the fact it uses ports 21/22
>
> Which "issues" are you talking about? It is not encrypted, of course,
> but this is done on the user's home network, not on the internet. BTW, I
> am not suggesting to keep the ftp server on the phone running all the
> time.

It has issues when there are firewalls involved in either server or client.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Transfer_Protocol#NAT_and_firewall_traversal


It also has many issues regarding security, but we are talking of a LAN,
so it depends on what users are on that LAN.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Transfer_Protocol#Security


--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Frank Slootweg]

Yes, XP could use Bluetooth (with driver/software provided with the
Bluetooth USB-dongle).

It's actually the way I 'tethered' to my first Internet-capable mobile
phone, a Nokia 6310i GSM/GPRS phone.

That phone could also use an infrared connection (IrDA [1]) and my XP
laptop had a built-in infrared transceiver.

Those were the days! :-)

[1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_Data_Association>

[Arno Welzel]

Oliver, 2024-01-07 02:51:

What does WebRTC have to do with that? Please explain.

[Arno Welzel]

Andrew, 2024-01-06 22:01:

Yes, I know tools like Cx File Explorer or servers for FTP and WebDAV
etc.. - but this is additional software which needs additional
configuration.

I talk about using the phone *without* additional software.

When using a USB cable you just connect the phone and you can just
access it with the file manager of your computer, since Windows, Linux
and macOS support the protocols for that out of the box.

[Arno Welzel]

Bradley, 2024-01-07 01:44:

> On 1/6/2024 9:45 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
>> I'm wary of using metal needles inside USB connectors, wooden cocktail
>> sticks are better if you can find ones thin enough. Also use a bright
>> torch to shine into the socket, it only takes a bit of fluff to block
>> the connection ...
>
> Metal is a really bad idea.
> Sharp is also a really bad idea.
> Take a guess as to how bad using sharp metal will be?

Well - the *side* of a small metal needle is not sharp at all. It only
has a pointy tip. And for me that it always worked without any issues at
all. Of course you need to be *gentle* and not poke around with a lot of
force.

> Most people use those little cans of compressed air to blow it out.

Yes, if you if have that. Finding a needle is often easier.

[Oliver]

On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 01:41:52 +0100, Arno Welzel <use...@arnowelzel.de> wrote

>>>> Most of the time it's the cable but you can also connect by wifi.
>>>
>>> But not to transfer data between the phone and the computer without
>>> additional software.
>>
>> Not if you use WebRTC.
>
> What does WebRTC have to do with that? Please explain.

Anyone can easily copy any file over Wi-Fi from any device on any platform
to any other device on any platform using nothing but the native tools.

That other device is typically on your own LAN but it could cross networks.
You do need momentary Internet access to establish the ad hoc connections.

That's where the WebRTC comes in.
https://webrtc.org/

[Andrew]

Arno Welzel wrote on Tue, 9 Jan 2024 01:44:37 +0100 :

> I talk about using the phone *without* additional software.

While it's nice to have the Android phone showing up as a drive,
you do have to install a server (like webdav) & configure it right.

I saw someone already gave you the answer if you insist on installing
nothing and configuring nothing and just copying over the wifi lan.

Sharedrop needs no software and no configuration as it uses webrtc.
https://github.com/szimek/sharedrop

It has been discussed on this newsgroup many times but you missed it.

"ShareDrop is a web application inspired by Apple AirDrop service. It
allows you to transfer files directly between devices, without having to
upload them to any server first. It uses WebRTC for secure peer-to-peer
file transfer and Firebase for presence management and WebRTC signaling.

ShareDrop allows you to send files to other devices in the same local
network (i.e. devices with the same public IP address) without any
configuration - simply open https://www.sharedrop.io on all devices and
they will see each other. It also allows you to send files between networks
- just click the + button in the top right corner of the page to create a
room with a unique URL and share this URL with other people you want to
send a file to. Once they open this page in a browser on their devices,
you'll see each other's avatars.

The main difference between ShareDrop and AirDrop is that ShareDrop
requires Internet connection to discover other devices, while AirDrop
doesn't need one, as it creates ad-hoc wireless network between them. On
the other hand, ShareDrop allows you to share files between mobiles
(Android and iOS) and desktop devices and even between networks."

[Arno Welzel]

Oliver, 2024-01-09 01:55:

> On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 01:41:52 +0100, Arno Welzel <use...@arnowelzel.de> wrote
>
>>>>> Most of the time it's the cable but you can also connect by wifi.
>>>>
>>>> But not to transfer data between the phone and the computer without
>>>> additional software.
>>>
>>> Not if you use WebRTC.
>>
>> What does WebRTC have to do with that? Please explain.
>
> Anyone can easily copy any file over Wi-Fi from any device on any platform
> to any other device on any platform using nothing but the native tools.

How exactly does WebRTC help with that?

> That other device is typically on your own LAN but it could cross networks.
> You do need momentary Internet access to establish the ad hoc connections.
> That's where the WebRTC comes in.
> https://webrtc.org/

I know what WebRTC is. But how does this help to transfer files between
an Android smartphone and a computer in the same network via WiFi
*without* any additional software?

[Arno Welzel]

Andrew, 2024-01-09 02:58:

> Arno Welzel wrote on Tue, 9 Jan 2024 01:44:37 +0100 :
>
>> I talk about using the phone *without* additional software.
>
> While it's nice to have the Android phone showing up as a drive,
> you do have to install a server (like webdav) & configure it right.

No, you do not have to do this via USB.

> I saw someone already gave you the answer if you insist on installing
> nothing and configuring nothing and just copying over the wifi lan.

No, he didn't. Just the protocol "WebRTC" was mentioned.

> Sharedrop needs no software and no configuration as it uses webrtc.
> https://github.com/szimek/sharedrop

Oh my... Sharedrop *is* software.

> "ShareDrop is a web application inspired by Apple AirDrop service. It

Also "web application" is *software* and is has to run somewhere. You
need to connect to a website where Sharedrop is running, as for example
<https://www.sharedrop.io/>.

Maybe it is still not clear enough:

When using USB you need *NOTHING* extra! No internet connection, no
extra software. Just connect via USB, enable data connection in the
Android phone and you can access the phone on your computer - no extra
software in most cases.

[Andy Burns]

Arno Welzel wrote:

> I know what WebRTC is. But how does this help to transfer files between
> an Android smartphone and a computer in the same network via WiFi
> *without* any additional software?

Seems you know *part* of what webRTC is, I suppose the important feature
here is peer discovery ...

<https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/WebRTC>

"WebRTC (Web Real-Time Communication)
is an API that can be used by video-chat,
voice-calling, and P2P-file-sharing Web apps."

[Arno Welzel]

Andy Burns, 2024-01-09 16:41:

> Arno Welzel wrote:
>
>> I know what WebRTC is. But how does this help to transfer files between
>> an Android smartphone and a computer in the same network via WiFi
>> *without* any additional software?
>
> Seems you know *part* of what webRTC is, I suppose the important feature
> here is peer discovery ...

No, I know that.

> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/WebRTC>

This does not help without any software running one some machine
providing this, like <https://www.sharedrop.io/> as mentioned in anothe
post. But without access to such a server, WebRTC is *not* a substitute
to using a USB cable and file transfer using PTP/MTP - which is
supported in Windows, macOS or Linux out of the box.

[Andrew]

Arno Welzel wrote on Tue, 9 Jan 2024 15:01:02 +0100 :

>> Sharedrop needs no software and no configuration as it uses webrtc.
>> https://github.com/szimek/sharedrop
>
> Oh my... Sharedrop *is* software.

Oh my... A USB driver *is* software too.

ShareDrop is just a server. It's not "software". That you think it's
software means you are objecting to something you don't even understand.

>> "ShareDrop is a web application inspired by Apple AirDrop service. It
>
> Also "web application" is *software* and is has to run somewhere.

Also the "usb application" is *software* and it has to run somewhere.
Again, you're objecting to something that you can't seem to understand.

> You need to connect to a website where Sharedrop is running, as for example
> <https://www.sharedrop.io/>.

With USB you need to connect to another USB device where a USB driver is
running, as for example a Windows computer with USB.

You object to what you haven't understood when what you're objecting to
applies more to USB than it does to ad hoc wi-fi file transfers.

> Maybe it is still not clear enough:

What's clear is USB uses more software than what you're objecting to.
And what's clear is USB uses more hardware than what you object to.

How many people have had USB driver problems on their PC for example.
Plus, what you're objecting to uses a cord that ad hoc wi-fi doesn't.

> When using USB you need *NOTHING* extra! No internet connection, no
> extra software. Just connect via USB, enable data connection in the
> Android phone and you can access the phone on your computer - no extra
> software in most cases.

Ad hoc wi-fi uses less hardware than USB.
In fact it needs no added hardware (as you need a cable for USB).

Ad hoc wi-fi uses less software than USB (as USB requires drivers).
In fact it needs no software (since every platform has a browser).

In addition, ad hoc wi-fi connects to any device in the network.
Or on any other network. Even devices that don't have USB ports.

That's because USB requires more software and more hardware than it.

Your objections are ridiculous.
Who in his right mind objects to a universal solution that requires less
hardware and less software and less configuration than even USB does?

This is the end of the conversation with you.
You aren't capable of understanding even USB, let along ad hoc wi-fi.

[Oliver]

On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 18:14:13 +0100, Arno Welzel <use...@arnowelzel.de> wrote

>> Seems you know *part* of what webRTC is, I suppose the important feature
>> here is peer discovery ...
>
> No, I know that.
>
>> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/WebRTC>
>
> This does not help without any software running one some machine
> providing this, like <https://www.sharedrop.io/> as mentioned in anothe
> post. But without access to such a server, WebRTC is *not* a substitute
> to using a USB cable and file transfer using PTP/MTP - which is
> supported in Windows, macOS or Linux out of the box.

You complain about Mom & Apple Pie because you like Dad's Pumpkin Pie.

USB requires short distances to transfer between devices.
Ad hoc wi-fi via WebRTC peer-discovery does not.

USB requires a compatible cable to transfer between devices.
Ad hoc wi-fi via WebRTC peer-discovery does not.

USB requires a compatible driver to transfer between devices.
Ad hoc wi-fi via WebRTC peer-discovery does not.

Ad hoc wi-fi requires peer discovery (which is where WebRTC comes in).
USB does not.

Having made that distinction, I'm not going to continue a discussion that
is fraught with impossibly insane argument such as those you are making.

Neither method uses more software (nor less).
Neither method requires more setup (nor less).

Each method solves the hurdles (such as distances) the other can't solve.
If the distance is extremely short & cables & drivers compatible, use USB.

The fundamental difference is USB requires compatible hardware & distances
while WebRTC peer-to-peer discovery requires a few seconds of Internet.

Neither method precludes the other.
Both methods are practically perfect.

No sense continuing this farcical charade to the point of absurdity.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2024-01-09 22:24, Andrew wrote:
> Arno Welzel wrote on Tue, 9 Jan 2024 15:01:02 +0100 :
>
>>> Sharedrop needs no software and no configuration as it uses webrtc.
>>> https://github.com/szimek/sharedrop
>>
>> Oh my... Sharedrop *is* software.
>
> Oh my... A USB driver *is* software too.

Huh, no. Comes by default, nothing has to be installed.

> ShareDrop is just a server. It's not "software". That you think it's
> software means you are objecting to something you don't even understand.

Well, is is some extra service, maybe external, that is needed so that
phone and computer find one another and can exchange files.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Andrew]

Carlos E.R. wrote on Tue, 9 Jan 2024 23:00:12 +0100 :

>> Oh my... A USB driver *is* software too.
>
> Huh, no. Comes by default, nothing has to be installed.

It's not really important because the objections that Arno Welzel were
ridiculous in that both solutions work quite well without configuration.

If I use the same fault-finding level, I point out the correct USB driver
has to be INSTALLED as an additional driver on Windows when you plug it in.

Sure, that's automatic. Most of the time. If you're lucky. But it's added.

Keeping to this ridiculous picky level, USB not only uses more software,
but USB requires more hardware (as you have to have a compatible cable).

>> ShareDrop is just a server. It's not "software". That you think it's
>> software means you are objecting to something you don't even understand.
>
> Well, is is some extra service, maybe external, that is needed so that
> phone and computer find one another and can exchange files.

Keeping to your acrimoniously fussy level, the USB method also requires
what you call an "extra service" in the form of a PC hardware driver.

But let's stop your persnickety attitude to accept if you have a compatible
cable and if the device is close to the PC, then USB is a simple method.

If the devices are farther away than your cable allows, or if the second
device doesn't use the same cable, or if the second device is on another
network, then using ad hoc wi-fi file sharing is as simple as it gets.

Once you stop being picky, neither needs extra software or configuration.

[Arno Welzel]

Oliver, 2024-01-09 22:46:

> On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 18:14:13 +0100, Arno Welzel <use...@arnowelzel.de> wrote
>
>>> Seems you know *part* of what webRTC is, I suppose the important feature
>>> here is peer discovery ...
>>
>> No, I know that.
>>
>>> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/WebRTC>
>>
>> This does not help without any software running one some machine
>> providing this, like <https://www.sharedrop.io/> as mentioned in anothe
>> post. But without access to such a server, WebRTC is *not* a substitute
>> to using a USB cable and file transfer using PTP/MTP - which is
>> supported in Windows, macOS or Linux out of the box.
>
> You complain about Mom & Apple Pie because you like Dad's Pumpkin Pie.

No, you just did not get at all, what I was talking about.

> USB requires short distances to transfer between devices.
> Ad hoc wi-fi via WebRTC peer-discovery does not.

This was not the topic!

> USB requires a compatible cable to transfer between devices.

This was not the topic!

> Ad hoc wi-fi via WebRTC peer-discovery does not.
>
> USB requires a compatible driver to transfer between devices.

No.

> Ad hoc wi-fi via WebRTC peer-discovery does not.

But it requires a working internet connection and access to a website
which offers the file transfer services using WebRTC.

> Ad hoc wi-fi requires peer discovery (which is where WebRTC comes in).
> USB does not.

And "peer discovery" does NOT work without a website which offers that!
By default neither Windows nor macOS or Linux have any software built in
which privides this.

> Having made that distinction, I'm not going to continue a discussion that
> is fraught with impossibly insane argument such as those you are making.
>
> Neither method uses more software (nor less).

Wrong.

> Neither method requires more setup (nor less).

Wrong.

> Each method solves the hurdles (such as distances) the other can't solve.

This was not the topic!

> If the distance is extremely short & cables & drivers compatible, use USB.
>
> The fundamental difference is USB requires compatible hardware & distances
> while WebRTC peer-to-peer discovery requires a few seconds of Internet.

Windows and macOS *are* compatible to Android USB data connections by
default.

> Neither method precludes the other.
> Both methods are practically perfect.

No, since for WebRTC you *must* have internet access to be able to use
<https://www.sharedrop.io/> or similar websites.

> No sense continuing this farcical charade to the point of absurdity.

You did not get it.

[Arno Welzel]

Andrew, 2024-01-09 22:24:

> Arno Welzel wrote on Tue, 9 Jan 2024 15:01:02 +0100 :
>
>>> Sharedrop needs no software and no configuration as it uses webrtc.
>>> https://github.com/szimek/sharedrop
>>
>> Oh my... Sharedrop *is* software.
>
> Oh my... A USB driver *is* software too.

There is *no* extra USB driver needed! This is already built in!

> ShareDrop is just a server. It's not "software". That you think it's
> software means you are objecting to something you don't even understand.

ShareDrop is *software* running on *another* machine and not on your own
computer.

>>> "ShareDrop is a web application inspired by Apple AirDrop service. It
>>
>> Also "web application" is *software* and is has to run somewhere.
>
> Also the "usb application" is *software* and it has to run somewhere.

Which you do *not* have to install. It is already built in your
operating system.

>> You need to connect to a website where Sharedrop is running, as for example
>> <https://www.sharedrop.io/>.
>
> With USB you need to connect to another USB device where a USB driver is
> running, as for example a Windows computer with USB.

But the driver is already built in!

You don't get it.

[Arno Welzel]

Andrew, 2024-01-10 05:20:

> Carlos E.R. wrote on Tue, 9 Jan 2024 23:00:12 +0100 :
>
>>> Oh my... A USB driver *is* software too.
>>
>> Huh, no. Comes by default, nothing has to be installed.
>
> It's not really important because the objections that Arno Welzel were
> ridiculous in that both solutions work quite well without configuration.

The latter one needs

a) Internet access

b) The user has to know a website like <https://www.sharedrop.io/> -
without that knowledge he can not exchange files at all

> If I use the same fault-finding level, I point out the correct USB driver
> has to be INSTALLED as an additional driver on Windows when you plug it in.

No, it hasn't. The driver is already installed. Windows will only
activate the device in the device manager,

> Sure, that's automatic. Most of the time. If you're lucky. But it's added.

No, not "if you're lucky".

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2024-01-10 17:34, Arno Welzel wrote:
> Andrew, 2024-01-10 05:20:
>
>> Carlos E.R. wrote on Tue, 9 Jan 2024 23:00:12 +0100 :
>>
>>>> Oh my... A USB driver *is* software too.
>>>
>>> Huh, no. Comes by default, nothing has to be installed.
>>
>> It's not really important because the objections that Arno Welzel were
>> ridiculous in that both solutions work quite well without configuration.
>
> The latter one needs
>
> a) Internet access
>
> b) The user has to know a website like <https://www.sharedrop.io/> -
> without that knowledge he can not exchange files at all

Not something I'm inclined to do when copying private files.

If I want to copy files using WiFi in my LAN (which sometimes I do, for
various reasons), I can try the functionality on my phone to send files
"nearby", which is an option in the Google Files app, for instance.
Doesn't need a LAN, I believe, the finding is done using BT.

I don't know if other tools can use the "Nearby" facility, so I don't
know if this is an "out of the box" facility, because I installed "Files".


Or I would use an FTP server, or some other app on the phone to share
files, or connect to a server on my LAN. Some tools like Ghost Commander
can do that. This is not out of the box, though.

>> If I use the same fault-finding level, I point out the correct USB driver
>> has to be INSTALLED as an additional driver on Windows when you plug it in.
>
> No, it hasn't. The driver is already installed. Windows will only
> activate the device in the device manager,
>
>> Sure, that's automatic. Most of the time. If you're lucky. But it's added.
>
> No, not "if you're lucky".

Same on Linux, the USB connection works out of the box, nothing to
install, ever.


--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Oscar Mayer]

On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 17:30:24 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:

> By default neither Windows nor macOS or Linux have any software built in
> which privides this.

Wrong. Firefox has it built in. So does Chrome. Safari too.

Your incorrect claim "neither Windows nor macOS or Linux has" Firefox,
Chrome or Safari is just wrong. It means you don't understand anything.

What is funny is what they don't have are the correct USB drivers.
That's "additional software" that has to be installed for USB to work.

[Oscar Mayer]

On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 17:32:18 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:

>> With USB you need to connect to another USB device where a USB driver is
>> running, as for example a Windows computer with USB.
>
> But the driver is already built in!
>
> You don't get it.

[Andrew]

Carlos E.R. wrote on Wed, 10 Jan 2024 23:40:14 +0100 :

>> b) The user has to know a website like <https://www.sharedrop.io/> -
>> without that knowledge he can not exchange files at all
>
> Not something I'm inclined to do when copying private files.

There are lots of ways to copy files but Arno Welzel insisted on no
configuration & no additional software - which is when sharedrop came in.

> If I want to copy files using WiFi in my LAN (which sometimes I do, for
> various reasons), I can try the functionality on my phone to send files
> "nearby", which is an option in the Google Files app, for instance.
> Doesn't need a LAN, I believe, the finding is done using BT.

That works too as do many other ways but Arno Welzel insisted on no
additional software and no configuration, so BT fails /his/ test.

Besides, BT requires hardware even worse than USB requires hardware.
The peer-to-peer solution requires no hardware other than working Wi-Fi.

> I don't know if other tools can use the "Nearby" facility, so I don't
> know if this is an "out of the box" facility, because I installed "Files".

The solution proposed /is/ an out of the box facility that just works.
It requires no additional software and no configuration.

USB requires short distances and a compatible cable.
Peer-to-peer requires Wi-Fi and an Internet discovery.

> Or I would use an FTP server, or some other app on the phone to share
> files, or connect to a server on my LAN. Some tools like Ghost Commander
> can do that. This is not out of the box, though.

But that fails Arno Welzel's test of no additional software & no config.

>> No, not "if you're lucky".
>
> Same on Linux, the USB connection works out of the box, nothing to
> install, ever.

If we limit the solutions to Arno Welzel's requirement of no additional
software and no configuration, both USB and peer-to-peer transfers work.

Nothing else that I know of requires no additional software & no
configuration. Do you know of anything else that fits Arno's requirements?

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2024-01-11 04:41, Andrew wrote:
> Carlos E.R. wrote on Wed, 10 Jan 2024 23:40:14 +0100 :
>
>>> b) The user has to know a website like <https://www.sharedrop.io/> -
>>> without that knowledge he can not exchange files at all
>>
>> Not something I'm inclined to do when copying private files.
>
> There are lots of ways to copy files but Arno Welzel insisted on no
> configuration & no additional software - which is when sharedrop came in.
>
>> If I want to copy files using WiFi in my LAN (which sometimes I do, for
>> various reasons), I can try the functionality on my phone to send files
>> "nearby", which is an option in the Google Files app, for instance.
>> Doesn't need a LAN, I believe, the finding is done using BT.
>
> That works too as do many other ways but Arno Welzel insisted on no
> additional software and no configuration, so BT fails /his/ test.
>
> Besides, BT requires hardware even worse than USB requires hardware.
> The peer-to-peer solution requires no hardware other than working Wi-Fi.

Huh, no.

BT is included hardware, same as WiFi. All current phones include it,
since maybe a decade.

>
>> I don't know if other tools can use the "Nearby" facility, so I don't
>> know if this is an "out of the box" facility, because I installed "Files".
>
> The solution proposed /is/ an out of the box facility that just works.
> It requires no additional software and no configuration.

It requires an external service to intermediate. That can be considered
an external configuration service.

>
> USB requires short distances and a compatible cable.
> Peer-to-peer requires Wi-Fi and an Internet discovery.
>
>> Or I would use an FTP server, or some other app on the phone to share
>> files, or connect to a server on my LAN. Some tools like Ghost Commander
>> can do that. This is not out of the box, though.
>
> But that fails Arno Welzel's test of no additional software & no config.
>
>>> No, not "if you're lucky".
>>
>> Same on Linux, the USB connection works out of the box, nothing to
>> install, ever.
>
> If we limit the solutions to Arno Welzel's requirement of no additional
> software and no configuration, both USB and peer-to-peer transfers work.
>
> Nothing else that I know of requires no additional software & no
> configuration. Do you know of anything else that fits Arno's requirements?

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Arno Welzel]

Oscar Mayer, 2024-01-11 04:27:

> On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 17:30:24 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
>
>> By default neither Windows nor macOS or Linux have any software built in
>> which privides this.
>
> Wrong. Firefox has it built in. So does Chrome. Safari too.

Firefox, Chrome and Safari have a link to websites like
<https://www.sharedrop.io/> built in? Where?

> Your incorrect claim "neither Windows nor macOS or Linux has" Firefox,
> Chrome or Safari is just wrong. It means you don't understand anything.

No, *you* don't understand anything. It's about *not* knowing what
website or additional(!) software one has to visit to be able to use
WebRTC for file transfer.

> What is funny is what they don't have are the correct USB drivers.

They are

> That's "additional software" that has to be installed for USB to work.

No. This happens automatically. A user does not have to do anything at
all for this except allowing data transfer on his smartphone.

Ok, a practical test, maybe you understand it then:

1) Go to a person with an Android smartphone and a USB cable who does
*not* know any website providing WebRTC file transfer services.

2) Tell the person to use the USB cable to connect the smartphone with
the computer, wait until the phone shows up in the file manager of the
operating system and transfer files from the phone to the computer.

3) Now tell the person to remove the USB cable and use WebRTC instead
for the same operation - of course *without* telling any website for
this. Because as you claim the existance of WebRTC alone is a complete
subsitute for using an USB cable.

[Arno Welzel]

Carlos E.R., 2024-01-10 23:40:

> On 2024-01-10 17:34, Arno Welzel wrote:
>> Andrew, 2024-01-10 05:20:

[...]

>>> It's not really important because the objections that Arno Welzel were
>>> ridiculous in that both solutions work quite well without configuration.
>>
>> The latter one needs
>>
>> a) Internet access
>>
>> b) The user has to know a website like <https://www.sharedrop.io/> -
>> without that knowledge he can not exchange files at all
>
> Not something I'm inclined to do when copying private files.
>
> If I want to copy files using WiFi in my LAN (which sometimes I do, for
> various reasons), I can try the functionality on my phone to send files
> "nearby", which is an option in the Google Files app, for instance.
> Doesn't need a LAN, I believe, the finding is done using BT.
>
> I don't know if other tools can use the "Nearby" facility, so I don't
> know if this is an "out of the box" facility, because I installed "Files".

At least Windows and Linux do *not* proviude a similar feature without
using a browser - because *WebRTC* is a browser based technology. And
the service provided by <https://www.sharedrop.io/> is of course *not*
only the protocol WebRTC but is a *software* developed in JavaScript
running in the browser to provide this feature.

And no, the data is not transmitted to the server, it is directly
transferred from the Smartphone to the Computer since they both "see"
each other when accessing this website. But of course you need to open a
browser on both devices and visit that website to initiate the connection.

> Or I would use an FTP server, or some other app on the phone to share
> files, or connect to a server on my LAN. Some tools like Ghost Commander
> can do that. This is not out of the box, though.

Or Cx File Exporer or many other file managers which provide this.

But this is exactly my point:

Using a USB cable you do *not* need any app on the smartphone at all and
PTP/MTP via USB is *built* *in* to Windows or macOS. You do *not* have
install anything at all - just wait a moment, if the device is connected
for the very first time.

[Arno Welzel]

Andrew, 2024-01-11 04:41:

> Carlos E.R. wrote on Wed, 10 Jan 2024 23:40:14 +0100 :
>
>>> b) The user has to know a website like <https://www.sharedrop.io/> -
>>> without that knowledge he can not exchange files at all
>>
>> Not something I'm inclined to do when copying private files.
>
> There are lots of ways to copy files but Arno Welzel insisted on no
> configuration & no additional software - which is when sharedrop came in.

No - I insist on using devices without *ANY* external resource at all!
NOTHING! No website, no software - just the hardware you have:
Smartphone, Computer, USB cable.

And the claim "WebRTC is the same as using a USB cable, you don't need
anyhing at all for this" is just bullshit, because of course you need to
have internet access and you need to know what website to visit for that.

[Arno Welzel]

Oscar Mayer, 2024-01-11 04:29:

> On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 17:32:18 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
>
>>> With USB you need to connect to another USB device where a USB driver is
>>> running, as for example a Windows computer with USB.
>>
>> But the driver is already built in!
>>
>> You don't get it.
>
> Wrong. Firefox has it built in. So does Chrome. Safari too.

WebRTC alone is *not* enough! You still need to know what website to visit.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2024-01-11 18:09, Arno Welzel wrote:
> Carlos E.R., 2024-01-10 23:40:
>> On 2024-01-10 17:34, Arno Welzel wrote:
>>> Andrew, 2024-01-10 05:20:
> [...]
>>>> It's not really important because the objections that Arno Welzel were
>>>> ridiculous in that both solutions work quite well without configuration.
>>>
>>> The latter one needs
>>>
>>> a) Internet access
>>>
>>> b) The user has to know a website like <https://www.sharedrop.io/> -
>>> without that knowledge he can not exchange files at all
>>
>> Not something I'm inclined to do when copying private files.
>>
>> If I want to copy files using WiFi in my LAN (which sometimes I do, for
>> various reasons), I can try the functionality on my phone to send files
>> "nearby", which is an option in the Google Files app, for instance.
>> Doesn't need a LAN, I believe, the finding is done using BT.
>>
>> I don't know if other tools can use the "Nearby" facility, so I don't
>> know if this is an "out of the box" facility, because I installed "Files".
>
> At least Windows and Linux do *not* proviude a similar feature without
> using a browser - because *WebRTC* is a browser based technology. And
> the service provided by <https://www.sharedrop.io/> is of course *not*
> only the protocol WebRTC but is a *software* developed in JavaScript
> running in the browser to provide this feature.

Ah, ok. Interesting.

Yes, in that case it is running external software.

>
> And no, the data is not transmitted to the server, it is directly
> transferred from the Smartphone to the Computer since they both "see"
> each other when accessing this website. But of course you need to open a
> browser on both devices and visit that website to initiate the connection.

And to "download" and run the external software.

It is of course an interesting method, if one doesn't want to /install/
an application and cable is not an option for whatever reason.

>
>> Or I would use an FTP server, or some other app on the phone to share
>> files, or connect to a server on my LAN. Some tools like Ghost Commander
>> can do that. This is not out of the box, though.
>
> Or Cx File Exporer or many other file managers which provide this.
>
> But this is exactly my point:
>
> Using a USB cable you do *not* need any app on the smartphone at all and
> PTP/MTP via USB is *built* *in* to Windows or macOS. You do *not* have
> install anything at all - just wait a moment, if the device is connected
> for the very first time.

Yes, of course.

However, sometimes wifi is more convenient, or even the only method,
like when the USB connector is faulty. So I only wanted to mention what
methods I used for WiFi transfer.

I will add WebRTC to my notes on how to transfer files as another
possibility.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Oscar Mayer]

On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 18:03:23 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:

> Firefox, Chrome and Safari have a link to websites like
> <https://www.sharedrop.io/> built in? Where?

I'm not even going to respond to that because only an idiot says that they
want all their web browsers to be pre-loaded with every URL they may use.

That you've never heard of a bookmark shows what an absolute idiot you are.

>> Your incorrect claim "neither Windows nor macOS or Linux has" Firefox,
>> Chrome or Safari is just wrong. It means you don't understand anything.
>
> No, *you* don't understand anything. It's about *not* knowing what
> website or additional(!) software one has to visit to be able to use
> WebRTC for file transfer.

That statement shows that you are an idiot because you're claiming that
every web browser must pre-load every URL you will ever want to visit.

What kind of absolute idiot makes the idiotic claims you are making?

>> What is funny is what they don't have are the correct USB drivers.
>
> They are

While it's usually done without errors, there are times when the PC
installs an old or incorrect driver which you are completely unaware of.

>> That's "additional software" that has to be installed for USB to work.
>
> No. This happens automatically. A user does not have to do anything at
> all for this except allowing data transfer on his smartphone.

You are an idiot because nobody but an idiot would claim that the PC always
installs the correct USB driver for every phone and updates it accordingly.

> Ok, a practical test, maybe you understand it then:

You are an idiot because you claim there is no additional software with USB
and yet all your examples show there is additional software with USB.

> 3) Now tell the person to remove the USB cable and use WebRTC instead
> for the same operation - of course *without* telling any website for
> this. Because as you claim the existance of WebRTC alone is a complete
> subsitute for using an USB cable.

You are an idiot because you think everyone always has a five hundred foot
long USB cable available so that they can connect to any device at home.

Because you are an idiot, there's no way to get you to not say idiotic
statements so I will simply summarize for the people who are not idiots.

[1] If you have compatible cables & ports handy and if the distance
is extremely close, then you will find USB easy to use.

[2] If you don't have compatible cables or ports or if the distance
is not extremely close, then you will find peer-to-peer easy to use.

[3] USB requires short distances. Peer-to-peer discovery requires the net.

[4] Neither requires additional software. Neither requires configuration.

Because you are an idiot, there's nothing possible to learn from any more
of your idiotic nonsense so this summary is not for you. It's for others.

[Andrew]

Carlos E.R. wrote on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 11:29:26 +0100 :

> BT is included hardware, same as WiFi. All current phones include it,
> since maybe a decade.

I'm all for solutions that work so I'd like to test out your BT suggestion.

My desktop doesn't have bluetooth but my kid's laptop does have bluetooth.
My phone has bluetooth.

I don't know about Bluetooth versions, but let's assume compatibility.

Without any software nor configuration, how would you suggest I copy a file
from my phone downstairs to my kid's laptop upstairs using just bluetooth?

>>> I don't know if other tools can use the "Nearby" facility, so I don't
>>> know if this is an "out of the box" facility, because I installed "Files".
>>
>> The solution proposed /is/ an out of the box facility that just works.
>> It requires no additional software and no configuration.
>
> It requires an external service to intermediate. That can be considered
> an external configuration service.

Even with configuration, but without software (as per Arno, not me), can
you tell me how to copy a file over BT from my phone to my kid's laptop?

I'd like to try it out as it's always good to have multiple ways to do it.
Especially since USB is for very short distances but BT can go farther.

[Andy Burns]

Andrew wrote:

> Even with configuration, but without software (as per Arno, not me), can
> you tell me how to copy a file over BT from my phone to my kid's laptop?

On the laptop, run fsquirt.exe, tell it to receive.

Then on the phone select your file, click the share* icon, choose your
laptop as the device.



[*]
<https://www.iconarchive.com/show/iconoir-icons-by-iconoir-team/share-android-icon.html>

[Arno Welzel]

Oscar Mayer, 2024-01-11 23:35:

> On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 18:03:23 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
>
>> Firefox, Chrome and Safari have a link to websites like
>> <https://www.sharedrop.io/> built in? Where?
>
> I'm not even going to respond to that because only an idiot says that they
> want all their web browsers to be pre-loaded with every URL they may use.

You still don't get my point.

When using a USB cable you don't need to know any website at all.

[...]

>> 3) Now tell the person to remove the USB cable and use WebRTC instead
>> for the same operation - of course *without* telling any website for
>> this. Because as you claim the existance of WebRTC alone is a complete
>> subsitute for using an USB cable.
>
> You are an idiot because you think everyone always has a five hundred foot
> long USB cable available so that they can connect to any device at home.

No, I assume, when someone wants to transfer data from their Android
smartphone to a computer, that the computer is not five hundret foot
away, but within a distance of 1 or 2 meter. That's the normal use case
for USB cables.

> Because you are an idiot, there's no way to get you to not say idiotic
> statements so I will simply summarize for the people who are not idiots.
>
> [1] If you have compatible cables & ports handy and if the distance
> is extremely close, then you will find USB easy to use.

Well - I usually sit directly in front of my laptop or next to my
desktop computer when working with it and of course my smartphone is
then also there. Is that "extremely close" to you?

> [2] If you don't have compatible cables or ports or if the distance
> is not extremely close, then you will find peer-to-peer easy to use.

I did not have any device since Android came out, where manufacturers
did not provide a compatible cable for it.

> [3] USB requires short distances. Peer-to-peer discovery requires the net.
>
> [4] Neither requires additional software. Neither requires configuration.

WebRTC requires to know which website to use.

> Because you are an idiot, there's nothing possible to learn from any more
> of your idiotic nonsense so this summary is not for you. It's for others.

The original poster was using an USB cable!

Quote:

"Sometimes I plug my phone into the computer and a little boc pops up
asking it I want to treat the phone like a USB drive, and all is well."

And then some posts later "Oliver" came up with this:

"Not if you use WebRTC."

And this without *any* explanation for the original poster how to this!

No, just saying "use WebRTC" and saying "most browsers support this" is
of course not enough - you have to know a website providing this service
as well and you need to have internet connection.

[Arno Welzel]

Andy Burns, 2024-01-12 11:28:

One of the few useful suggestions here, thanks! Better than just saying
"use Bluetooth, it's already build in to your phone" ;-)

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2024-01-11 23:47, Andrew wrote:
> Carlos E.R. wrote on Thu, 11 Jan 2024 11:29:26 +0100 :
>
>> BT is included hardware, same as WiFi. All current phones include it,
>> since maybe a decade.
>
> I'm all for solutions that work so I'd like to test out your BT suggestion.
>
> My desktop doesn't have bluetooth but my kid's laptop does have bluetooth.
> My phone has bluetooth.
>
> I don't know about Bluetooth versions, but let's assume compatibility.
>
> Without any software nor configuration, how would you suggest I copy a file
> from my phone downstairs to my kid's laptop upstairs using just bluetooth?

Sorry, I was thinking phone to phone.

I don't know if computers support "Nearby" (probably ™)

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

Use BT and the "Nearby" feature, I said.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nearby_Share

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Frank Slootweg]

> I don't know if computers support "Nearby" (probably ?)

Your Wikipedia reference [1] says Nearby Share is supported on Windows
(and ChromeOS). It points to android.com without a direct reference, but
they also point to two articles, on Android Central one.

I went to android.com, searched on 'Nearby Share' and found:

'Wireless sharing with your PC, made easy.'
'Send and receive photos, documents and more between nearby Android
devices1 and Windows PCs.'
<https://www.android.com/better-together/nearby-share-app/>

I haven't downloaded/tried the Windows 'app' yet. (First have to get
Bluetooth working (phone fails to connect to laptop). Or I might try
Wi-Fi instead.)

Of course this fails the no-extra-software requirement, but maybe
useful in cases when this requirement is a non-issue.

[1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nearby_Share>

[Carlos E.R.]

I suspect you have to install the "app" first, because otherwise the BT
linking might not happen, as the computer reports the wrong protocols
supported.

And it has to be BT.

The protocol uses BT to find the other device "nearby", and then they
exchange the WiFi credentials to create a bigger bandwidth connection.

>
> Of course this fails the no-extra-software requirement, but maybe
> useful in cases when this requirement is a non-issue.

Yep.

>
> [1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nearby_Share>

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Frank Slootweg]

Arno Welzel <use...@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
> Oscar Mayer, 2024-01-11 23:35:
>
> > On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 18:03:23 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
> >
> >> Firefox, Chrome and Safari have a link to websites like
> >> <https://www.sharedrop.io/> built in? Where?
> >
> > I'm not even going to respond to that because only an idiot says that they
> > want all their web browsers to be pre-loaded with every URL they may use.
>
> You still don't get my point.
>
> When using a USB cable you don't need to know any website at all.

And no Internet!

When we're in the boonies, without any Internet - mobile or otherwise -
I often need to copy stuff from my phone to my laptop or vice versa, so
then USB is the simplest solution. There are other solutions, like
Bluetooth, Wi-Fi Direct, etc., but IME they're not that easy to setup
or/and do require extra software.

[...]

[Oscar Mayer]

On 14 Jan 2024 19:44:58 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> When we're in the boonies, without any Internet - mobile or otherwise -
> I often need to copy stuff from my phone to my laptop or vice versa, so
> then USB is the simplest solution. There are other solutions, like
> Bluetooth, Wi-Fi Direct, etc., but IME they're not that easy to setup
> or/and do require extra software.

Arno Welzel's whole argument is that there is only one screwdriver.

Only flathead.
No Phillips.

But most people aren't as rigid as he is in the way they think.
Most people prefer simple solutions that fit their needs.

As with different shaped screwdrivers - - -

Each solution solves a problem that the other solutions don't.
Each solution has a requirement that the other solutions don't.

Neither uses more software. Neither less.
Neither requires more configuration. Neither less.

Neither is better.
Neither is worse.

They're different.
Just like Bluetooth file transfer is different.

These solutions are like different shaped screwdrivers.
You likely want one of each shape in your toolbox.

[1] USB
[2] Wi-Fi peer-to-peer
[3] Bluetooth peer-to-peer

Any others?

[AJL]

On 1/14/24 4:21 PM, Oscar Mayer wrote:
>On 14 Jan 2024 19:44:58 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
>> When we're in the boonies, without any Internet - mobile or otherwise -
>> I often need to copy stuff from my phone to my laptop or vice versa, so
>> then USB is the simplest solution. There are other solutions, like
>> Bluetooth, Wi-Fi Direct, etc., but IME they're not that easy to setup
>> or/and do require extra software.
>

>These solutions are like different shaped screwdrivers.
>You likely want one of each shape in your toolbox.
>
> [1] USB
> [2] Wi-Fi peer-to-peer
> [3] Bluetooth peer-to-peer
>
>Any others?

I often use an SD card...

[Frank Slootweg]

And while doing so, you of course plug the 3.5mm TRRS/TRS plug of
your wired earphones into your smartphone to listen to its FM radio.

[Andy Burns]

Frank Slootweg wrote:

> 'Wireless sharing with your PC, made easy.'
> 'Send and receive photos, documents and more between nearby Android
> devices1 and Windows PCs.'
> <https://www.android.com/better-together/nearby-share-app/>

Nearby Share was already enabled on phone, but I was unaware of the
Window app, installed it, tried to send a file from Win->Android, it
just sits there "pulsing" various blue shapes while it tries to detect
the phone ...

[AJL]

Though my Galaxy S10+ has an FM radio Samsung broke it so no I don't...

[Arno Welzel]

Oscar Mayer, 2024-01-15 00:21:

> On 14 Jan 2024 19:44:58 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
>> When we're in the boonies, without any Internet - mobile or otherwise -
>> I often need to copy stuff from my phone to my laptop or vice versa, so
>> then USB is the simplest solution. There are other solutions, like
>> Bluetooth, Wi-Fi Direct, etc., but IME they're not that easy to setup
>> or/and do require extra software.
>
> Arno Welzel's whole argument is that there is only one screwdriver.

No. There isn't. It was about what is the *same* like USB: without any
additional software needed, without internet access, without any special
knowledge like which website to open to be able to use WebRTC etc..

> Only flathead.
> No Phillips.

Wrong.

> But most people aren't as rigid as he is in the way they think.

I don't think so.

> Most people prefer simple solutions that fit their needs.

And using an external website which you have to know first is *not* simple.

[...]

> These solutions are like different shaped screwdrivers.
> You likely want one of each shape in your toolbox.
>
> [1] USB

Works out of the box.

> [2] Wi-Fi peer-to-peer

Needs a working internet connection on both devices *and* a website.
What if you don't remember which website it was in the first place?

> [3] Bluetooth peer-to-peer

Needs bluetooth on both devices which is not always the case. Also
bluetooth is quite slow - even Bluetooth 5.0 provides only 3 MBit/s when
EDR is available. So transferring 500 MB of data can take more than 30
minutes.

[kelown]

On 1/15/2024 1:13 PM, Arno Welzel wrote:
> Oscar Mayer, 2024-01-15 00:21:
>
>> On 14 Jan 2024 19:44:58 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>
>>> When we're in the boonies, without any Internet - mobile or otherwise -
>>> I often need to copy stuff from my phone to my laptop or vice versa, so
>>> then USB is the simplest solution. There are other solutions, like
>>> Bluetooth, Wi-Fi Direct, etc., but IME they're not that easy to setup
>>> or/and do require extra software.

TBF, USB will need a specific type of cable. Odd that you think a USB
cable would be more available in the boonies than Bluetooth connectivity
between two computer devices.

>> [1] USB
>
> Works out of the box.

Needs a DATA cable.

>> [2] Wi-Fi peer-to-peer
>
> Needs a working internet connection on both devices *and* a website.
> What if you don't remember which website it was in the first place?
>
>> [3] Bluetooth peer-to-peer
>
> Needs bluetooth on both devices which is not always the case.

It's more likely the case than the availability of a USB "data" cable.

> Also
> bluetooth is quite slow - even Bluetooth 5.0 provides only 3 MBit/s when
> EDR is available. So transferring 500 MB of data can take more than 30
> minutes.

500 MB is likely an outlier usage case when in the boonies. Bluetooth
comes in handy for file transfer precisely because of its ubiquity and
lack of extra hardware or software.

[Frank Slootweg]

kelown <kel...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> On 1/15/2024 1:13 PM, Arno Welzel wrote:
> > Oscar Mayer, 2024-01-15 00:21:
> >
> >> On 14 Jan 2024 19:44:58 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> >>
> >>> When we're in the boonies, without any Internet - mobile or otherwise -
> >>> I often need to copy stuff from my phone to my laptop or vice versa, so
> >>> then USB is the simplest solution. There are other solutions, like
> >>> Bluetooth, Wi-Fi Direct, etc., but IME they're not that easy to setup
> >>> or/and do require extra software.
>
> TBF, USB will need a specific type of cable. Odd that you think a USB
> cable would be more available in the boonies than Bluetooth connectivity
> between two computer devices.

Nope, a USB (smart)phone to/from laptop transfer does *not* need "a
specific type of cable". It uses the *same* cable as is used to charge
the phone, so no special cable or any other hardware (or software) is
needed for this type of connection. That's the main advantage: Needs
nothing extra and is reasonably fast.

[More of the same deleted.]

[AJL]

On 1/16/24 9:01 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:

>a USB (smart)phone to/from laptop transfer does *not* need "a
>specific type of cable". It uses the *same* cable as is used to charge
>the phone, so no special cable or any other hardware (or software) is
>needed for this type of connection. That's the main advantage: Needs
>nothing extra and is reasonably fast.

There are charge only (no data line) USB cables in my collection. Not yours?

[Frank Slootweg]

Nope, I don't [1] have any such cables.

But the point of charge-only cables is irrelevant, because the
(snipped) context is obviously about a cable which came with the phone,
otherwise it *would* be an extra item in this "no-extra's"
(non-)discussion.

[1] I do have some special-case charge-only cables which have a USB
connector on one end, but a non-USB connector on the other end. For
example for a Fitbit 'watch' and a AA/AAA charger.

[AJL]

On 1/16/24 11:15 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>AJL <noe...@none.com> wrote:

>> There are charge only (no data line) USB cables in my collection. Not yours?

> Nope, I don't [1] have any such cables.

> But the point of charge-only cables is irrelevant, because the
>(snipped) context is obviously about a cable which came with the phone,

Ah. I think my original phone cable got lost around 4 years ago. But no
worries. I think I have 20 or more in my box.

>otherwise it *would* be an extra item in this "no-extra's"
>(non-)discussion.

Yup. But better IMO than a dead group...

>[1] I do have some special-case charge-only cables which have a USB
>connector on one end, but a non-USB connector on the other end. For
>example for a Fitbit 'watch' and a AA/AAA charger.

Yup2. Same here but I also have some with USB on the other end. The most
recent came with a rechargable mouse.

Am posting with my recently acquired $39US 7" Android tablet (you are the
victim of a test)...

[Frank Slootweg]

AJL <noe...@none.com> wrote:
> On 1/16/24 11:15 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> >AJL <noe...@none.com> wrote:
>
> >> There are charge only (no data line) USB cables in my collection.
> >> Not yours?
>
> > Nope, I don't [1] have any such cables.
>
> > But the point of charge-only cables is irrelevant, because the
> >(snipped) context is obviously about a cable which came with the phone,
>
> Ah. I think my original phone cable got lost around 4 years ago. But no
> worries. I think I have 20 or more in my box.

Well, when we're going into the boonies, I make very, very sure that I
have the right cable(s) and at least one spare for each unique cable. A
bit of a bother when the next shop might be some 800-1000km away! :-)

> >otherwise it *would* be an extra item in this "no-extra's"
> >(non-)discussion.
>
> Yup. But better IMO than a dead group...

Yes, it's getting a bit quiet, but then I'm filtering quite a lot of
trolls/loons and (crossposted to) troll groups.

> >[1] I do have some special-case charge-only cables which have a USB
> >connector on one end, but a non-USB connector on the other end. For
> >example for a Fitbit 'watch' and a AA/AAA charger.
>
> Yup2. Same here but I also have some with USB on the other end. The most
> recent came with a rechargable mouse.

As 'nospam' used to say, if it doesn't confirm to the USB spec - and
hence the connectors will/should not have USB markings -, it's not a
USB cable, it's just a cable which has connectors which *look like* USB
connectors.

Having said that, I see that our (Samsung) USB-A to USB-C cables have
no marking on the USB-C side. Do USB-C to USB-C cables have no markings
on their connectors? If so, I understand why the Apple adepts objected
so much to USB-C charging ports for/on iPhones! :-)

Well, if that's wasn't some totally irrelevant rambling, I don't know
what *is*!

> Am posting with my recently acquired $39US 7" Android tablet (you are the
> victim of a test)...

In news.software.readers there's yet another thread in search of a
Android newsreader. Well, one can hope, can't one!?

[AJL]

On 1/16/24 1:16 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>AJL <noe...@none.com> wrote:.

>when we're going into the boonies, I make very, very sure that I
>have the right cable(s) and at least one spare for each unique cable. A
>bit of a bother when the next shop might be some 800-1000km away! :-)

Impressive. My boonies are only 100 miles away (in the mountains out of the
desert heat)...


>>[Endless arguing is] better IMO than a dead group...

>Yes, it's getting a bit quiet, but then I'm filtering quite a lot of
>trolls/loons and (crossposted to) troll groups.

No filtering here. I have always enjoyed the slanderous chatter.


> As 'nospam' used to say...

Where did nospam go? Haven't seen him in a long time. As most of us are old
farts here I hope it's not the worst...

>I see that our (Samsung) USB-A to USB-C cables have
>no marking on the USB-C side. Do USB-C to USB-C cables have no markings

>on their connectors.

None of my cables have any markings on them. I did try to send data through
a charge only cable one time. I got a verrrry slow transfer speed...

>If so, I understand why the Apple adepts objected
>so much to USB-C charging ports for/on iPhones! :-)

Not a problem for the iPhone that lives and wirelessly charges in my
house...

>In news.software.readers there's yet another thread in search of a
>Android newsreader. Well, one can hope, can't one!?

Yep. This PhoNews is definitely a PITA to use compared to my earlier
Groundhog and NewsGroup Android readers. But it does work on all my modern
Android stuff including this Chromebook tablet whereas the old ones don't.
Now if it only had a spell check so I wouldn't em bare ass myself so
much...

[Carlos E. R.]

On 2024-01-15 21:34, kelown wrote:
> On 1/15/2024 1:13 PM, Arno Welzel wrote:
>> Oscar Mayer, 2024-01-15 00:21:
>>
>>> On 14 Jan 2024 19:44:58 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>>
>>>>    When we're in the boonies, without any Internet - mobile or
>>>> otherwise -
>>>> I often need to copy stuff from my phone to my laptop or vice versa, so
>>>> then USB is the simplest solution. There are other solutions, like
>>>> Bluetooth, Wi-Fi Direct, etc., but IME they're not that easy to setup
>>>> or/and do require extra software.
>
> TBF, USB will need a specific type of cable. Odd that you think a USB
> cable would be more available in the boonies than Bluetooth connectivity
> between two computer devices.

What, you do not travel with an USB cable in the backpack, for
emergencies? :-)

>
>>>   [1] USB
>>
>> Works out of the box.
>
> Needs a DATA cable.

If the USB cable doesn't have all the wires, it is not an USB cable.

...

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 2024-01-15 22:40, Peter wrote:

> kelown <kel...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> TBF, USB will need a specific type of cable. Odd that you think a USB
>> cable would be more available in the boonies than Bluetooth connectivity
>> between two computer devices.
>

> Correct. Often are cases of incompatible ports or longer distances?
> Then usb no longer works at all.

>
>>>> [1] USB
>>>
>>> Works out of the box.
>>
>> Needs a DATA cable.
>

> Correct. Usb only works after you add additional specific hardware.
> And usb requires software drivers specific to your hardware.
>
> Although if you're not on the internet when you first connect usb, I would
> hope that Windows will automatically install at least a generic usb driver.

The driver, if needed, is currently installed by default in any recent
laptop or computer. Even the BIOS supports USB, because keyboards are
USB, and laptops include hardware connected internally via USB. The BT
subsystem may be connected itself via USB (it is in this laptop I'm
using to write this).

...

> Each method is better/worse than the others depending on the situation.

Yes!

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Carlos E. R.]

Provided in the box where the smart phone came? No way.

And they are not USB, actually.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[AJL]

On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 11
"Carlos E. R." <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2024-01-16 18:16, AJL wrote:

> > There are charge only (no data line) USB cables in my collection.

> Provided in the box where the smart phone came? No way.

Nope. They came with various other devices.

> And they are not USB, actually.

Common usage is a data-blocker or charge-only USB cables.
Google says so too. YMMV...

Just put this Groundhog newsreader on an old Amazon Fire tablet. It
has spell check and auto correction (which I hate). I had forgotten
that. On newer devices it had quote problems. Lets see how it works
on this old tablet (you are now another of my test victims)...

[Frank Slootweg]

AJL <noe...@none.com> wrote:
> On 1/16/24 1:16 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> >AJL <noe...@none.com> wrote:.
>
> >when we're going into the boonies, I make very, very sure that I
> >have the right cable(s) and at least one spare for each unique cable. A
> >bit of a bother when the next shop might be some 800-1000km away! :-)
>
> Impressive. My boonies are only 100 miles away (in the mountains out of the
> desert heat)...

Well, it - sadly - was more reminiscing than current practice. I was
referring to the 4WD dirt tracks we did in Australia. Some of them were
some 1100km with nothing or hardly anything - for example only a bush
camp - in between. On a next trip we might still do some short(er) ones,
but not the big ones which took three to four days or more. "Hey!
There's a vehicle! The first one today and probably the last." Bliss!

[...]

> > As 'nospam' used to say...
>
> Where did nospam go? Haven't seen him in a long time. As most of us are old
> farts here I hope it's not the worst...

I don't know where he went/is and I indeed also hope it's not the
worst.

I seem to remember from my (now cleaned) filter logs that he was still
posting in June last year.

Perhaps someone else knows.

[...]

> >If so, I understand why the Apple adepts objected
> >so much to USB-C charging ports for/on iPhones! :-)
>
> Not a problem for the iPhone that lives and wirelessly charges in my
> house...

Sigh! Now you've given the troll(s) yet another (non-)argument! :-)

[...]

[Arno Welzel]

kelown, 2024-01-15 21:34:

> On 1/15/2024 1:13 PM, Arno Welzel wrote:
>> Oscar Mayer, 2024-01-15 00:21:
>>
>>> On 14 Jan 2024 19:44:58 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>>
>>>> When we're in the boonies, without any Internet - mobile or otherwise -
>>>> I often need to copy stuff from my phone to my laptop or vice versa, so
>>>> then USB is the simplest solution. There are other solutions, like
>>>> Bluetooth, Wi-Fi Direct, etc., but IME they're not that easy to setup
>>>> or/and do require extra software.
>
> TBF, USB will need a specific type of cable. Odd that you think a USB
> cable would be more available in the boonies than Bluetooth connectivity
> between two computer devices.

The USB cable does not have to be very "specific" - just one with data
connection and the matching connector type for your device. Usually that
comes with the device.

>>> [1] USB
>>
>> Works out of the box.
>
> Needs a DATA cable.

Which is provided with most devices. And to get one is also not very
hard. And to buy a USB data cable for your device you still don't have
to know what website to use to to data transfer ;-)

[...]

>>> [3] Bluetooth peer-to-peer
>>
>> Needs bluetooth on both devices which is not always the case.
>
> It's more likely the case than the availability of a USB "data" cable.

Not in my world. I have tons of USB data cables in the office and at
home and in the city where I live and can get cables very easy in one of
the local shops which sell smartphones.

>> Also
>> bluetooth is quite slow - even Bluetooth 5.0 provides only 3 MBit/s when
>> EDR is available. So transferring 500 MB of data can take more than 30
>> minutes.
>
> 500 MB is likely an outlier usage case when in the boonies. Bluetooth
> comes in handy for file transfer precisely because of its ubiquity and
> lack of extra hardware or software.

When it's just about to transfer a few files, you don't need file
transfer at all - just send it via drop box etc. and use the PC to
download the files.

[Arno Welzel]

Peter, 2024-01-15 22:40:

> kelown <kel...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> TBF, USB will need a specific type of cable. Odd that you think a USB
>> cable would be more available in the boonies than Bluetooth connectivity
>> between two computer devices.
>

> Correct. Often are cases of incompatible ports or longer distances?
> Then usb no longer works at all.

See the ORIGINAL POST!

[...]

> Each method is better/worse than the others depending on the situation.

See the ORIGINAL POST!

[Arno Welzel]

AJL, 2024-01-16 18:16:

The cables provided with the phone is usally NOT(!) a "charge only" cable.

[Arno Welzel]

AJL, 2024-01-17 16:35:

> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 11
> "Carlos E. R." <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2024-01-16 18:16, AJL wrote:
>
>>> There are charge only (no data line) USB cables in my collection.
>
>> Provided in the box where the smart phone came? No way.
>
> Nope. They came with various other devices.

The Pixel 6a I bought a while ago came with a data cable.

Also the Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite before and the Sony Xperia Z1 before and so on...

[Arno Welzel]

Peter, 2024-01-15 22:34:

> Arno Welzel <use...@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
>>> [1] USB
>>
>> Works out of the box.
>

> Wrong. Usb does not work "out of the box."

It does.

> Usb requires additional hardware and device-specific software drivers.

No.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Same here with the Pixel 7, the Pixel 4 before and so on.
But not with a charger.

--
"Manus manum lavat."

[AJL]

Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Arno Welzel wrote:
> > AJL wrote:

> >> "Carlos E. R." wrote:
> >>> AJL wrote:

> >>>> There are charge only (no data line) USB cables in my
collection.

> >>> Provided in the box where the smart phone came? No way.

> >> Nope. They came with various other devices.

> > The Pixel 6a I bought a while ago came with a data cable.

> > Also the Xiaomi Mi 9 Lite before and the Sony Xperia Z1 before
and so on...

> Same here with the Pixel 7, the Pixel 4 before and so on.

ALL my USB equipped phones over the years CAME WITH a data capable
cable. I repeat (from above) that my charge only USB cables in my
cable collection came from OTHER DEVICES...

[Frank Slootweg]

Just now, I installed the Windows program [1] and I can send from
Android to Windows and from Windows to Android.

The first time it took a little while - a few seconds - to find the
phone. The second time it was faster.

Can you transfer a file in the other direction, Android to Windows?

BTW, my laptop has Windows 11 (23H2).

I'm largely unimpressed by Nearby Share! It may be handy for an
incidental transfer of a file or a few files, but the user interface is
not very friendly, nor powerful.

I am still looking for a file manager type UI on both Android and
Windows, where you can copy-and-paste and cut-and-paste/drag
files/folders from one device to the other via a network (Wi-Fi/mobile)
connection. Nearby Share isn't that, not at all.

Nearby Share looked somewhat promising, because it's Google software
on both sides - Android and Windows -, instead of some third-party app
on Android and some other third-party stuff on Windows. But I'll keep
looking and in the meantime I'll keep Nearby Share, just in case.

[1] Lives in C:\Program Files\Google\NearbyShare, i.e. not in whatever
place Windows UWP/Metro/Modern/Fisher-Price 'apps' live.

[Carlos E. R.]

All phones come with a "real" USB cable, ie, all 4 wires.


--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 2024-01-18 13:56, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>
>>> 'Wireless sharing with your PC, made easy.'
>>> 'Send and receive photos, documents and more between nearby Android
>>> devices1 and Windows PCs.'
>>> <https://www.android.com/better-together/nearby-share-app/>
>>
>> Nearby Share was already enabled on phone, but I was unaware of the
>> Window app, installed it, tried to send a file from Win->Android, it
>> just sits there "pulsing" various blue shapes while it tries to detect
>> the phone ...
>
> Just now, I installed the Windows program [1] and I can send from
> Android to Windows and from Windows to Android.
>
> The first time it took a little while - a few seconds - to find the
> phone. The second time it was faster.
>
> Can you transfer a file in the other direction, Android to Windows?
>
> BTW, my laptop has Windows 11 (23H2).
>
> I'm largely unimpressed by Nearby Share! It may be handy for an
> incidental transfer of a file or a few files, but the user interface is
> not very friendly, nor powerful.
>

I have only tried phone to phone.

> I am still looking for a file manager type UI on both Android and
> Windows, where you can copy-and-paste and cut-and-paste/drag
> files/folders from one device to the other via a network (Wi-Fi/mobile)
> connection. Nearby Share isn't that, not at all.

Try Ghost Commander on the phone. It can connect to a Windows share
(smb) and others (sftp (ssh) to Linux, or plain ftp). There are other
similar tools.

[Frank Slootweg]

Carlos E. R. <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> On 2024-01-18 13:56, Frank Slootweg wrote:

[...]

> > I am still looking for a file manager type UI on both Android and
> > Windows, where you can copy-and-paste and cut-and-paste/drag
> > files/folders from one device to the other via a network (Wi-Fi/mobile)
> > connection. Nearby Share isn't that, not at all.
>
> Try Ghost Commander on the phone. It can connect to a Windows share
> (smb) and others (sftp (ssh) to Linux, or plain ftp). There are other
> similar tools.

Yes, I've used tools like that, but, as I said, I *also* want it the
other way around - file manager on Windows to 'share' on Android -, but
that is always a hack, because 1) Android can not be a Network Share for
Windows (it can be a SMB share for Linux, because the Linux client can
use a port which Android allows for the SMB server), 2) FTP is clumsy
and doesn't provide all file operations and 3) WebDAV is even harder to
set up on both sides.

So you need a software supplier which provides *both* the Android side
*and* the Windows side. Google's Nearby Share seemed to fit that bill,
but, as I wrote, it can't do copy-and-paste and cut-and-paste/drag from
a filemanager like UI.

[kaan26]

https://lezzethanem.com Yemek Tarifleri ile çok kolay! Dilerseniz yemek tarifleri gönderebilir, arkadaşlarınızı davet edip takip edebilirsiniz.

--
<a href="lezzethanem.com" rel="dofollow">Yemek Tarifi</a> ile çok kolay! Dilerseniz yemek tarifleri gönderebilir, arkadaşlarınızı davet edip takip edebilirsiniz.