Usb-c to usb-c

[Carlos E.R.]

Hi,

I just got a new phone. A modest Moto g52. There were only two choices
with Android 12, the other one was the g22, but commentators said it
felt slow. And I am partial to this brand (fewer customization). I
bought the previous model on spring or summer of 2018, and it is still
working except one thing (and no system updates).

I find few snags: no FM radio (the g22 has it), that it is not 5G, and
that the dual sim slot is "hybrid", ie, the second position is either
the second SIM or a micro SD card (the g22 admits the 3 cards). It only
has 6GB ram, 128 GB of flash. If I add the µSD card, it can be 1TB (the
g22 has 4GB ram).

Compromises.

I made a full backup of the old phone on my computer (a moto G6+), and
started the new phone without the SIM, yet. Soon after starting, after
activating the wifi, it asked if I wanted to copy over accounts/apps/data.

Hell yes.

Connect cables, "no, I don't see your other phone". And then it says
that it is a phone to phone cable, an usb-c to usb-c.

I still had time to try to buy one, but it is a holiday here, many
places do not open. And it is 6€ more for a 10 cm cable.

Fortunately, it accepts WiFi.

It told me to find and start Google app on the other phone, but there
was no need: after placing one near the other, the old phone detected
the new one and asked if I wanted to allow the copy. It asked if I saw
the same geometric pattern on both phones. Then just a few questions
about what I wanted to copy. I said all. 15GB. Still, it says some
videos and photos may not be copied. Well, maybe I can transfer those
later, manually, if I want to.

This was a nice surprise, transferring old phone to new phone has never
been easier.

Of course, there is still 54 minutes to go, it says. Oops, now it says 49.


--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Andy Burnelli]

Carlos E.R. wrote:

> I just got a new phone. A modest Moto g52. There were only two choices
> with Android 12,

I haven't seen anything in the news worthwhile about Android 12 that you
can't back port if you really want the feature; have you? Has anyone?

> the other one was the g22 but commentators said it

> felt slow. And I am partial to this brand (fewer customization). I
> bought the previous model on spring or summer of 2018,

I've had the $200 Moto G and the $100 Moto G7, both from Google on sale
each time, and I too liked the "clean" interface of the Motorola Android.

The nice thing is almost all consumer electronics get better faster cheaper
over time (save for one, and you know which one that is, so I won't say).

> and it is still
> working except one thing (and no system updates).

Just to be clear to the others lurking, you have plenty of "updates" on an
Android phone, as even all the way back to 4.4 the news said they were
being updated; what you don't have are Android _version_ updates most
likely, and, likely the security patch updates (after a few years).

The rest of Android (which is _most_ of Android), updates for quite a long
time, and, for some items, there is no known EOL date any of us can find.

> I find few snags: no FM radio (the g22 has it), that it is not 5G, and
> that the dual sim slot is "hybrid", ie, the second position is either
> the second SIM or a micro SD card (the g22 admits the 3 cards). It only
> has 6GB ram, 128 GB of flash. If I add the µSD card, it can be 1TB (the
> g22 has 4GB ram).

Here is a one-to-one comparison of those two phones, G52 vs G22
<https://phonesdata.com/en/compare/5462208/5462094/>
Release Date: 2022, April | 2022, March 04
Dimensions: 160.1 x 74.5 x 8 mm | 164 x 75 x 8.5 mm
Weight: 169 g | 185 g
Screen: 6.6", AMOLED | 6.5", IPS LCD
Main Camera: Triple, 50 MP | Quad, 50 MP
Selfi Camera: Single, 16 MP | Single, 16 MP
Memory: 128GB 4GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM
Battery: 5000 mAh | 5000 mAh
Headphone Jack: Yes | Yes
Approximate price: 250 EUR | $ 345

Where, like most phones (save for one brand) it has the standard
functionality of the headphone jack & the sdslot (so it's odd that it
doesn't have the FM radio you speak of).

Running through the rest of the specs, your new phone has a Qualcomm
processor (Qualcomm SM6225 Snapdragon 680 4G (6 nm), Octa-core (4x2.4 GHz
Kryo 265 Gold & 4x1.9 GHz Kryo 265 Silver), while the older phone was a
Mediatek CPU.

And the new phone is a fast charging 30 Watt, which is hard to tell from
the specs, but did the 30W fast charging brick come with the new phone?

> Compromises.
>
> I made a full backup of the old phone on my computer (a moto G6+), and
> started the new phone without the SIM, yet. Soon after starting, after
> activating the wifi, it asked if I wanted to copy over accounts/apps/data.

I recently set up a spare Samsung Galaxy A32-5G and it too asked me if I
wanted to do that (this person had a google account set up on the phone).

> Hell yes.
>
> Connect cables, "no, I don't see your other phone". And then it says
> that it is a phone to phone cable, an usb-c to usb-c.

You can do it over the radio if they're on the same network, I think.
I think it uses an ad hoc network in fact - but I'm not really sure.

> I still had time to try to buy one, but it is a holiday here, many
> places do not open. And it is 6¤ more for a 10 cm cable.
>
> Fortunately, it accepts WiFi.

Ah, yes. I thought so. That was my experience although I was wary of the
transfer so I'll be interested to see how well yours went along, but bear
in mind I've posted many times that _all_ the crap that the Android's used
to do that the iKooks blasphemed, have been rectified over time (the iKooks
haven't kept up with the times of course).

One of those things was how easy it is nowadays to move your stuff over.

> It told me to find and start Google app on the other phone, but there
> was no need: after placing one near the other, the old phone detected
> the new one and asked if I wanted to allow the copy. It asked if I saw
> the same geometric pattern on both phones. Then just a few questions
> about what I wanted to copy. I said all. 15GB.

Is it using an ad hoc network? I think it may be doing that.
Others will know better than I do though.

> Still, it says some
> videos and photos may not be copied. Well, maybe I can transfer those
> later, manually, if I want to.

I suspect that may be standard boilerplate because you can put media in a
ton of places that it might not be looking (e.g., I have my PulseSMS media
go into its own folder on the external sdcard).

> This was a nice surprise, transferring old phone to new phone has never
> been easier.

Yup. Not only have almost all consumer electronics (save for one) gotten
better faster cheaper over time, but Android updates have gotten better, as
had Android app functionality, and, in particular, the integration of teh
Android device for easy updates.

> Of course, there is still 54 minutes to go, it says. Oops, now it says 49.

Please let us knwo the details as I was leery of it so I did a manual
migration instead but I saw what you saw (Android 11 in this case).
--
Usenet is where friendly people daily gather to discuss topics of interest.

[nospam]

In article <t4q39n$17ld$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli

<sp...@nospam.com> wrote:

> I haven't seen anything in the news worthwhile about Android 12 that you
> can't back port if you really want the feature; have you? Has anyone?

then you haven't looked, and what you call 'back port' is essentially
reimplementing android 12, something which took google quite some time
to do.

> The nice thing is almost all consumer electronics get better faster cheaper
> over time (save for one, and you know which one that is, so I won't say).

that one also gets better faster cheaper, trollboi.

> Others will know better than I do though.

oh, they very definitely do, on just about everything.

[MajorLanGod]

"Carlos E.R." <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote in
news:dtp5ki-...@Telcontar.valinor:

> Hi,

>
> I find few snags: no FM radio (the g22 has it), that it is not 5G, and
> that the dual sim slot is "hybrid", ie, the second position is either
> the second SIM or a micro SD card (the g22 admits the 3 cards). It
> only has 6GB ram, 128 GB of flash. If I add the µSD card, it can be
> 1TB (the g22 has 4GB ram).
>
>

When you say no FM radio do you mean no FM chip? If it has a radio chip you
can use next radio and your earphone (cable acts as antenna) to listen to
off-the-air stations as opposed to over the net ones.

[Andy Burnelli]

nospam wrote:

>> I haven't seen anything in the news worthwhile about Android 12 that you
>> can't back port if you really want the feature; have you? Has anyone?
>
> then you haven't looked, and what you call 'back port' is essentially
> reimplementing android 12, something which took google quite some time
> to do.

You bullshit so much nospam that I'm not even going to ask you to name even
a _single_ useful functionality of Android 12 that isn't already backported
into Android 11.

>
>> The nice thing is almost all consumer electronics get better faster cheaper
>> over time (save for one, and you know which one that is, so I won't say).
>
> that one also gets better faster cheaper, trollboi.

You _hate_ that your beloved iPhone is the only common consumer electronics
that does NOT get better faster cheaper over time.

>> Others will know better than I do though.
>
> oh, they very definitely do, on just about everything.

And yet you never can back up a single claim you make nospam.

The reason you can't back up any of your claims is simple:
a. Your IQ is no higher than about 80
b. You lack formal education
c. Your self esteem is in the toilet (rightfully so) where you are
_desperate_ to garner self esteem from what Apple advertising feeds you.

When you can back up even a single claim you make, then, after that, you
can come back and tell we Android owners how much you know about Android.

[Andy Burnelli]

MajorLanGod wrote:

> When you say no FM radio do you mean no FM chip? If it has a radio chip you
> can use next radio and your earphone (cable acts as antenna) to listen to
> off-the-air stations as opposed to over the net ones.

The adults on this newsgroup will note all but the iKooks are trying to
_help_ Chris, where I too found it odd that the FM radio would be missing.

Especially given that the headphone jack is still there (which is half the
problem set).

The OP knows exactly what sub model he has, but a general check finds
conflicting information on the presence of the Motorola G52 FM radio.
<https://droidchart.com/en/motorola/motorola-moto-g52-motog52-7773>
"This Motorola smartphone has FM radio receiver."

<https://www.gizmochina.com/product/motorola-moto-g52/>
"FM Radio = Unspecified"

<https://www.phonearena.com/phones/Motorola-Moto-G52_id11899>
"Radio: FM, Stereo, RDS"

<https://latestmobilefaq.com/motorola-moto-g52-faqs-nfc-ir-blaster-ois-5g-waterproof-body/>
"Q : Does Motorola Moto G52 support FM Radio?
A : No, Motorola Moto G52 does not supports FM Radio."

etc.
--
Everyone but the iKooks is trying to be purposefully helpful to the OP.
(The iKooks are only interested in defending all things Apple.)

[Andy Burnelli]

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> The adults on this newsgroup will note all but the iKooks are trying to
> _help_ Chris, where I too found it odd that the FM radio would be missing.

Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

AFAIK, no FM radio chip. The old phone has it, but not the g52. I would
like it to have FM, but there was no choice.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-03 04:16, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>> I just got a new phone. A modest Moto g52. There were only two choices
>> with Android 12,
>
> I haven't seen anything in the news worthwhile about Android 12 that you
> can't back port if you really want the feature; have you? Has anyone?

That's irrelevant.

>
>> the other one was the g22 but commentators said it felt slow. And I am
>> partial to this brand (fewer customization). I bought the previous
>> model on spring or summer of 2018,
>
> I've had the $200 Moto G and the $100 Moto G7, both from Google on sale
> each time, and I too liked the "clean" interface of the Motorola Android.
>
> The nice thing is almost all consumer electronics get better faster cheaper
> over time (save for one, and you know which one that is, so I won't say).
>
>> and it is still working except one thing (and no system updates).
>
> Just to be clear to the others lurking, you have plenty of "updates" on an
> Android phone, as even all the way back to 4.4 the news said they were
> being updated; what you don't have are Android _version_ updates most
> likely, and, likely the security patch updates (after a few years).

No.

You get updates to the apps, but not system updates. My phone is clear
that the last one is from July 2020.

>
> The rest of Android (which is _most_ of Android), updates for quite a long
> time, and, for some items, there is no known EOL date any of us can find.
>
>> I find few snags: no FM radio (the g22 has it), that it is not 5G, and
>> that the dual sim slot is "hybrid", ie, the second position is either
>> the second SIM or a micro SD card (the g22 admits the 3 cards). It

>> only has 6GB ram, 128 GB of flash. If I add the �SD card, it can be

>> 1TB (the g22 has 4GB ram).
>
> Here is a one-to-one comparison of those two phones, G52 vs G22
> <https://phonesdata.com/en/compare/5462208/5462094/>
> Release Date: 2022, April | 2022, March 04
> Dimensions: 160.1 x 74.5 x 8 mm | 164 x 75 x 8.5 mm
> Weight: 169 g | 185 g
> Screen: 6.6", AMOLED | 6.5", IPS LCD
> Main Camera: Triple, 50 MP | Quad, 50 MP
> Selfi Camera: Single, 16 MP | Single, 16 MP
> Memory: 128GB 4GB RAM | 64GB 4GB RAM
> Battery: 5000 mAh | 5000 mAh
> Headphone Jack: Yes | Yes
> Approximate price: 250 EUR | $ 345
>
> Where, like most phones (save for one brand) it has the standard
> functionality of the headphone jack & the sdslot (so it's odd that it
> doesn't have the FM radio you speak of).

It is mentioned on Motorola web page.

>
> Running through the rest of the specs, your new phone has a Qualcomm
> processor (Qualcomm SM6225 Snapdragon 680 4G (6 nm), Octa-core (4x2.4 GHz
> Kryo 265 Gold & 4x1.9 GHz Kryo 265 Silver), while the older phone was a
> Mediatek CPU.
>
> And the new phone is a fast charging 30 Watt, which is hard to tell from
> the specs, but did the 30W fast charging brick come with the new phone?

Yes. It did charge fast.

And in-ear headphones.

>
>> Compromises.
>>
>> I made a full backup of the old phone on my computer (a moto G6+), and
>> started the new phone without the SIM, yet. Soon after starting, after
>> activating the wifi, it asked if I wanted to copy over
>> accounts/apps/data.
>
> I recently set up a spare Samsung Galaxy A32-5G and it too asked me if I
> wanted to do that (this person had a google account set up on the phone).
>
>> Hell yes.
>>
>> Connect cables, "no, I don't see your other phone". And then it says
>> that it is a phone to phone cable, an usb-c to usb-c.
>
> You can do it over the radio if they're on the same network, I think.
> I think it uses an ad hoc network in fact - but I'm not really sure.

Yes, that's what I did. It insists the phones have to be close to one
another, so maybe it uses NFC at some point at least.

>
>> I still had time to try to buy one, but it is a holiday here, many
>> places do not open. And it is 6� more for a 10 cm cable.
>>
>> Fortunately, it accepts WiFi.
>
> Ah, yes. I thought so. That was my experience although I was wary of the
> transfer so I'll be interested to see how well yours went along, but bear
> in mind I've posted many times that _all_ the crap that the Android's used
> to do that the iKooks blasphemed, have been rectified over time (the iKooks
> haven't kept up with the times of course).
>
> One of those things was how easy it is nowadays to move your stuff over.

It did not transfer the entire whatsapp stuff, only a little bit. It
relies on whatasapp own internal backup (which is uploaded to google
drive), but that one doesn't include photos/videos unless you tick for
it, and then it takes ages. So I did that internal backup of messages,
and later just cloned the directories across phones, using the computer.
Worked perfectly. Oh, it insisted on importing from the google drive
backup any way, so I let it. But I can see the photos on the messages,
so it's fine.

Of course, takes a lot of space in the phone. I will deal with that
another day.

>
>> It told me to find and start Google app on the other phone, but there
>> was no need: after placing one near the other, the old phone detected
>> the new one and asked if I wanted to allow the copy. It asked if I saw
>> the same geometric pattern on both phones. Then just a few questions
>> about what I wanted to copy. I said all. 15GB.
>
> Is it using an ad hoc network? I think it may be doing that.
> Others will know better than I do though.

Very possibly, it did not say. Certainly not via my router.

>> Still, it says some videos and photos may not be copied. Well, maybe I
>> can transfer those later, manually, if I want to.
>
> I suspect that may be standard boilerplate because you can put media in a
> ton of places that it might not be looking (e.g., I have my PulseSMS media
> go into its own folder on the external sdcard).
>
>> This was a nice surprise, transferring old phone to new phone has
>> never been easier.
>
> Yup. Not only have almost all consumer electronics (save for one) gotten
> better faster cheaper over time, but Android updates have gotten better, as
> had Android app functionality, and, in particular, the integration of teh
> Android device for easy updates.
>> Of course, there is still 54 minutes to go, it says. Oops, now it says
>> 49.
>
> Please let us knwo the details as I was leery of it so I did a manual
> migration instead but I saw what you saw (Android 11 in this case).

It worked well, but not everything was transferred. Whatsapp I copied
manually. k9 did not transfer; on starting it, I noticed it suggested to
import a backup file, which I then generated on the old phone, and
transferred. I imported it, but I still had to enter the isp mail
password - which is a good thing.

So I think that applications that have their own backup system (like
these two) are not transferred via the general system.


It transferred my background photo, but it did not transfer "the icons"
on the "desktop". So now I am creating the shortcuts to start each app,
one by one, and re-organizing them.

Interestingly, even though the screens are the same size on both phones,
at least one widget is bigger on the new phone. Both are 2x1, but has
more pixels. Visibly so. (rain alarm).

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-03 09:41, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> MajorLanGod wrote:
>
>> When you say no FM radio do you mean no FM chip? If it has a radio
>> chip you can use next radio and your earphone (cable acts as antenna)
>> to listen to off-the-air stations as opposed to over the net ones.
>
> The adults on this newsgroup will note all but the iKooks are trying to
> _help_ Chris, where I too found it odd that the FM radio would be missing.
>
> Especially given that the headphone jack is still there (which is half the
> problem set).
>
> The OP knows exactly what sub model he has, but a general check finds
> conflicting information on the presence of the Motorola G52 FM radio.
> <https://droidchart.com/en/motorola/motorola-moto-g52-motog52-7773>
> "This Motorola smartphone has FM radio receiver."

Well, I just tried, and indeed the radio FM works. I'm very surprised.
It is certainly not mentioned by them:

https://www.motorola.es/smartphones-moto-g-52/p

And has RDS, at least the station name and maybe program name.

>
> <https://www.gizmochina.com/product/motorola-moto-g52/>
> "FM Radio = Unspecified"
>
> <https://www.phonearena.com/phones/Motorola-Moto-G52_id11899>
> "Radio: FM, Stereo, RDS"
>
> <https://latestmobilefaq.com/motorola-moto-g52-faqs-nfc-ir-blaster-ois-5g-waterproof-body/>
>
> "Q : Does Motorola Moto G52 support FM Radio?
>  A : No, Motorola Moto G52 does not supports FM Radio."
>
> etc.


--

Cheers, Carlos.

[sms]

On 5/2/2022 1:01 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just got a new phone. A modest Moto g52. There were only two choices
> with Android 12, the other one was the g22, but commentators said it
> felt slow. And I am partial to this brand (fewer customization). I
> bought the previous model on spring or summer of 2018, and it is still
> working except one thing (and no system updates).
>
> I find few snags: no FM radio (the g22 has it), that it is not 5G, and
> that the dual sim slot is "hybrid", ie, the second position is either
> the second SIM or a micro SD card (the g22 admits the 3 cards). It only
> has 6GB ram, 128 GB of flash. If I add the µSD card, it can be 1TB (the
> g22 has 4GB ram).

The SOC in the g52 (Snapdragon 680) supports an FM radio, and the G52
has a headphone jack for an antenna.

<https://www.phonearena.com/phones/Motorola-Moto-G52_id11899> states
that the g52 has an FM radio. They might have been basing this off the
fact that the Snapdragon 680 has FM radio capability, though it's
possible that Motorola disabled the FM radio.

Sometimes you have to just install an FM radio app when the specs don't
say that it has an FM radio. Try
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.motorola.fmplayer>.

[sms]

On 5/2/2022 1:01 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I just got a new phone. A modest Moto g52. There were only two choices
> with Android 12, the other one was the g22, but commentators said it
> felt slow. And I am partial to this brand (fewer customization). I
> bought the previous model on spring or summer of 2018, and it is still
> working except one thing (and no system updates).
>
> I find few snags: no FM radio (the g22 has it), that it is not 5G, and
> that the dual sim slot is "hybrid", ie, the second position is either
> the second SIM or a micro SD card (the g22 admits the 3 cards). It only
> has 6GB ram, 128 GB of flash. If I add the µSD card, it can be 1TB (the
> g22 has 4GB ram).
>
> Compromises.
>
> I made a full backup of the old phone on my computer (a moto G6+), and
> started the new phone without the SIM, yet. Soon after starting, after
> activating the wifi, it asked if I wanted to copy over accounts/apps/data.
>
> Hell yes.
>
> Connect cables, "no, I don't see your other phone". And then it says
> that it is a phone to phone cable, an usb-c to usb-c.

Samsung includes a USB-A to USB-C OTG adapter as well as a USB-A to
USB-C cable so you can do USB-C to USB-C transfer.

Since many new USB-C PD chargers also support QC 3.0, I prefer USB-C to
USB-C cables and having a good stock of high-quality, high-wattage,
cables is a good idea. These cables are not cheap, even ordered from
China they are around $4 for a high quality, braided, strain-relieved,
100 watt, cable from a >96% rated seller.

[Rob]

Carlos E.R. <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
> This was a nice surprise, transferring old phone to new phone has never
> been easier.

I always find it a little disappointing that it only transfers data and
a list of apps to be installed, and nothing w.r.t. settings, stored
credentials, etc.

Even when the old and new phone are exactly the same type (happens regularly
in our company when people have dropped the phone etc), it still is a lot
of work to get everything setup, registered and logged in again. I
would hope that at some time Google can master the art of transferring
settings 100% between the same devices and "as best as possible" when
upgrading to a new device.

[Andy Burnelli]

Carlos E.R. wrote:

>> I haven't seen anything in the news worthwhile about Android 12 that you
>> can't back port if you really want the feature; have you? Has anyone?
>
> That's irrelevant.

It's not irrelevant if it's those _features_ of Android 12 that you want.
:)

>> Just to be clear to the others lurking, you have plenty of "updates" on an
>> Android phone, as even all the way back to 4.4 the news said they were
>> being updated; what you don't have are Android _version_ updates most
>> likely, and, likely the security patch updates (after a few years).
>

> You get updates to the apps, but not system updates.

We covered this. In detail. Ask Andy Burns.
You get _plenty_ of system updates on Android after Android 10.

In fact you get updates to almost the entire system (25 core modules!).
Those _system_ updates are in _addition_ to the key app updates.

And they're in addition to _Android Security_ updates.
And they're in addition to _Android Version_ updates.

Almost all of the Android _system_ is updated with no known EOL date.

> that the last one is from July 2020.

You didn't say of what, so I presume you mean Security Updates.

I agree that they don't last as long as the Android system updates do.
Nor as long as the Android Version updates do.

>> Where, like most phones (save for one brand) it has the standard
>> functionality of the headphone jack & the sdslot (so it's odd that it
>> doesn't have the FM radio you speak of).
>
> It is mentioned on Motorola web page.

In another post to someone else on this same thread I showed that you can
easily find that some reports say the FM radio is there, others say it's
not there, and that still others say it's maybe there. :)

I'm just saying in general I've seen the FM radio and the headphone jack as
a pair, but they don't have to be a pair - they just often usually are.

>> And the new phone is a fast charging 30 Watt, which is hard to tell from
>> the specs, but did the 30W fast charging brick come with the new phone?
>
> Yes. It did charge fast.

Most Android phones come with huge batteries and fast chargers nowadays.
Did that 30W fast charger come with the phone in the box?

> And in-ear headphones.

Great! Motorola knows how to take care of their customer base.

>> You can do it over the radio if they're on the same network, I think.
>> I think it uses an ad hoc network in fact - but I'm not really sure.
>
> Yes, that's what I did. It insists the phones have to be close to one
> another, so maybe it uses NFC at some point at least.

Thanks for that information. When I saw what it wanted to do, I wasn't sure
what it would do so I didn't do it. It's nice that you tried & that it
worked. I wonder if it copied over all the old apps and re-installed them?

>> One of those things was how easy it is nowadays to move your stuff over.
>
> It did not transfer the entire whatsapp stuff, only a little bit.

Maybe it brought over _just_ the app, and not the app data?

> It
> relies on whatasapp own internal backup (which is uploaded to google
> drive), but that one doesn't include photos/videos unless you tick for
> it, and then it takes ages. So I did that internal backup of messages,
> and later just cloned the directories across phones, using the computer.
> Worked perfectly. Oh, it insisted on importing from the google drive
> backup any way, so I let it. But I can see the photos on the messages,
> so it's fine.

Good! Thanks for letting us know as just with almost all consumer devices
getting better faster cheaper, Android is just getting easier to port from
one phone to another by the day! Good for you! Good for us.

> Of course, takes a lot of space in the phone. I will deal with that
> another day.

You have plenty. :) I think you said you have 128GB. Plus portable memory
if you want it (the sdcard isn't really useful anymore for expansion - but
it's _still_ useful for portable memory - like thumb drives are on PCs).

>>> It told me to find and start Google app on the other phone, but there
>>> was no need: after placing one near the other, the old phone detected
>>> the new one and asked if I wanted to allow the copy. It asked if I saw
>>> the same geometric pattern on both phones. Then just a few questions
>>> about what I wanted to copy. I said all. 15GB.
>>
>> Is it using an ad hoc network? I think it may be doing that.
>> Others will know better than I do though.
>
> Very possibly, it did not say. Certainly not via my router.

Probably ad hoc but who knows which radio. Bluetooth? NFC? Wi-FI? Dunno.
We can let nospam tell us. :)

>> Please let us knwo the details as I was leery of it so I did a manual
>> migration instead but I saw what you saw (Android 11 in this case).
>
>
> It worked well, but not everything was transferred. Whatsapp I copied
> manually. k9 did not transfer; on starting it, I noticed it suggested to
> import a backup file, which I then generated on the old phone, and
> transferred. I imported it, but I still had to enter the isp mail
> password - which is a good thing.
>
> So I think that applications that have their own backup system (like
> these two) are not transferred via the general system.

Interesting. Good to know. Luckily you still have the old phone so you can
copy "stuff" over one by one as you find out what's missing.

> It transferred my background photo, but it did not transfer "the icons"
> on the "desktop". So now I am creating the shortcuts to start each app,
> one by one, and re-organizing them.

Just a reminder that "some" App Launchers have a "backup" option.
Nova free launcher does, for example.

Nova will bring over _all_ the app icons in the exact same place they were
on your old phone. I've done it many times so I know that it works well.

> Interestingly, even though the screens are the same size on both phones,
> at least one widget is bigger on the new phone. Both are 2x1, but has
> more pixels. Visibly so. (rain alarm).

I don't remember the pixel difference but that "might" be the reason.
Also each launcher default to its own grid (Nova lets you set the grid).

[Andy Burnelli]

Carlos E.R. wrote:

> Well, I just tried, and indeed the radio FM works. I'm very surprised.
> It is certainly not mentioned by them:
>
> https://www.motorola.es/smartphones-moto-g-52/p
>
> And has RDS, at least the station name and maybe program name.

Thanks for checking as I found it odd that it had all the basic expected
industry standard functionality that most phones have, so I found it odd
that it wouldn't have FM radio.

I don't even know what RDS is... so I'll search since others may be similar
to me in not knowing offhand what it is...
"Radio data system or RDS is a standard for sending small amounts
of data through conventional FM radio broadcasts. The RDS system
standardizes several types of information transmitted, including
track/artist info and station identification."
<https://www.gsmarena.com/glossary.php3>
<https://www.phonescoop.com/glossary/term.php?gid=339>

There's a lot more detail here:
*What the heck is the RDS?*
<https://boss104.gu/boss-104-3-blog/322619>

I'm glad it supports industry standards, unlike some other brand we know.
--
On Usenet, intelligent well-educated people kindly help each other out.

[Andy Burnelli]

sms wrote:

> Since many new USB-C PD chargers also support QC 3.0, I prefer USB-C to
> USB-C cables and having a good stock of high-quality, high-wattage,
> cables is a good idea.

While I have a good stock of ten feet long USB-C to USB-A, and luckily, so
far, all my free fast chargers have been USB-A, I think we're all destined
to need to keep those USB-C to USB-C cables around (Sigh. One more cable.)

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-03 17:19, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>>> I haven't seen anything in the news worthwhile about Android 12 that you
>>> can't back port if you really want the feature; have you? Has anyone?
>>
>> That's irrelevant.
>
> It's not irrelevant if it's those _features_ of Android 12 that you want.
> :)

It is irrelevant because I don't care about the features.

>
>>> Just to be clear to the others lurking, you have plenty of "updates"
>>> on an
>>> Android phone, as even all the way back to 4.4 the news said they were
>>> being updated; what you don't have are Android _version_ updates most
>>> likely, and, likely the security patch updates (after a few years).
>>
>> You get updates to the apps, but not system updates.
>
> We covered this. In detail. Ask Andy Burns. You get _plenty_ of system
> updates on Android after Android 10.

My phone is on 9, and no, it is not getting updates, which have to be
published by Motorola, and they don't.

>
> In fact you get updates to almost the entire system (25 core modules!).
> Those _system_ updates are in _addition_ to the key app updates.
> And they're in addition to _Android Security_ updates. And they're in
> addition to _Android Version_ updates.
>
> Almost all of the Android _system_ is updated with no known EOL date.
>
>> that the last one is from July 2020.
>
> You didn't say of what, so I presume you mean Security Updates.

No, it is "actualizaciones de sistema", clearly labelled as such in the
setup of my phone. Then it says that the last security patch was applied
2020-07-01.

And then I have the problem of "Android Auto" not connecting to my car.

> I agree that they don't last as long as the Android system updates do.
> Nor as long as the Android Version updates do.
>
>>> Where, like most phones (save for one brand) it has the standard
>>> functionality of the headphone jack & the sdslot (so it's odd that it
>>> doesn't have the FM radio you speak of).
>>
>> It is mentioned on Motorola web page.
>
> In another post to someone else on this same thread I showed that you can
> easily find that some reports say the FM radio is there, others say it's
> not there, and that still others say it's maybe there. :)
>
> I'm just saying in general I've seen the FM radio and the headphone jack as
> a pair, but they don't have to be a pair - they just often usually are.

Yes, and I posted that the FM radio indeed does work.

>
>>> And the new phone is a fast charging 30 Watt, which is hard to tell from
>>> the specs, but did the 30W fast charging brick come with the new phone?
>>
>> Yes. It did charge fast.
>
> Most Android phones come with huge batteries and fast chargers nowadays.
> Did that 30W fast charger come with the phone in the box?

Yes.

>
>> And in-ear headphones.
>
> Great! Motorola knows how to take care of their customer base.

It even has a semi-soft transparent plastic back cover.

The manual is just 2 or 3 pages in each language, fits in my palm. Small
print.

I still have not figured out "gestures", which are different than on the
previous phone for no reason.

>
>>> You can do it over the radio if they're on the same network, I think.
>>> I think it uses an ad hoc network in fact - but I'm not really sure.
>>
>> Yes, that's what I did. It insists the phones have to be close to one
>> another, so maybe it uses NFC at some point at least.
>
> Thanks for that information. When I saw what it wanted to do, I wasn't sure
> what it would do so I didn't do it. It's nice that you tried & that it
> worked. I wonder if it copied over all the old apps and re-installed them?

Yes, it did reinstall all the apps, but not all their data.

>
>>> One of those things was how easy it is nowadays to move your stuff over.
>>
>> It did not transfer the entire whatsapp stuff, only a little bit.
>
> Maybe it brought over _just_ the app, and not the app data?

Just one directory of the data.

>
>> It relies on whatasapp own internal backup (which is uploaded to
>> google drive), but that one doesn't include photos/videos unless you
>> tick for it, and then it takes ages. So I did that internal backup of
>> messages, and later just cloned the directories across phones, using
>> the computer. Worked perfectly. Oh, it insisted on importing from the
>> google drive backup any way, so I let it. But I can see the photos on
>> the messages, so it's fine.
>
> Good! Thanks for letting us know as just with almost all consumer devices
> getting better faster cheaper, Android is just getting easier to port from
> one phone to another by the day! Good for you! Good for us.
>
>> Of course, takes a lot of space in the phone. I will deal with that
>> another day.
>
> You have plenty. :) I think you said you have 128GB. Plus portable memory
> if you want it (the sdcard isn't really useful anymore for expansion - but
> it's _still_ useful for portable memory - like thumb drives are on PCs).

It is not that plenty when photos get bigger with each camera; and I can
not put a memory card as I want to have the 2nd SIM available for
travelling when needed.

I will have a go at further compressing the photos, and perhaps the
videos. Some script. One week I'm not too busy.

>
>>>> It told me to find and start Google app on the other phone, but
>>>> there was no need: after placing one near the other, the old phone
>>>> detected the new one and asked if I wanted to allow the copy. It
>>>> asked if I saw the same geometric pattern on both phones. Then just
>>>> a few questions about what I wanted to copy. I said all. 15GB.
>>>
>>> Is it using an ad hoc network? I think it may be doing that.
>>> Others will know better than I do though.
>>
>> Very possibly, it did not say. Certainly not via my router.
>
> Probably ad hoc but who knows which radio. Bluetooth? NFC? Wi-FI? Dunno.
> We can let nospam tell us. :)

I guess NFC for negotiation and authorization, then WiFi. I heard of an
NFC+WiFi chip for doing just this.

>
>>> Please let us knwo the details as I was leery of it so I did a manual
>>> migration instead but I saw what you saw (Android 11 in this case).
>>
>>
>> It worked well, but not everything was transferred. Whatsapp I copied
>> manually. k9 did not transfer; on starting it, I noticed it suggested
>> to import a backup file, which I then generated on the old phone, and
>> transferred. I imported it, but I still had to enter the isp mail
>> password - which is a good thing.
>>
>> So I think that applications that have their own backup system (like
>> these two) are not transferred via the general system.
>
> Interesting. Good to know. Luckily you still have the old phone so you can
> copy "stuff" over one by one as you find out what's missing.

I made a full backup to the computer. My previous phone will be
repurposed with my secondary number, and my previous-previous phone will
go to storage or guests.

>> It transferred my background photo, but it did not transfer "the
>> icons" on the "desktop". So now I am creating the shortcuts to start
>> each app, one by one, and re-organizing them.
>
> Just a reminder that "some" App Launchers have a "backup" option. Nova
> free launcher does, for example.
> Nova will bring over _all_ the app icons in the exact same place they were
> on your old phone. I've done it many times so I know that it works well.

Yes, I know, we commented about that. I like keeping these things on
"stock".

I take the chance to reorganize the icons :-)

>
>> Interestingly, even though the screens are the same size on both
>> phones, at least one widget is bigger on the new phone. Both are 2x1,
>> but has more pixels. Visibly so. (rain alarm).
>
> I don't remember the pixel difference but that "might" be the reason.
> Also each launcher default to its own grid (Nova lets you set the grid).


--

Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-03 17:26, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>> Well, I just tried, and indeed the radio FM works. I'm very surprised.
>> It is certainly not mentioned by them:
>>
>> https://www.motorola.es/smartphones-moto-g-52/p
>>
>> And has RDS, at least the station name and maybe program name.
>
> Thanks for checking as I found it odd that it had all the basic expected
> industry standard functionality that most phones have, so I found it odd
> that it wouldn't have FM radio.

It is a nice surprise, after having resigned to not having it.

>
> I don't even know what RDS is... so I'll search since others may be similar
> to me in not knowing offhand what it is... "Radio data system or RDS is
> a standard for sending small amounts  of data through conventional FM
> radio broadcasts. The RDS system
>  standardizes several types of information transmitted, including
>  track/artist info and station identification."
>  <https://www.gsmarena.com/glossary.php3>
>  <https://www.phonescoop.com/glossary/term.php?gid=339>
>
> There's a lot more detail here:
> *What the heck is the RDS?*
> <https://boss104.gu/boss-104-3-blog/322619>

Basically, it transmits the (FM) station identifier, or network
identifier; sometimes also the program name. It is useful in the car
radio, because as you drive the system automatically moves over to
another station of the same name in the area. It also transmits some
other data such as the current hour and I forget which.

Unfortunately, some stations do not transmit a "good" time clock, can be
off by anything from one minute to 30, even hours. So you set the car
clock to "auto", and it is constantly shifting and driving you nuts. So,
set the car clock to "manual". Have new gadgets to then disable them.
Not the first time they goof like this... happened to the VCRs, too.

Changing stations automatically can also be a problem, when the radio
network changes to regional or local information instead of national.
When you are in the "frontier" region or in the mountains, the radio
keeps changing to the best station, but the program is totally
different. Pain on the backside then.

>
> I'm glad it supports industry standards, unlike some other brand we know.


--

Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

Maybe they think that transmitting passwords is a security risk. Clone a
phone with the cable, and steal that person identity.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Rob]

As you noted, before the transfer starts there are things that you
need to do on both phones, and maybe they can be extended.
But as it is now, swapping a phone because of a defect or upgrade is
much more work than would be desirable (and than is the case with
the equipment of the competitor)

[sms]

On 5/3/2022 9:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2022-05-03 17:26, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>>> Well, I just tried, and indeed the radio FM works. I'm very
>>> surprised. It is certainly not mentioned by them:
>>>
>>> https://www.motorola.es/smartphones-moto-g-52/p
>>>
>>> And has RDS, at least the station name and maybe program name.
>>
>> Thanks for checking as I found it odd that it had all the basic expected
>> industry standard functionality that most phones have, so I found it odd
>> that it wouldn't have FM radio.
>
> It is a nice surprise, after having resigned to not having it.

I was surprised at just how many people actually use the FM radio. I've
used it on occasion but lately I've seen others using it and not buying
phones that lack it.

[nospam]

In article <t4rn3e$of1$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> I was surprised at just how many people actually use the FM radio. I've
> used it on occasion but lately I've seen others using it and not buying
> phones that lack it.

bullshit, nor can you tell if someone is using it without asking them.

industry stats show that it's rarely used and not a factor in purchase
decisions.

[Carlos E.R.]

It is a commodity.

Say I'm driving listening to something, so when I enter the supermarket
I may want to continue listening to it. Not something I do every day,
far from it, but occasionally. It is the only place I use it, elsewhere
I prefer a real radio with proper speakers.

Given the choice of having it or not, I prefer a phone with it, if the
rest is acceptable.

Other people take a walk while listening to the radio. Yes, there is
internet radio, but not everybody has unlimited internet plans.

For instance, when using internet radio with "radioonline", I can only
select the central station of the network I want, not the local one of
my city. I can use the app provided by that network to select any city,
but it is full of adware, bloated. A pain to use. And requires registration.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Andy Burns]

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>

>> You get updates to the apps, but not system updates.
>

> You get _plenty_ of system updates
> on Android after Android 10.
>
> In fact you get updates to almost the entire system (25 core modules!).
> Those _system_ updates are in _addition_ to the key app updates.
> And they're in addition to _Android Security_ updates. And they're in addition
> to _Android Version_ updates.

Did anyone receive the April Play System Update yet? I'm still stuck on the
March version. On my Pixel5a it has already received the May Security Update.

But they still make it almost impossible to see what "core module" updates your
device has received via the play system mechanism... you shouldn't have to copy
apk/apex files off the thing over adb and poke about inside zip archives on a PC
to check what version you have ...

[Andy Burnelli]

Andy Burns wrote:

> Did anyone receive the April Play System Update yet? I'm still stuck on the
> March version. On my Pixel5a it has already received the May Security Update.
>
> But they still make it almost impossible to see what "core module" updates your
> device has received via the play system mechanism... you shouldn't have to copy
> apk/apex files off the thing over adb and poke about inside zip archives on a PC
> to check what version you have ...

You're well ahead of me with your Pixel over my Samsung Galaxy A32-5G.
One UI version = 4.1
Android version = 12
Google Play Store = 30.3.21-21 <com.android.vending>
Google Play Services = 22.12.15 <com.google.android.gms>
Google Play system update = January 1, 2022
Baseband version = A326USQU7BVD1
Kernel version = 4.14.186-23893183 Apr 7 2022
Build number = SP1A.210812.016.A326USQU7BVD1
SE for Android status = Apr 07 2022
Knox version = 3.8 Knox API level 35
Service provider software version = (long - see screenshot)
Carrier configuration version = 2.370001
Security software version = ASKS v4.5 Release 20211027
Android security patch level = April 1, 2022

However, I just noticed I have a "Google Play Services" update:
<https://i.postimg.cc/FHJ16nvF/update01.jpg> Android 11->12 screwed up!
<https://i.postimg.cc/BZD7B2tr/update02.jpg> 22.12.15 (150400-439420056)
<https://i.postimg.cc/cJK9rbjn/update03.jpg> Reload all software :(
<https://i.postimg.cc/yNwf9T4r/update04.jpg> Google Play Services update

So I just updated it
From: Google Play Services 22.12.15 (150400-439420056)
To: Google Play Services 22.12.15 (190400-439420056)
<https://i.postimg.cc/mkSVvfc0/update05.jpg> 22.12.15 (190400-439420056)

You're still way ahead of me on your Google Play system update though.
Yours: April 1, 2022
Mine: January 1, 2022

Let's see where the others are.
--
On Usenet, kind-hearted purposefully helpful people carry on polite
discussions which benefit everyone who participates in the convesation.

[Andy Burns]

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> You're well ahead of me with your Pixel over my Samsung Galaxy A32-5G.
> One UI version = 4.1
> Android version = 12

The "spare" Galaxy A21s that I have got an android 11 security patch to March
202, it's using oneui 3.1, AFAIK it won't receive android 12 until July.

[Andy Burns]

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> You're still way ahead of me on your Google Play system update though.
> Yours: April 1, 2022
> Mine: January 1, 2022

No Mine is March 1 2022, not a sniff of April

[Andy Burnelli]

Yeah. That was a typo/thinko. I wrote this up but you beat me to it.

Typo/thinko...

You're still way ahead of me on your Google Play system update though.

Yours: March 1, 2022 & May 1, 2022
Mine: January 1, 2022

BTW, I completely agree with you on this sentiment you just expressed:
They make it almost impossible to see what "core module" updates your

device has received via the play system mechanism... you shouldn't have
to copy apk/apex files off the thing over adb and poke about inside
zip archives on a PC to check what version you have ...

Can you help me do what you can do, Andy?

I don't know how to do what you do (poke around the apk/apex files).
Can you tell me what I'd do given I'm not rooted?

How can I "poke around" those apk/apex files to tell which of the two dozen
core modules are updated that are updated independently of the carriers?

I have adb running over both USB & Wi-Fi of course.
And I have everything but the external sdcard mounted onto Windows as a
drive letter (I don't know why I can't mount the external sdcard yet).

What do I do to be able to do what you do to poke around the core modules?
Connect USB cable from Windows to the phone
C:\> adb kill-server
C:\> adb tcpip 5555
restarting in TCP mode port: 5555
C:\> adb connect 192.168.0.2:5555
connected to 192.168.0.2:5555
C:\> adb devices
List of devices attached
ABCDEFGHIJK device
192.168.0.2:5555 device
At this point you can disconnect USB cable from Windows to the phone
C:\> adb devices
List of devices attached
192.168.0.2:5555 device
At this point you can pull any file off the Android phone
C:\> adb pull /system/etc/hosts .\hosts.txt
/system/etc/hosts: 1 file pulled, 0 skipped. 0.0 MB/s (56 bytes in 0.006s)
You can find the number of packages you have with "google" in the name.
C:\> adb shell pm list packages google | find /c /v ""
61
You can bring up Android Activities on the phone
C:\> adb shell am start -n com.google.android.gms/.ads.settings.AdsSettingsActivity

But how can I "poke around" the core modules like you do?

--
On Usenet, kind-hearted purposefully helpful people carry on polite

discussions which benefit everyone who participates in the conversation.

[Andy Burns]

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> how can I "poke around" the core modules like you do?

I have been meaning to do more methodical checks, but never seem to find time,
I'll try to do so, but hints as far as I can remember ...

copy off the apexfiles (somewhere under /system)

rename them to .zip

extract contents

one of the contents is a file which is an ext3/ext file system

loopback mount that

can't remember what's inside ...

[Andy Burnelli]

Andy Burns wrote:

> The "spare" Galaxy A21s that I have got an android 11 security patch to March
> 202, it's using oneui 3.1, AFAIK it won't receive android 12 until July.

Be advised, for whatever reason, my move hours ago from Android 11 to
Android 12 was a disaster in terms of apps by the hundreds not working.
*Warning when updating Android 11 to Android 12*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/GngVnfddiT8>

The net is _hundreds_ of apps no longer work for whatever reason.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-04 14:08, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> The "spare" Galaxy A21s that I have got an android 11 security patch
>> to March 202, it's using oneui 3.1, AFAIK it won't receive android 12
>> until July.
>
> Be advised, for whatever reason, my move hours ago from Android 11 to
> Android 12 was a disaster in terms of apps by the hundreds not working.
> *Warning when updating Android 11 to Android 12*
> <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/GngVnfddiT8>

But you do not login your phone to google, and you disable some
services. That may be the reason it doesn't work for you.

>
> The net is _hundreds_ of apps no longer work for whatever reason.
> <https://i.postimg.cc/FHJ16nvF/update01.jpg> Android 11->12 screwed up!

I have not detected yet any app that doesn't work for me; I have not
tried all of them, but at least they were all installed. Maybe hangouts,
I think it was deprecated, but my previous phone had it, so it has been
installed in the new one.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Andy Burnelli]

Andy Burns wrote:

> copy off the apexfiles (somewhere under /system)

Well, that doesn't even need adb then since a WebDAV server works better.
<https://i.postimg.cc/yNtmVWnz/update07.jpg> WebDav set to Android root
On Android, I set the DavWWWRoot :"Home Directory" to the system partition.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Y0wQWVJn/update08.jpg> Windows reads Android root
And then Windows can access the Android system partition as a drive letter.
C:\> net use Z: \\192.168.0.2@8080\DavWWWRoot /USER:andy burnelli
Now the entire Android system is a Windows drive letter:
<https://i.postimg.cc/QNqfqdVX/update06.jpg> Android system on Windows
C:\> Z:
Z:\> cd .\system\apex
Z:\> system\apex>dir /b
com.google.android.permission_compressed.apex
com.google.android.scheduling_compressed.apex
com.samsung.android.ipm.apex
com.google.android.conscrypt_compressed.apex
com.google.android.art_compressed.apex
com.android.i18n.apex
com.google.android.media_compressed.apex
com.google.android.extservices_compressed.apex
com.google.android.adbd_trimmed_compressed.apex
com.google.android.tzdata3.apex
com.samsung.android.shell.apex
com.google.mainline.primary.libs.apex
com.android.vndk.current.apex
com.google.android.tethering_compressed.apex
com.google.android.ipsec_compressed.apex
com.android.runtime.apex
com.google.android.resolv_compressed.apex
com.google.android.cellbroadcast_compressed.apex
com.android.wifi.capex
com.google.android.neuralnetworks_compressed.apex
com.google.android.mediaprovider_compressed.apex
com.google.android.os.statsd_compressed.apex
com.google.android.sdkext_compressed.apex
com.android.apex.cts.shim.apex
com.google.android.media.swcodec_compressed.apex
com.android.appsearch.apex

> rename them to .zip
> extract contents

No need to do this since the Windows "tar" command extracts apex fine.
C:\> tar -xf com.android.runtime.apex
C:\> dir
01/01/2009 01:00 AM 1,336 AndroidManifest.xml
01/01/2009 01:00 AM 2,011 apex_build_info.pb
01/01/2009 01:00 AM 49 apex_manifest.pb
01/01/2009 01:00 AM 8,810,496 apex_payload.img
01/01/2009 01:00 AM 1,032 apex_pubkey
05/04/2022 02:45 PM <DIR> assets
12/31/2008 04:00 PM 8,886,294 com.android.runtime.apex
05/04/2022 02:45 PM <DIR> META-INF
01/01/2009 01:00 AM 40 resources.arsc

> one of the contents is a file which is an ext3/ext file system
>
> loopback mount that
>
> can't remember what's inside ...

This is where I need your help...

[Andy Burnelli]

Carlos E.R. wrote:

>> Be advised, for whatever reason, my move hours ago from Android 11 to
>> Android 12 was a disaster in terms of apps by the hundreds not working.
>> *Warning when updating Android 11 to Android 12*
>> <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/GngVnfddiT8>
>
> But you do not login your phone to google, and you disable some
> services. That may be the reason it doesn't work for you.

Thanks for trying to help.

Given I've moved Android from one version to another for many years, and
given I've never had this problem, I don't think it's that (but it could be
that Nova launcher was what screwed it up... dunno yet...).

Plus, _all_ my apps were gotten using the Aurora Store as none used the
Google Play Store app so it's not obvious (yet) why hundreds of app
shortcut icons lost their underlying apps in the move from Android 11 to
Android 12.

That's why I asked if others saw what I saw.

I just switched launchers to the default and noticed it put a single icon
on a single homescreen page (for scores of pages!) and then the last five
pages were filled from corner to corner with app icons - all of which were
NOT gray like they are in Nova.

So it "might" be Nova 6.2.18 that's all messed up in Android 12. Dunno yet.
So I updated Nova to Nova 7 using Aurora Store (same as Google Play Store).

Nope. It wasn't that.

>> The net is _hundreds_ of apps no longer work for whatever reason.
>> <https://i.postimg.cc/FHJ16nvF/update01.jpg> Android 11->12 screwed up!
>
> I have not detected yet any app that doesn't work for me; I have not
> tried all of them, but at least they were all installed. Maybe hangouts,
> I think it was deprecated, but my previous phone had it, so it has been
> installed in the new one.

I think the app is there but the icon isn't pointing to it anymore.
For example, I have a "DevCheck" grayed out icon now.
When I press "DevCheck" it says:
This app is not installed
The app for this icon isn't installed. You
can remove it, or search for the app and
install it manually.
[REMOVE] [SEARCH]

When I press [Search] it pops me instantly into the exactly correct page
for that specific app in Aurora (which is interesting as I would have
expected it to pop me into Google Play Store, which wouldn't have worked).

Then it has an [Install] button (as if it was never installed), and then an
"Open" button after that, and then it is installed "again".

When I go back to the icon on my homescreen, _now_ it's fine for that _one_
app (which I re-installed from Aurora). Hmmmmmmmm......

I suspect something fishy is going on in Android 12... but what.

[Bob Martin]

On 4 May 2022 at 07:46:45, Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> Andy Burnelli wrote:
>
>> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>>> You get updates to the apps, but not system updates.
>>
>> You get _plenty_ of system updates
>> on Android after Android 10.
>>
>> In fact you get updates to almost the entire system (25 core modules!).
>> Those _system_ updates are in _addition_ to the key app updates.
>> And they're in addition to _Android Security_ updates. And they're in addition
>> to _Android Version_ updates.
>
> Did anyone receive the April Play System Update yet? I'm still stuck on the
> March version. On my Pixel5a it has already received the May Security Update.

My Pixel 3 received it a few days ago.

> But they still make it almost impossible to see what "core module" updates your
> device has received via the play system mechanism... you shouldn't have to copy
> apk/apex files off the thing over adb and poke about inside zip archives on a PC
> to check what version you have ...

> .

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-04 16:25, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>>> Be advised, for whatever reason, my move hours ago from Android 11 to
>>> Android 12 was a disaster in terms of apps by the hundreds not working.
>>> *Warning when updating Android 11 to Android 12*
>>> <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/GngVnfddiT8>
>>
>> But you do not login your phone to google, and you disable some
>> services. That may be the reason it doesn't work for you.
>
> Thanks for trying to help.
>
> Given I've moved Android from one version to another for many years, and
> given I've never had this problem, I don't think it's that (but it could be
> that Nova launcher was what screwed it up... dunno yet...).
>
> Plus, _all_ my apps were gotten using the Aurora Store as none used the
> Google Play Store app so it's not obvious (yet) why hundreds of app
> shortcut icons lost their underlying apps in the move from Android 11 to
> Android 12.

Well, my phone used Google Play to install the same applications on the
new phone. The apps were not copied from the old phone, but from the
official Google service.

>
> That's why I asked if others saw what I saw.
>
> I just switched launchers to the default and noticed it put a single icon
> on a single homescreen page (for scores of pages!) and then the last five
> pages were filled from corner to corner with app icons - all of which were
> NOT gray like they are in Nova.
>
> So it "might" be Nova 6.2.18 that's all messed up in Android 12. Dunno yet.
> So I updated Nova to Nova 7 using Aurora Store (same as Google Play Store).
>
> Nope. It wasn't that.
>
>>> The net is _hundreds_ of apps no longer work for whatever reason.
>>> <https://i.postimg.cc/FHJ16nvF/update01.jpg> Android 11->12 screwed up!
>>
>> I have not detected yet any app that doesn't work for me; I have not
>> tried all of them, but at least they were all installed. Maybe
>> hangouts, I think it was deprecated, but my previous phone had it, so
>> it has been installed in the new one.
>
> I think the app is there but the icon isn't pointing to it anymore. For
> example, I have a "DevCheck" grayed out icon now.
> When I press "DevCheck" it says: This app is not installed
> The app for this icon isn't installed. You can remove it, or search for
> the app and
> install it manually. [REMOVE]      [SEARCH]

I don't have greyed icons, but maybe I don't have that feature. I expect
that apps that are not available on 12 would simply not be installed,
but I would expect to have been told.

>
> When I press [Search] it pops me instantly into the exactly correct page
> for that specific app in Aurora (which is interesting as I would have
> expected it to pop me into Google Play Store, which wouldn't have worked).
>
> Then it has an [Install] button (as if it was never installed), and then an
> "Open" button after that, and then it is installed "again".
>
> When I go back to the icon on my homescreen, _now_ it's fine for that _one_
> app (which I re-installed from Aurora). Hmmmmmmmm......
>
> I suspect something fishy is going on in Android 12... but what.
>
>

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Andy Burnelli]

Carlos E.R. wrote:

>> I was surprised at just how many people actually use the FM radio. I've
>> used it on occasion but lately I've seen others using it and not buying
>> phones that lack it.
>
> It is a commodity.

I agree with Carlos that no phone is going to differentiate itself on
having a "better FM radio". The only differentiation possible is NOT having
it, which is just a worse phone.

Given most phones have the FM radio, and given there is no substitute
(despite the protestations from the iKooks to the contrary), any phone
without this basic functionality is simply a less functional phone.

> Say I'm driving listening to something, so when I enter the supermarket
> I may want to continue listening to it. Not something I do every day,
> far from it, but occasionally. It is the only place I use it, elsewhere
> I prefer a real radio with proper speakers.

It's industry standard basic functionality that is useful when you need it.

> Given the choice of having it or not, I prefer a phone with it, if the
> rest is acceptable.

Everyone does.

Yes. I know, the iKooks claim nobody wants basic functionality.

> Other people take a walk while listening to the radio. Yes, there is
> internet radio, but not everybody has unlimited internet plans.

As everyone but the iKooks is aware, Internet radio is not the same thing
as FM radio, as one works when the other doesn't. Having both is basic
functionality, just like having two axles on a car is basic functionality.

> For instance, when using internet radio with "radioonline", I can only
> select the central station of the network I want, not the local one of
> my city. I can use the app provided by that network to select any city,
> but it is full of adware, bloated. A pain to use. And requires registration.

Internet radio is not the same thing as FM radio, as you are aware.
You don't need to justify it to the iKooks.

It's _only_ the iKooks who claim that nobody wants basic functionality.

And it's only iKooks who claim that Internet radio is either equivalent to
FM radio or better, because it's neither in all cases.
--
Those who don't try to bullshit me find me quite friendly & helpful.

[Andy Burnelli]

nospam wrote:

>> I was surprised at just how many people actually use the FM radio. I've
>> used it on occasion but lately I've seen others using it and not buying
>> phones that lack it.
>
> bullshit, nor can you tell if someone is using it without asking them.
>
> industry stats show that it's rarely used and not a factor in purchase
> decisions.

Where do you get your "industry stats" from, nospam? Marvel Comics?

The fact is _most_ phones have the industry standard FM radio
functionality.

It's only one brand of phone that habitually removes basic functionality so
that you have to figure out another way to buy it back (usually from them).

[Andy Burnelli]

Carlos E.R. wrote:

>> Plus, _all_ my apps were gotten using the Aurora Store as none used the
>> Google Play Store app so it's not obvious (yet) why hundreds of app
>> shortcut icons lost their underlying apps in the move from Android 11 to
>> Android 12.
>
> Well, my phone used Google Play to install the same applications on the
> new phone. The apps were not copied from the old phone, but from the
> official Google service.

This phone isn't a new phone - it's the same phone that was just upgraded
from Android 11 to Android 12, and then, WHAM! Hundreds of apps
disappeared.

This has never happened before. Dunno why. Could be the APK to APEX thing,
or it could be something else altogether. Dunno yet.

>> I think the app is there but the icon isn't pointing to it anymore. For
>> example, I have a "DevCheck" grayed out icon now.
>> When I press "DevCheck" it says: This app is not installed
>> The app for this icon isn't installed. You can remove it, or search for
>> the app and
>> install it manually. [REMOVE]      [SEARCH]
>
> I don't have greyed icons, but maybe I don't have that feature. I expect
> that apps that are not available on 12 would simply not be installed,
> but I would expect to have been told.

The apps still exist on the Google Play Store as they will re-install
easily.

I suspect there's something _different_ in Android 12 that was _never_ in
any previous Android release that did it - but I don't know what yet.

Anyway, here is documentation but I'm still trying to figure out what's
_different_ about Android 12 that would cause _hundreds_ of apps to be
"uninstalled" (which I find hard to believe that's what happened).

<https://i.postimg.cc/FHJ16nvF/update01.jpg> Android 11->12 screwed up!

<https://i.postimg.cc/BZD7B2tr/update02.jpg> 22.12.15 (150400-439420056)
<https://i.postimg.cc/cJK9rbjn/update03.jpg> Reload all software :(
<https://i.postimg.cc/yNwf9T4r/update04.jpg> Google Play Services update

<https://i.postimg.cc/mkSVvfc0/update05.jpg> 22.12.15 (190400-439420056)

<https://i.postimg.cc/QNqfqdVX/update06.jpg> Android system on Windows

<https://i.postimg.cc/yNtmVWnz/update07.jpg> WebDav set to Android root

<https://i.postimg.cc/Y0wQWVJn/update08.jpg> Windows reads Android root

<https://i.postimg.cc/DzQFrfw3/update09.jpg> The default homescreen
<https://i.postimg.cc/Xqqb6wcn/update10.jpg> The Nova homescreen
<https://i.postimg.cc/MHNhkgpY/update11.jpg> App is not installed
<https://i.postimg.cc/nc9yKV3S/update12.jpg> App can be installed
<https://i.postimg.cc/0QN3z96f/update13.jpg> Only then does it work
<https://i.postimg.cc/L4tFb7ND/update14.jpg> The apps are gone!
<https://i.postimg.cc/15m2YzgR/update15.jpg> Where did they go?

[Carlos E.R.]

I rather suspect that there is something faulty with the upgrade
procedure or application you used (probably from your mobile brand). It
can be that the "desktop management" tool you use is faulty. Not that
Android 12 is not compatible with the apps.

>
> Anyway, here is documentation but I'm still trying to figure out what's
> _different_ about Android 12 that would cause _hundreds_ of apps to be
> "uninstalled" (which I find hard to believe that's what happened).
> <https://i.postimg.cc/FHJ16nvF/update01.jpg> Android 11->12 screwed up!
> <https://i.postimg.cc/BZD7B2tr/update02.jpg> 22.12.15 (150400-439420056)
> <https://i.postimg.cc/cJK9rbjn/update03.jpg> Reload all software :(
> <https://i.postimg.cc/yNwf9T4r/update04.jpg> Google Play Services update
> <https://i.postimg.cc/mkSVvfc0/update05.jpg> 22.12.15 (190400-439420056)
> <https://i.postimg.cc/QNqfqdVX/update06.jpg> Android system on Windows
> <https://i.postimg.cc/yNtmVWnz/update07.jpg> WebDav set to Android root
> <https://i.postimg.cc/Y0wQWVJn/update08.jpg> Windows reads Android root
> <https://i.postimg.cc/DzQFrfw3/update09.jpg> The default homescreen
> <https://i.postimg.cc/Xqqb6wcn/update10.jpg> The Nova homescreen
> <https://i.postimg.cc/MHNhkgpY/update11.jpg> App is not installed
> <https://i.postimg.cc/nc9yKV3S/update12.jpg> App can be installed
> <https://i.postimg.cc/0QN3z96f/update13.jpg> Only then does it work
> <https://i.postimg.cc/L4tFb7ND/update14.jpg> The apps are gone!
> <https://i.postimg.cc/15m2YzgR/update15.jpg> Where did they go?

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-05 11:53, Andy Burnelli wrote:

> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>>> I was surprised at just how many people actually use the FM radio.
>>> I've used it on occasion but lately I've seen others using it and not
>>> buying phones that lack it.
>>
>> It is a commodity.
>
> I agree with Carlos that no phone is going to differentiate itself on
> having a "better FM radio". The only differentiation possible is NOT
> having it, which is just a worse phone.
>
> Given most phones have the FM radio, and given there is no substitute
> (despite the protestations from the iKooks to the contrary), any phone
> without this basic functionality is simply a less functional phone.
>> Say I'm driving listening to something, so when I enter the
>> supermarket I may want to continue listening to it. Not something I do
>> every day, far from it, but occasionally. It is the only place I use
>> it, elsewhere I prefer a real radio with proper speakers.
>
> It's industry standard basic functionality that is useful when you need it.
>
>> Given the choice of having it or not, I prefer a phone with it, if the
>> rest is acceptable.
>
> Everyone does.
>
> Yes. I know, the iKooks claim nobody wants basic functionality.

I don't have a war with Apple or their fans. I don't care what they have
or do. I don't have any apple product, never did, probably never will.
But I don't like anybody taking any occasion to do war on them.

This group is only about Android.

>
>> Other people take a walk while listening to the radio. Yes, there is
>> internet radio, but not everybody has unlimited internet plans.
>
> As everyone but the iKooks is aware, Internet radio is not the same
> thing as FM radio, as one works when the other doesn't. Having both is
> basic functionality, just like having two axles on a car is basic
> functionality.
>
>> For instance, when using internet radio with "radioonline", I can only
>> select the central station of the network I want, not the local one of
>> my city. I can use the app provided by that network to select any
>> city, but it is full of adware, bloated. A pain to use. And requires
>> registration.
>
> Internet radio is not the same thing as FM radio, as you are aware.
> You don't need to justify it to the iKooks.
>
> It's _only_ the iKooks who claim that nobody wants basic functionality.
>
> And it's only iKooks who claim that Internet radio is either equivalent
> to FM radio or better, because it's neither in all cases.


--

Cheers, Carlos.

[Andy Burnelli]

Carlos E.R. wrote:

>> Yes. I know, the iKooks claim nobody wants basic functionality.
>
> I don't have a war with Apple or their fans. I don't care what they have
> or do. I don't have any apple product, never did, probably never will.
> But I don't like anybody taking any occasion to do war on them.

I have both Android and iOS and I do think that there are times when
discussing the differences are good for both Android & iOS users.

Most of the time what Android does is far better but sometimes what iOS
does isn't a bad idea for Android to copy (as it sometimes does).

> This group is only about Android.

Well, that's both true and not true, given that iKooks often post here. :)

Bear in mind I had perceived that you seemed to be have been needlessly
"defending" FM radio, which is where I took my cues from. I was telling you
that you didn't ever need to defend the use of FM radio to Android owners.

Nobody would ever need to defend basic functionality such as the Android
ubiquitous FM radio in this Android group if it were devoid of the iKooks.

[Andy Burnelli]

Rob wrote:

> But as it is now, swapping a phone because of a defect or upgrade is
> much more work than would be desirable (and than is the case with
> the equipment of the competitor)

While we can discuss what is "desirable", all of us have plenty of
experience swapping out a computer (such as Windows or Linux) and swapping
out routers, and swapping out phones, etc., where there's always the
question of whether you "really" want an exact clone or not.

I, for one, do not normally want an exact clone on Windows, for example,
because there's too much rot that sets in over time; however I do want to
clone my user interface (which I do) where the only time the user
interaction needs to change is when the operating system provides something
better (which it rarely does). Hence Windows XP menus literally copy over
to Windows 10 and _still_ work perfectly on all my computer systems.
<https://i.postimg.cc/qvJDMQcq/taskbarmenu02.jpg> menus are folders

You simply need to know what you're doing to get this kind of "clone".

It's the same concept with Android, where you can save your contacts to a
file and you can save your photos to certain folders and you can save your
downloaded maps into others, and you can even save your rather
well-organized desktop folder and application shortcuts to a file with some
launchers (Nova does it, for example) to clone the old phone's homescreen.

The only thing that I "think" is kind of hard to do automagically is
re-install all your old apps onto a new phone. Note that you can re-install
them and have their app shortcut icons be exactly the same (see Nova
launcher example above); but I don't know of anything that re-installs your
apps automagically for you.

What Nova does is _second_ best though, which is Nova will give you the
blank icon and when you tap it, Nova (like Windows) will ask you to find
it, where Nova will open up your Google Play Store client at the app
already sitting there waiting for you to just tap the "install" button.

<https://i.postimg.cc/MHNhkgpY/update11.jpg> App is not installed

<https://i.postimg.cc/L4tFb7ND/update14.jpg> The apps are gone!
<https://i.postimg.cc/15m2YzgR/update15.jpg> Where did they go?

Bear in mind you can also mount your Android onto a PC and slide over all
the installers onto Android and then you can install them one by one, and
they'll go automagically into the old homescreen shortcut positions too.
<https://i.postimg.cc/cJK9rbjn/update03.jpg> APKs load from Windows

The only thing that I don't know if it's ever done is _installing_ those
apps automatically, go clone a phone.

Does _any_ backup/restore solution which goes from one phone to another
phone ever actually install all the apps onto the new phone that were on
the old phone?

[Andy Burnelli]

Carlos E.R. wrote:

>> I suspect there's something _different_ in Android 12 that was _never_ in
>> any previous Android release that did it - but I don't know what yet.
>
> I rather suspect that there is something faulty with the upgrade
> procedure or application you used (probably from your mobile brand).

I don't know yet, but I'm glad it happened as I'm learning a lot by
debugging why _hundreds_ of apps don't seem to have remained on my phone
when I simply migrated from Android 11 to Android 12.

I find it hard to believe hundreds of apps were _uninstalled_ so they're
probably still there, much like a Windows app would still be there if you
moved it such that the Windows registry could no longer find it.

> It
> can be that the "desktop management" tool you use is faulty.

I find it more plausible that the "indexing" operating that Android does
when it is first run is where the problem lies - which means it's more
likely due to Google (and/or Samsung) than to the launcher I used.

In fact, when I defaulted to the original launcher, the apps still were not
there, so I don't think it has anything to do with the launcher, per se. In
fact, I documented there were 119 homescreen pages, most of which had only
a single icon on them, but the first page had more and the last few pages
were filled to the brim.
<https://i.postimg.cc/mgQkjB77/update16.jpg> 119 homescreen pages!

> Not that
> Android 12 is not compatible with the apps.

I completely agree with you now that I've looked deeper at the situaton.

For example, one app that's grayed out is Zoom, which I higly doubt is
suddenly incompatible with Android 12. While I can't believe Android
actually _deleted_ the app, it won't show up in any tool that I try.
<https://i.postimg.cc/brtpv9T1/update17.jpg> Even Zoom disappeared!

I suspect Android indexing went bad; but I don't know _anything_ about
Android indexing; so that's just one of the options which has to be
proved or disproved.

[AJL]

On 5/4/22 4:11 AM, nospam wrote:
>In article <t4rn3e$of1$1...@dont-email.me>, sms
><scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I was surprised at just how many people actually use the FM radio. I've
>> used it on occasion but lately I've seen others using it and not buying
>> phones that lack it.
>
>bullshit, nor can you tell if someone is using it without asking them.

I think you can probably tell by looking who's NOT using a phone's FM radio
when they're out and about. They're the ones NOT wearing wired earphones.
In my area that's everybody Ive seen in several weeks now...

[nospam]

In article <t50qbr$tfs$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, AJL <noe...@none.com> wrote:

> >> I was surprised at just how many people actually use the FM radio. I've
> >> used it on occasion but lately I've seen others using it and not buying
> >> phones that lack it.
> >
> >bullshit, nor can you tell if someone is using it without asking them.
>
> I think you can probably tell by looking who's NOT using a phone's FM radio
> when they're out and about. They're the ones NOT wearing wired earphones.
> In my area that's everybody Ive seen in several weeks now...

yep, and that also shows how many do not use a headphone jack.

[Andy Burnelli]

AJL wrote:

>>> I was surprised at just how many people actually use the FM radio. I've
>>> used it on occasion but lately I've seen others using it and not buying
>>> phones that lack it.
>>
>>bullshit, nor can you tell if someone is using it without asking them.
>
> I think you can probably tell by looking who's NOT using a phone's FM radio
> when they're out and about. They're the ones NOT wearing wired earphones.
> In my area that's everybody Ive seen in several weeks now...

I think Steve's point may have been that nospam fabricates his usage polls.
--
Usenet is where friendly people daily gather to discuss topics of interest.

[sms]

I haven't been on BART or Caltrain since the pandemic, but in 2019 and
early 2020, wired earphones were definitely more common than wireless.
2+ years later this may have changed.

Of course very few of the people wearing wired headphones are using an
FM radio since more than half were almost certainly on iPhones.

FM radio use on phones is certainly not widespread, but it's also not as
rare as some people apparently believe.

[Andy Burnelli]

sms wrote:

> Of course very few of the people wearing wired headphones are using an
> FM radio since more than half were almost certainly on iPhones.

In the USA, roughly about half the smartphone owners are on each platform.
If they're listening to a recent iPhone, it won't be using standard wires.

Apple dropped that basic functionality so that you have to find some other
way to get what you had before Apple removed functionality from the iPhone.

> FM radio use on phones is certainly not widespread, but it's also not as
> rare as some people apparently believe.

The fact that FM radio is supplied with _most_ phones is an important fact.

What I observe about nospam is what everyone observes about what he does.
1. He _hates_ that Apple removed the basic wired-headphone functionality
2. So he makes up _excuses_ for why his beloved iPhone lacks functionality
3. One of those excuses is that he _fabricates_ his "opinion polls"

Just watch.
We who observe predict every move nospam makes, maybe even better than he.

[Andy Burnelli]

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> Apple dropped that basic functionality so that you have to find some other
> way to get what you had before Apple removed functionality from the iPhone.

Ooops. Before iKooks jump on that (because that's what they do), it's
likely Apple iPhones _never_ had the basic functionality of the FM radio.

However, the observation remains that the iKooks fabricate their "exit
polls" particularly in their doomed defense of the lack of iPhone
functionality.

The fact remains that _most_ phones have FM radio functionality.
The observation is that the iKooks _hate_ that fact.

Why?
Ask them why.
--

[Andy Burnelli]

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> The fact remains that _most_ phones have FM radio functionality.
> The observation is that the iKooks _hate_ that fact.

BTW, the observation is the iKooks _hate_ a lot of facts about phones.
It's not just FM radio functionality that iKooks hate that it exists.

For example, iKooks _hate_ the fact most new phones have huge batteries.
And the iKooks _hate_ the fact most phones come with chargers in the box.

Why do iKooks _hate_ those facts?
Ask them why.

Likewise, iKooks _hate_ the fact most phones have the 3.5mm jack.
And iKooks _hate_ the fact most phones have sdcard slots too.

The iKooks _hate_ the fact most phones can change their homescreen app.
The iKooks _hate_ the fact most apps re-install on _any_ phone.

The list goes on and on and on about functionality iKooks hate existing.

Why?
Ask them why.
--

Why is it that the iKooks hate so much of what is basic functionality?

[nospam]

In article <t50slj$den$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> I haven't been on BART or Caltrain since the pandemic, but in 2019 and
> early 2020, wired earphones were definitely more common than wireless.
> 2+ years later this may have changed.

bart/caltrain isn't the only metric.

from what i've seen in wide a variety of places over several years,
about half do not use anything and of the remaining half, the majority
are using wireless headphones (mostly airpods but there are some
others), with a minority using wired headphones.

> Of course very few of the people wearing wired headphones are using an
> FM radio since more than half were almost certainly on iPhones.

which further proves how little demand there is for such a feature.

> FM radio use on phones is certainly not widespread, but it's also not as
> rare as some people apparently believe.

it's use is extremely rare. otherwise, it would be widely advertised as
a competitive advantage over phones that don't have it. so few people
care that many of them don't even realize their phone has it, if it
does.

[Andy Burnelli]

nospam wrote:

> from what i've seen in wide a variety of places over several years,
> about half do not use anything and of the remaining half, the majority
> are using wireless headphones (mostly airpods but there are some
> others), with a minority using wired headphones.

Hey nospam, allow me to ask you an _adult_ question, ok?

You always seem to fabricate your own various and sundry "personal polls"
that always seem to agree with your preconceived notion that every
functionality that the iPhone lacks, is functionality _nobody_ wants.

Why?

>> Of course very few of the people wearing wired headphones are using an
>> FM radio since more than half were almost certainly on iPhones.
>
> which further proves how little demand there is for such a feature.

Regarding demand, why is it a fact FM radios are in _most_ smartphones?

>> FM radio use on phones is certainly not widespread, but it's also not as
>> rare as some people apparently believe.
>
> it's use is extremely rare.

The fact is that FM radio OTA isn't useful unless you have a receiver.
If FM radio is so rare, why are there so many FM OTA stations, nospam?

Note to morons: OTA means here that they're sending the waves out OTA.

> otherwise, it would be widely advertised as
> a competitive advantage over phones that don't have it.

Car companies don't advertise their cars come with seat belts, do they?
People selling houses don't advertise they come with windows, do they?
People who sell coffee don't advertise they can add sugar if you want.

Some things are basic and simply expected in a _functional_ device.
An FM radio is found in most phones because it's considered standard.

Except in one brand of phones, of course, which wouldn't matter so much as
a detail, except the iKooks who favor that one brand that always is missing
the functionality are the ones claiming nobody wants that functionality.

Which means it's important for _adults_ to note that all the functionality
that Apple removed (or never put in) the iPhone, is _always_ the
functionality that the iKooks spend gads of posts claiming nobody wants.

That adult observation brings me to my question of the iKooks like nospam.

> so few people
> care that many of them don't even realize their phone has it, if it
> does.

Based on observation that iKooks _hate_ only the basic functionality that
the iPhone lacks, the question is why do they _hate_ that functionality?

*They should be _happy_ that Android has basic functionality iPhones lack*

Why is it the iKooks come up with all sorts of fantastical excuses for why
they _hate_ what, to everyone else, is simple basic standard functionality?
*May I ask the iKooks why they _hate_ basic smartphone functionality?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/dS0CGiK-M00>
--
Why is it the iKooks come up with all sorts of fantastical excuses for why
they _hate_ what, to everyone else, is simple basic standard functionality?

[Hank Rogers]

Man, you sure do a good job riding herd on all these juvenile
iKooks. Why do you love iKooks so much? Seems sort of kinky to me.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-05 15:25, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>>> Yes. I know, the iKooks claim nobody wants basic functionality.
>>
>> I don't have a war with Apple or their fans. I don't care what they
>> have or do. I don't have any apple product, never did, probably never
>> will. But I don't like anybody taking any occasion to do war on them.
>
> I have both Android and iOS and I do think that there are times when
> discussing the differences are good for both Android & iOS users.

Ok, true, right, but as long as you (all) are polite and don't demean
the others. Not calling names, for instance. Take that to advocacy groups.

Or rent a boxing ring and get it over :-P

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Alan]

On 2022-05-05 9:14 a.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> sms wrote:
>
>> Of course very few of the people wearing wired headphones are using an
>> FM radio since more than half were almost certainly on iPhones.
>
> In the USA, roughly about half the smartphone owners are on each platform.
> If they're listening to a recent iPhone, it won't be using standard wires.

I love the way you have to throw in those careful qualifiers.

What is the particular benefit of the wires being "standard".

>
> Apple dropped that basic functionality so that you have to find some other
> way to get what you had before Apple removed functionality from the iPhone.

Apple replaced the 3.5mm audio jack with a different way that lets you
have the same real functionality:

Plugging in earbuds/earphones.

>
>> FM radio use on phones is certainly not widespread, but it's also not
>> as rare as some people apparently believe.
>
> The fact that FM radio is supplied with _most_ phones is an important fact.

The fact is that a fact is a fact...

...without examining the fact that on many phones the FM radio isn't
actually supported.

Roughly 2500 phones currently available (or coming soon)...

...only 1500 of which have FM radio.

Is 3/5 really "most"?

>
> What I observe about nospam is what everyone observes about what he does.
> 1. He _hates_ that Apple removed the basic wired-headphone functionality

Why would he hate that?

[nospam]

In article <t51cs1$hjp$1...@dont-email.me>, Alan <nuh...@nope.com> wrote:

> > Apple dropped that basic functionality so that you have to find some other
> > way to get what you had before Apple removed functionality from the iPhone.
>
> Apple replaced the 3.5mm audio jack with a different way that lets you
> have the same real functionality:

it actually has better functionality and with a more reliable connector.

many android device makers did the same, including google pixel,
samsung, oneplus and others. in other words, the major brands that sell
in quantity.

> Plugging in earbuds/earphones.

which is the same as before. the only difference is the shape of the
plug.

[AJL]

On 5/5/2022 3:25 PM, nospam wrote:

> Alan <nuh...@nope.com> wrote:

>> Apple replaced the 3.5mm audio jack with a different way that lets you
>> have the same real functionality:

> it actually has better functionality and with a more reliable connector.

> many android device makers did the same, including google pixel,
> samsung, oneplus and others. in other words, the major brands that sell
> in quantity.

Same with my Lenovo IdeaPad Chrome OS tablet. No earphone or card holes.
Maybe it's because IdeaPad sounds like iPad... ;)

[Andy Burnelli]

nospam wrote:

>> Apple replaced the 3.5mm audio jack with a different way that lets you
>> have the same real functionality:
>
> it actually has better functionality and with a more reliable connector.

C'mon nospam. You can't fool everyone.

The only common factor in the basic industry standard functionality you
deplore... is Apple removed it (or never had it).

>> Plugging in earbuds/earphones.
>
> which is the same as before. the only difference is the shape of the
> plug.

You've still not answered the logical question of what you claim is the
lack of functionality in a phone that happens to have a 3.5mm jack.

What functionality can your phone _without_ the jack do that any phone
can't do that happens to have the jack (whether or not that jack is used)?