Can we list all the ways we've been successful copying Android files & folders to/from Mac/Windows/Linux desktops & to/from other iOS/Android mobile devices

Arlen Holder

unread,

Dec 25, 2020, 9:38:53 PM12/25/20

to

Merry Christmas!

Can we list all the ways we've been successful using freeware methods for
copying Android files & folders to/from Mac/Windows/Linux desktops to/from
other iOS/Android mobile devices?

Here's a start (as always, please improve so all benefit from every thread):
o FTP (via ports 22/21 for example, or sftp)
o WebDAV (which allows "mounting" of Android filesystems onto Windows)
o HTTP and https (which generally has a crappy file xfer user interface)
o MTP (which likely has one of the simplest USB file xfer interfaces)
o PTP (does anyone bother with PTP anymore?)
o adb (which provides command-line access to the root file system)
o SMBv3 (for mounting as a CIFS/Samba file system on Windows/Linux)
o LibMTP & MTPDrive (yet another set of command line file xfer tools)
o CalDAV (for certain types of files)
o ssh (for command line access)
o sdcard expansion slots (which are 'mechanical xfers')
o KDEConnect ad hoc wi-fi file transfer solution
o NitroShare ad hoc wi-fi file & folder transfer solutions
o Proprietary solutions (e.g., AirDroid, WiFiDirect, Kies, DoubeTWist, etc)

Is there another method of transferring files & folders (e.g., the complete
Android visible file system, for example) specifically between Android and
the Windows 10 desktop, that we missed that you use successfully yourself?
--
Note: As are all my threads, this is posted out of the goodness of my heart
to help others, so if you need a particular tutorial for any of the above,
just ask and I'll see if I can dig it up, as I likely have tested them all.

malone

unread,

Dec 25, 2020, 10:16:52 PM12/25/20

to

On 26-Dec-2020 3:38 pm, Arlen Holder wrote:
> Merry Christmas!
>
> Can we list all the ways we've been successful using freeware methods for
> copying Android files & folders to/from Mac/Windows/Linux desktops to/from
> other iOS/Android mobile devices?
>
> Here's a start (as always, please improve so all benefit from every thread):
> o FTP (via ports 22/21 for example, or sftp)
> o WebDAV (which allows "mounting" of Android filesystems onto Windows)
> o HTTP and https (which generally has a crappy file xfer user interface)
> o MTP (which likely has one of the simplest USB file xfer interfaces)
> o PTP (does anyone bother with PTP anymore?)
> o adb (which provides command-line access to the root file system)
> o SMBv3 (for mounting as a CIFS/Samba file system on Windows/Linux)
> o LibMTP & MTPDrive (yet another set of command line file xfer tools)
> o CalDAV (for certain types of files)
> o ssh (for command line access)
> o sdcard expansion slots (which are 'mechanical xfers')
> o KDEConnect ad hoc wi-fi file transfer solution
> o NitroShare ad hoc wi-fi file & folder transfer solutions
> o Proprietary solutions (e.g., AirDroid, WiFiDirect, Kies, DoubeTWist, etc)
>
> Is there another method of transferring files & folders (e.g., the complete
> Android visible file system, for example) specifically between Android and
> the Windows 10 desktop, that we missed that you use successfully yourself?

Can't see the methods I use in this list

small files - Bluetooth
large files - drag n drop via a USB lead

As they must - surely - be the simplest possible methods I assume they
are both encompassed somewhere in those bullet points above?

Arlen Holder

unread,

Dec 26, 2020, 11:40:16 AM12/26/20

to

On Sat, 26 Dec 2020 16:16:49 +1300, malone wrote:

> Can't see the methods I use in this list
>
> small files - Bluetooth
> large files - drag n drop via a USB lead
>
> As they must - surely - be the simplest possible methods I assume they
> are both encompassed somewhere in those bullet points above?

Hi malone,

You're right.
o I forgot about bluetooth!

Thanks for adding value to the list of ways to copy files
between the typical Windows desktop & the typical Android phone.

The USB drag'n'drop was there (as MTP/PTP), but not Bluetooth file transfer
o Hence your input is very much appreciated to add BT file xfer.

Here's a tutorial for bluetooth file transfer, for example:
o How to Use Bluetooth to Transfer Files Between Devices
<https://www.lifewire.com/bluetooth-file-transfer-4147725>

I wasn't able to test Bluetooth file transfer to my desktop since it's not
bluetooth enabled, but I found this app on Google Play (actually via the
Aurora Store, as I never use Google Play on Android) reputedly for this:
o bluetooth Sender, by Inspire Zone, free, ad free, gsf free, google free
<com.inspirezone.shareapplication>

It seems there's something called "Wi-Fi Direct" that can also be used:
o <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi_Direct>
<https://skbloggers.com/how-to-use-wifi-direct-to-transfer-files/>

I also found a bunch more of the supposedly "wi-fi client/server apps"
for transferring files back and forth over the LAN via the Wi-Fi, so
I added them below for completeness (although there may be many more).

This is the current list, thanks to your input (please improve further):

o MTP over USB for Windows (drag and drop)
o PTP over USB for Windows (drag and drop)
o Android File Transfer over USB for the Mac <https://www.android.com/filetransfer/>
o Bluetooth file transfer solutions

o FTP (via ports 22/21 for example, or sftp)
o WebDAV (which allows "mounting" of Android filesystems onto Windows)
o HTTP and https (which generally has a crappy file xfer user interface)

o SMBv3 (for mounting as a CIFS/Samba file system on Windows/Linux)
o adb (which provides command-line access to the root file system)
o LibMTP & MTPDrive (yet another set of command line file xfer tools)

o CalDAV (for certain types of calendar files)

o ssh (for command line access)
o sdcard expansion slots (which are 'mechanical xfers')

malone

unread,

Dec 26, 2020, 3:29:43 PM12/26/20

to

I'm not too sure why all these methods are necessary - for me drag and
drop using a USB lead is far the simplest.

But, on a related matter - many years ago I bought one of the early
Apple iPads. I was extremely disappointed to discover I was unable to
drag and drop (I think it might have been possible for photos, but that
was about all). It appeared that it was necessary to use Apple's
iTunes(?) software which was quite user-hostile and that still wouldn't
work for some file types.

So, I moved to an Android tablet and never looked back. I can drag and
drop any file I want to and from my pc. That to me seemed to me a huge
advantage of Android over Apple.

Although I'm not currently planning to buy an Apple mobile product I'm
interested to know whether their more recent operating systems allow
native drag and drop for all files or whether one still needs to use
extra software?

Carlos E.R.

unread,

Dec 26, 2020, 4:20:06 PM12/26/20

to

On 26/12/2020 21.29, malone wrote:
> I'm not too sure why all these methods are necessary - for me drag and
> drop using a USB lead is far the simplest.

Because, for instance, sometimes the USB lead does not work, which was
the case of a recent poster on the android group.

In old phones the phone would present itself to the computer as if it
were an USB stick. The computer took control of the filesystem, and the
pone lost the access. Any application on the computer had access. When
removing the cable, the phone had to "mount" the "disk" and scan the
contents.

This was replaced later with a protocol called MTP.

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

This needs support from the operating system. Both the phone and the
computer get simultaneous access, but the computer access is limited. It
can be "non transparent", meaning that an application on the computer
may not have access to the phone.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

nospam

unread,

Dec 26, 2020, 4:25:57 PM12/26/20

to

In article <rs86fl$dc7$1...@dont-email.me>, malone <mal...@nospam.net.nz>
wrote:

> But, on a related matter - many years ago I bought one of the early
> Apple iPads. I was extremely disappointed to discover I was unable to
> drag and drop (I think it might have been possible for photos, but that
> was about all). It appeared that it was necessary to use Apple's
> iTunes(?) software which was quite user-hostile and that still wouldn't
> work for some file types.

itunes was not needed.

> So, I moved to an Android tablet and never looked back. I can drag and
> drop any file I want to and from my pc. That to me seemed to me a huge
> advantage of Android over Apple.

it isn't.

> Although I'm not currently planning to buy an Apple mobile product I'm
> interested to know whether their more recent operating systems allow
> native drag and drop for all files or whether one still needs to use
> extra software?

it does, with no additional software required.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Dec 26, 2020, 9:22:28 PM12/26/20

to

On Sun, 27 Dec 2020 09:29:41 +1300, malone wrote:

> I'm not too sure why all these methods are necessary - for me drag and
> drop using a USB lead is far the simplest.

Hi malone,

That's kind of like saying you're not sure why they make anything other
than Converse sneakers, if all you ever use are Converse sneakers.

It's like saying you're not sure why they make both bicycles and
motorcycles, if all you ever need is a bicycle.

It's like saying why people bother making canoes and rowboats, if all
you've ever needed is a canoe.

My point is that it's _obvious_ why all these methods exist.
o Each has inherent advantages & disadvantages over the others.

Choice is good.
o Only on Apple products is choice considered a "very bad thing".

> But, on a related matter - many years ago I bought one of the early
> Apple iPads. I was extremely disappointed to discover I was unable to
> drag and drop (I think it might have been possible for photos, but that
> was about all).

Remember always that nobody in high tech spends _less_ than Apple on R&D:
o Does it surprise you Apple is all MARKETING & very low R&D expenditures?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/STrAkx09VYk>

The trick with Apple products is to _ignore_ Apple MARKETING bullshit.
o Following Apple MARKETING solutions will only keep you inside the prison.

I own _plenty_ of Apple products, including multiple iPods & iPads, malone.
o The trick to get iPods & iPads to do what you want is to use your brain.

For example, my iPads are turned into read _and_ write USB sticks
o Simply by connecting them via USB to a native Ubuntu 18.04 release

I wrote _many_ tutorials on how to read & _write_ to the iOS filesystem
o That anyone who can't do what I do simply isn't reading this newsgroup

o Easily turn an iOS device into a read/write USB stick - for free - in a few minutes
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/GkGHMGnvKkY>

o How to read/write access iOS file systems on Ubuntu/Windows over USB cable
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/IFC52JXBQ1c>

o How to easily archive your iOS device and/or how to use your iOS device as a free USB stick (read & write)?
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/5hE4byjF930>

o An elegant solution to managing digital files on ANY iOS, Android, Windows, or Linux device SIMULTANEOUSLY over USB using zero additional software (other than the native OS)
<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.comp.freeware/c/H6T7KqzR_ww>

o Simultaneously slide Windows Linux iOS Android files back and forth over USB at 7GB per minute speeds using 100% native devices (no proprietary software needed)
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.comp.freeware/K0NZ0nb1pWw>

> It appeared that it was necessary to use Apple's
> iTunes(?) software which was quite user-hostile and that still wouldn't
> work for some file types.

Hi malone,

There's a reason I say intelligent people do not follow Apple MARKETING
o If you follow Apple MARKETING, you get _less_ functionality & safety

Apple removes functionality so that you are locked into using their tools:
o Why doesn't Apple just let you manage your iOS file system natively on Windows?
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/WjeGznahZwc/m/ZFLY6U8uEQAJ>

Apple even claims it's "courageous" of them to remove basic functionality
o Just so that you have to buy back that basic functionality Apple removed!

Meanwhile, over 99.5% of all Android phones have this basic functionality:
o Less than 1/2 of 1 percent of Android phones lack headphone jack basic hardware functionality
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/ZjnD2kAf-mI>

Apple even removes basic accessories so that you have to buy them back:
o A Brazilian consumer protection agency declared the "charger in the box" to be an "essential" component.
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/vJlfXaBaSFQ>

Notice that Apple essentially told Brazil nobody has a warranty unless they
purchase back the Apple charger Apple _removed_ from the iPhone 12 box!

For the stone age functionality it has, Apple _restricts_ what you can do:
o Why does Apple severely restrict what the user can do to set up their homescreen the way they want it to be?
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/udNmZK1FdLY>

For example, iTunes literally _reduces_ your available functionality:
o Is there any functionality the iTunes abomination does, for a dual-boot Win/Ubuntu PC that can't be done, better, WITHOUT iTunes?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/F-gWC05h1xQ>

And, installing the iTunes abomination _reduces_ your privacy & security:
o A zero-day vulnerability in iCloud and iTunes on Windows PCs allowed hackers to install ransomware undetected.
<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.comp.freeware/c/hftPQAEZr_g>

There's nothing the iTunes abomination does you can't do better without it:
o What functionality does iTunes do for you that you'll need to replicate without iTunes?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/v2jT-sWIKR0/gA45WfO6AAAJ>

Despite nospam insisting how "necessary" iTunes is, you're better off without it:
o Apple iTunes and iCloud for Windows 0-Day Exploited in Ransomware Attacks
<https://thehackernews.com/2019/10/apple-bonjour-ransomware.html>

Even Apple deprecated iTunes' hideous Windows Quicktime & iTunes bloatware:
o The rise and fall of iTunes, Apple's most hated app
<https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/3/18650571/apple-itunes-rip-discontinued-macos-10-15-ipod-store-digital-music-wwdc-2019>

I stopped using the iTunes abomination in the heyday of the iPod, malone:
o Where can you find the OLD versions of SharePod freeware [any version prior to version 3.9.4]?
<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.comp.freeware/c/urk_6-GQM2M>

You're far better off _without_ the iTunes abomination, than with it:
o How to access iOS media library on Linux or Windows WITHOUT iTunes?
<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.comp.freeware/c/jQlXf5Rlreo>

Nobody intelligent would stoop so low as to use iTunes on a Windows PC.
o As I said, all iTunes does is _reduce_ your available functionality.

Apple has never even once created a best in class product in its history.
o Which Apple CPUs, bootroms, & SEP secure enclave coprocessors do NOT already have well-known unpatchable fatal design flaws?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/6WKS9KpSyJA>

What Apple is best in class in, is MARKETING! (They're utterly brilliant!)
o What is the most brilliant marketing move Apple ever made?
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/wW-fu0jsvAU>

Which is why even Apple admits they don't own a single dominant market:
o Direct public quote from Sr. Apple exec: "Apple does NOT have a dominant position in ANY market"
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/WQpGuZnzp2c>

Apple knows _exactly_ how to play their gullible customer like a fiddle.
o You can't make those ungodly profits off an intelligent consumer base.

> So, I moved to an Android tablet and never looked back. I can drag and
> drop any file I want to and from my pc. That to me seemed to me a huge
> advantage of Android over Apple.

There's a lot more than a filesystem access stuck in the stone age, malone.
o The iOS ecosystem is stuck in the stone age of smartphone functionality

I can name a score of modern functionality on even five year old Android
devices that the most expensive iPhones today can't possibly do.
o Is there any software functionality in the new iPhone 11 that isn't already in an average 5-year old Android phone?
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/1D2Sgdlz1-I>

Meanwhile, nobody has ever found _anything_ on iOS not already on Android:
o What functionality you do on iOS you wish you could do on Android?
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/poG62SEefqk>

One of the reasons I own Apple products is I test them for my family
o The less technically inclined _love_ being imprisoned by Apple.

And that's ok for them.

> Although I'm not currently planning to buy an Apple mobile product I'm
> interested to know whether their more recent operating systems allow
> native drag and drop for all files or whether one still needs to use
> extra software?

Suffice to say Apple's ungodly profits are off their gullible customer.
o If you want any sort of functionality, then Apple isn't the way to go.

Bear in mind Apple touts imaginary functionality all the time
o As do the Apple apologists like nospam & Alan Baker

o Why do Apple Apologists constantly brazenly fabricate what turns out to be wholly imaginary Apple functionality?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/SZfblCIRc9s>

Apple apologists like nospam will send you on sadistic wild-goose chases:
o Why do the Apple Apologists constantly send poor unsuspecting iOS users on wild goose chases?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ynh0PE9lK_I>

In fact, just as this newsgroup sees me taking steps for removing the
trolls like "micky" and "T" and "Bob F", because of how sadistic they are,
one of the reasons I decided to bring FACT to the child like Apple
newsgroups was these same sadistic despicable wholly unprepossessing
apologists like nospam sent _me_ on a series of wild-goose chases when I
tried, in the early days, to get iOS to do what Android does by its very
nature.

The three types of Apple apologists you'll run into are:
o Type I (nospam)
o Type II (sms, Alan Browne, Chris, Savageduck, et al.)
o Type III (Jolly Roger, Lewis, Alan Baker, Joerg Lorenz, Hemidactylus, et al.)

They only have 7 responses to fact, none of which are adult, as proved here:
o What are the common well-verified psychological traits of the Apple Apologists on this newsgroup?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/18ARDsEOPzM>

o Type I (nospam) defend any & all Apple MARKETING choices to the very death!
o Type II (sms) naively believe everything MARKETING feeds them sans doublechecking facts
o Type III (Alan Baker) are cultists whose very identity is what MARKETING feeds them
(hence they react to facts with hateful vitriol because facts about
Apple are literally an extreme psychological danger to their self worth)
--
Note that every thread referenced above has numerous factual cites easily
verified on the net; but the apologists will deny those factual cites sans
even _clicking_ on them because Apologists _hate_ what Apple is; they
prefer only to believe in what Apple "says" it is (not what Apple actually
does). I do not bullshit. Every fact I claim is backed up by the
references.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Dec 26, 2020, 9:52:16 PM12/26/20

to

On Sat, 26 Dec 2020 22:19:59 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> This was replaced later with a protocol called MTP.

As Carlos noted, MTP works fine for many people, perhaps even most people.
o It's fast, easy, and pretty much always seems to work (with good cables).

My main beef with MTP file transfer is the specific situations described in
these threads below, where two common occurrences vastly slow things down:
1. Your folder (e.g., DCIM) is huge, and,
2. You _already_ have most of the DCIM folder copied over to Windows

In _that_ (very common) situation, Windows seems to take forever just to
_calculate_ what it needs to do, and, worse, Windows pops up a prompt at
the most inopportune random time, which you can't set the default to!

Details on this Windows 10 flaw is in these two similar threads below:
o Is there any way to set the default Win10 to copy Android DCIM to Merge & Skip by default?
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/tC5kVBbrK40/>

o Confirm DCIM folder replace "This destination already contains a folder named DCIM" [x]Do this for all current items [[Yes]][Skip][Cancel]
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/0AK6D9YuROo/>

That's why I love the simplicity of an ad hoc Wi-Fi sharing solution such
as NitroShare, where you can select just a few files out of thousands that
are already copied over to Windows, and they come over immediately without
Windows spending ten minutes running calculations and then without Windows
popping up a prompt whose settings are _always_ wrong and which can't be
changed to a better default (AFAIK).

There are also Wi-Fi sharing solutions which, supposedly, will geofence
your home LAN such that they will copy over _just_ the files that haven't
already been copied over, automatically, the moment your device connects to
your local LAN.

If anyone has a good automatic solution like that described above for their
Android DCIM & Pictures folders, _that_ would be a good bit of software
worth our time to test.
--
Always improving the file sharing between all common operating systems.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Dec 27, 2020, 6:03:35 AM12/27/20

to

Given this thread was an offshoot of this recent help for philo
o Copying files to PC, by philo
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/RENAJ8v-fdo>

I didn't add any cloud methods, but given I'm always purposefully helpful,
one method I found that appears to both be able to transfer files using the
cloud and not using the cloud appears to be this google app (of all
companies):

o Files by Google: Clean up space on your phone, by Google LLC
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.nbu.files>
"Share your pictures, videos, documents, or apps with others nearby
who also have the app. With fast speed up to 480 Mbps, it's fast, free,
and it works without the internet, so it doesn't cost mobile data.
Just pair up your phone with anyone nearby who has Files app."

NOTE: I don't use any Google apps on my phone, and I have almost every
service with "google" in the name disabled, and I certainly don't have a
Google Account for sure set up on my phone, just like I don't have a
Microsoft Account set up on my desktop; so this is for those who actually
use Google & Microsoft accounts and apps.
o <https://i.postimg.cc/9FmRKqnz/stt01.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/bNqRK0Xs/appdrawer02.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/ht5bzHXd/appdrawer03.jpg>
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart and helpful purpose in my soul.

Anssi Saari

unread,

Dec 28, 2020, 2:53:05 PM12/28/20

to

Arlen Holder <arlen_...@newmachines.com> writes:

> It seems there's something called "Wi-Fi Direct" that can also be used:
> o <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi_Direct>
> <https://skbloggers.com/how-to-use-wifi-direct-to-transfer-files/>

When I looked into this some time a goWi-Fi Direct seemed shunned for
phone-PC transfers. Pity, it'd be nice, no fiddling with cables and
considerably faster than Bluetooth.

Some apps exist for Android for transferring data between Android
devices. I've used "Files by Google" between a few times, it seems to
work. No idea how hard it violates privacy. It does insist on location
permission so there's that.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Dec 28, 2020, 3:41:04 PM12/28/20

to

On Mon, 28 Dec 2020 21:52:59 +0200, Anssi Saari wrote:

> When I looked into this some time a goWi-Fi Direct seemed shunned for
> phone-PC transfers. Pity, it'd be nice, no fiddling with cables and
> considerably faster than Bluetooth.

Hi Anssi Saari,

You never seem to be a troll so it's worth discussing these facts with you.
o Agreeing with you, most of the best solutions seem to be cable free.

I have tested all the suggested solutions (AFAIK) where I have a bunch of
working Wi-Fi solutions, but where I haven't yet tested a good "automagic"
Wi-Fi solution that will copy my DCIM folder upon connection to my LAN.
o They exist for sure - but I haven't yet tested a good one (so far)

Hence, anyone who can recommend a good solution that is "automagic", that
would benefit everyone here greatly, as it seems many people would benefit.

As for "Wi-Fi Direct", I don't profess to understand the breakdown...
o But it "seems" (perhaps) maybe perchance, this is the Wi-Fi breakdown

1. Wi-Fi via the LAN (i.e., the phone & the computer link via IP address)
2. Wi-Fi via an ad hoc connection (i.e., a proprietary 1-to-1 Wi-Fi link)
3. Wi-Fi Direct (i.e., I think it's a direct non-proprietary Wi-Fi link?)

It would be nice if someone who knows Wi-Fi connections far better than we
do could explain if that is correct in how the Wi-Fi apps break down.

>
> Some apps exist for Android for transferring data between Android
> devices. I've used "Files by Google" between a few times, it seems to
> work. No idea how hard it violates privacy. It does insist on location
> permission so there's that.

I liked the blurb about "Files by Google" that it could use "just" your LAN
o But, like many, I don't generally use Google apps unless forced to do so

As for the "location permission", that's one error IMHO Google implemented
in the guise of "privacy" where I can barely find a Wi-Fi access-point
scanner app lately that isn't forced, by Android, to request location
permission.

That's a topic for another thread, where I think Google chose just about
the worst solution to the problem that they could choose, where, as I
recall, their "justification" (probably sincerely felt by Google) was that
anyone could be tracked by the data (e.g., their unique nearby confluence
of specific access point combinations, strengths, and BSSIDs).

Hence, as I recall, Google's "logic" in forcing "location permission" was
to force the app to tell the user that the app _could_ locate them, but
what Google did, as far as I can tell, was give the app even _more_
location information, which is just about the worst "workaround" Google
could have come up with, in my humble opinion.

But that's a topic for another thread, where, in this thread, it would be
nice if someone who knows more than we do can break down the Wi-Fi file and
folder transfer apps into the specific "types" of Wi-Fi for starters.

For example, is this breakdown correct yet?
1. Wi-Fi via the LAN (i.e., the phone & the computer link via IP address)
2. Wi-Fi via an ad hoc connection (i.e., a proprietary 1-to-1 Wi-Fi link)
3. Wi-Fi Direct (i.e., I think it's a direct non-proprietary Wi-Fi link?)
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to learn & disseminate good info.

MajorLanGod

unread,

Dec 29, 2020, 12:17:54 AM12/29/20

to

Anssi Saari <a...@sci.fi> wrote in news:sm0mtxx...@lakka.kapsi.fi:

I us WiFi PC File Explorer on my Android devices to read from Window, and
to move files back and forth. It equires an accompanying server on
Windows to work properly

Of course, one can always turn it into a two-step procedure by putting a
service like Google Drive in the middle. Copy to Google Drive, then
download with the other device. Has the advantage of creating a backup
copy at the same time.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Dec 29, 2020, 7:15:55 PM12/29/20

to

On Tue, 29 Dec 2020 05:17:52 GMT, MajorLanGod wrote:

> I us WiFi PC File Explorer on my Android devices to read from Window, and
> to move files back and forth. It equires an accompanying server on
> Windows to work properly

Given a lot of apps have the same or similar names on Android...
o Is this the app you recommend called WiFi PC File Explorer for Android?

o WiFi PC File Explorer, by Blackcaret
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=x.WifiPCFileExplorerFree>

It's good when people suggest what works for them because there are too
many solutions to test by any one person, particularly the confusing array
of "Wi-Fi" solutions, of which seem to be three different types (I think):
o ad hoc Wi-Fi non-proprietary server:client solutions (e.g.,
o ad hoc Wi-Fi proprietary server:client solutions (e.g., Kies)
o Wi-Fi direct solutions

The breakdown of "Wi-Fi" apps confuses the hell out of me though.
o For example, this claims to be "Wi-Fi P2P" (is that "ad hoc"?)
Easy Share : WiFi File Transfer, by MobileIdea Studio
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.idea.share>

To be blunt, I'm not even sure what P2P vs Wi-Fi Direct even means
o But it's easy to find Android apps claiming to be "Wi-Fi Direct" apps

For example:
o SuperBeam WiFi Direct Share, by LiveQoS
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.majedev.superbeam>

o WiFi Direct +, by Dev Netcomps Android
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.netcompss_gh.wifidirect>

o Hifi WiFi Direct File Share, by Hifi App Devs
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.hardev.hifi>
etc.

> Of course, one can always turn it into a two-step procedure by putting a
> service like Google Drive in the middle. Copy to Google Drive, then
> download with the other device. Has the advantage of creating a backup
> copy at the same time.

Is "Google Drive" (or even "Microsoft's OneDrive) "really" encrypted?
o We know that the iCloud is _not_ encrypted - but what about Google/M$?

Besides, if you're gonna do a two-step process, why not just stick an
encrypted USB stick into the USB port of an SMBv3 capable SOHO router?

That way every device on the private LAN (but iOS?) has access to the data.

Either way, if someone is gonna put their "stuff" on the cloud or on a USB
stick, I think they're crazy if they don't encrypt it, as cloud solutions
are notorious for NOT being encrypted, despite huge MARKETING organizations
literally painting entire Las Vegas building walls with utter bullshit:
o <https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/apple-puts-up-privacy-billboard-ahead-of-ces-2019/>

The big MARKETING orgs "claim" privacy but almost nothing is encrypted:
o iCloud backups are _NOT_ encrypted, by JF Mezei
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/-EA9TYUeVhk/>

If you're on anything other than iOS, Veracrypt is good FOSS encryption:
1. Windows === Veracrypt freeware with Truecrypt-style containers
2. Linux === Veracrypt freeware with Truecrypt-style containers
3. Android === EDS Lite freeware with Truecrypt-style containers
4. iOS === there is no freeware that handles even this simple task

In summary, there are so many ways to share files using FOSS software
between Android & Windows that it's confusing just to try to list them in
some sort of functional order.
--
Leveraging knowledge gained together out of the goodness of our hearts.

Arlen Holder

unread,

Dec 29, 2020, 7:15:57 PM12/29/20

to

On Sun, 27 Dec 2020 11:18:53 -0600, philo wrote:

> On 12/27/20 10:39 AM, AJL wrote:
>> philo wrote:
>>
>>> I have no problem putting my stuff on the cloud ...I'd not put
>>> anything sensitive there.
>>
>> I have a backup of my sensitive stuff on the cloud. But it's encrypted.
>
> Sounds like a good idea.

If you're gonna put stuff in the cloud, then I agree that it's mandatory
to add your own encryption, whether or not the MARKETING of the cloud
provider "claims" (usually imaginary) encryption, as described here:
o <https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/apple-puts-up-privacy-billboard-ahead-of-ces-2019/>

The MARKETING orgs "claim" privacy but almost nothing is really encrypted:

o iCloud backups are _NOT_ encrypted, by JF Mezei
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/-EA9TYUeVhk/>

What works well, IMHO, is cross platform FOSS "Veracrypt" freeware.
o Which pretty much works for all platforms (other than iOS, as usual)

You can easily create a Veracrypt/Truecrypt encrypted container anywhere
o And then all platforms can read the same data across your own LAN

For example, you can maintain sensitive data on a flash card in your router
o Then edit that _same_ encrypted data from any platform (other than iOS)

All using FOSS:

1. Windows === Veracrypt freeware with Truecrypt-style containers
2. Linux === Veracrypt freeware with Truecrypt-style containers
3. Android === EDS Lite freeware with Truecrypt-style containers
4. iOS === there is no freeware that handles even this simple task

See, for example:
o Best [Android] freeware for portable encrypted file containers
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/cas1QJ_j2uI/>

o Best [iOS] freeware for portable encrypted file containers
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/8GGgFKaW-70/>

o Windows freeware for portable encrypted file containers
<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.comp.freeware/c/5yMnlyud-Fo/>

o What do you use to send 4GB zip files (taxes) encrypted via email to a non-technical Win10 Home recipient?
<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.comp.freeware/c/35YrZb8ZA8I/>
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to impart knowledge to others.

Alan Baker

unread,

Dec 29, 2020, 7:48:00 PM12/29/20

to

On 2020-12-29 4:15 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Dec 2020 11:18:53 -0600, philo wrote:
>
>> On 12/27/20 10:39 AM, AJL wrote:
>>> philo wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have no problem putting my stuff on the cloud ...I'd not put
>>>> anything sensitive there.
>>>
>>> I have a backup of my sensitive stuff on the cloud. But it's encrypted.
>>
>> Sounds like a good idea.
>
> If you're gonna put stuff in the cloud, then I agree that it's mandatory
> to add your own encryption, whether or not the MARKETING of the cloud
> provider "claims" (usually imaginary) encryption, as described here:
> o <https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/apple-puts-up-privacy-billboard-ahead-of-ces-2019/>
>
> The MARKETING orgs "claim" privacy but almost nothing is really encrypted:
> o iCloud backups are _NOT_ encrypted, by JF Mezei
> <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/-EA9TYUeVhk/>

He's wrong:

'Here's more detail on how iCloud protects your data.'

Data Encryption Notes
In transit On server

Backup Yes Yes'

<https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT202303>

james

unread,

Dec 30, 2020, 10:08:07 AM12/30/20

to

Alan Baker wrote:

> 'Here's more detail on how iCloud protects your data.'

... apple decrypts all your data first you idiot and then scans it you
idiot and then reencrypts your data for storage you idiot...

Paul

unread,

Dec 30, 2020, 10:54:48 AM12/30/20

to

Technology News
January 21, 2020 7:07 AM Updated a year ago
Exclusive: Apple dropped plan for encrypting backups after FBI complained - sources

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusive-idUSKBN1ZK1CT

Who can you trust ?

I bet some of the employees in the big round Apple
building, have seen a room like this with a funny
painted door, but don't know what it's for :-)
They keep Sparkle Ponies in here, a lot of 'em.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A

Paul

nospam

unread,

Dec 30, 2020, 11:04:49 AM12/30/20

to

In article <rsi7s5$g6v$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Paul <nos...@needed.invalid>
wrote:

> Technology News
> January 21, 2020 7:07 AM Updated a year ago
> Exclusive: Apple dropped plan for encrypting backups after FBI complained -

that claim was debunked.

Alan Baker

unread,

Dec 30, 2020, 1:54:03 PM12/30/20

to

Sorry, but have you got a cite for that?

Arlen Holder

unread,

Dec 30, 2020, 3:21:36 PM12/30/20

to

On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 11:04:47 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> Exclusive: Apple dropped plan for encrypting backups after FBI complained -
>
> that claim was debunked.

Regarding how apologists reacted to the fact the iCloud is _NOT_ encrypted:
o Can we list all the ways we've been successful copying Android files &
folders to/from Mac/Windows/Linux desktops & to/from other iOS/Android
mobile devices
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/xulTadhcpb4>

Even Apple admits openly they scan your uploaded files, nospam.
o Which, if you read the cite, you'd know, nospam, and I know you know this

All you Apple apologists simply deny facts without even _reading_ them.
o You apologists deny the facts simply because you don't _like_ them.

It doesn't matter to you apologists that I pointed to a thread replete with
facts, which, in the case of nospam, he actually _knows_ exists.

The apologists simply assume nobody clicks on the cites
o So they deny the reams of known facts (which Apple admitted themselves)

Paul & I pointed to known published facts - but apologists simply deny facts
o Without ever pointing to facts to back up their utterly baseless denials

I'm actually surprised nospam didn't point us to Apple MARKETING bullshit
o As glossy MARKETING brochures are the _only_ things apologists believe

The only difference between the three types of apologists is:
o Type I (nospam) will defend Apple MARKETING brochures to the very death
o Type II (sms) are simply people who believe everything MARKETING says
o Type III (Alan Baker) are the cultists whose very self worth is
(brilliantly) provided to them by Apple MARKETING (oddly enough).

Each type of apologist handles facts differently as their motives differ:
o Type I simply defend Apple MARKETING mantra at all costs no matter what
(That means they will use any means available to them to defend Apple.)

o Type II aren't malicious people; they're just typical gullible people.
(Once they're shown a fact, they almost always "just disappear".)

o Type III are the strange Jim Jones' cultists. They are about as
astonishingly resistant to facts as flat earthers are, in that they're
like religious zealots who "truly believe" in whatever Apple
"says it does"; yet they're astonishingly immune to what Apple
"actually does").

Each type therefore gives you different "references" for their beliefs:
o Type I will actually give you a real reference, since their goal is
to defend Apple MARKETING at all costs. So their game is to blame
Google or Microsoft for Apple's decisions, or to deflect the blame
by saying that Google or Microsoft are worse, or to deflect the blame
by claiming the FBI made them do it (or didn't make them do it, as it
doesn't matter as long as they can deflect people away from Apple).

o Type II will stop their absurd claims the instant you prove them wrong,
which makes them the least persistent since they're otherwise normal
adults (e.g., Steve Scharf is the mayor of Cupertino so he's not
ill educated and yet he loudly claimed Qualcomm royalties went down,
until he was proven wrong - and then he just shut up & went quiet.

o Type III will never stop their absurd claims, as they don't even _read_
the cites, since you can hand them a cite and they'll deny that cite
even existed in the very post that they're responding to. This is so
prevalent that it literally happens with _every_ single denial of theirs.
Alan Baker, for example, will deny a cite existed even if that cite
existed in the very denial of fact that Alan Baker is denying.

Each type of apologist has a completely different adult cognitive IQ:
o Type I, paradoxically, actually are the smartest of the 3 types.
(The best way to not only understand Type I apologists like nospam,
and even to predict their responses years in advance, is simply to
assume, as a thought experiment, that they 3work for Apple MARKETING,
and then ask yourself "How would Apple MARKETING deflect the blame?".)

The point is that Type I apologists like nospam don't care whether what
they claim is correct or if it's not correct, so long as it deflects the
focus of the blame _away_ from Apple.

o Type II, are simply people who tend to believe whatever any MARKETING
organization touts, e.g., if Apple claims to have gotten a "good deal"
when they surrendered to Qualcomm, Steve Scharf will simply _assume_
(without ever checking the facts) that this means the Qualcomm royalties
went down (even as they actually went up 113% on average).

Alan Browne, another Type II apologist, when told by Apple that they
removed the headphone jack (due to Apple's "courage") and they removed
the charger in the box (due to Apple's intense desire to be "green"),
simply _believe_ that MARKETING bullshit - without ever even bothering
to question why over 99.5% of Android phones have a headphone jack, and
without bothering to question why Apple destroys perfectly good iPhones
and why Apple makes iPhones difficult to repair on purpose, and why Apple
openly admitted in a criminal case which they paid a criminal fine for
that the reason they throttle iPhones is to _shorten_ their lifespam,
(where Apple paid another _criminal_ settlement in the USA for when they
purposefully changed the release notes well _after_ the fact).

The Type II apologist is simply unable to process facts at the level
that someone at, oh say, a scientist or engineer level, can process them.

o Type III apologists are completely different than the other types in
that they're inherently of such a low IQ that their arguments are always
that of a small child.

For example, Alan Baker's best argument is to simply deny that facts were
ever cited, but he will also play the game that nospam plays which is to
deny all facts he simply doesn't like - without ever supplying any cite
(save for a picture of an Apple MARKETING glossy brochure).

These Type III apologist, petrifyingly so, actually _believe_ what they
claim; hence nobody of any normal intelligence can communicate with them
because it's shocking that people _that_ incredibly stupid can actually
exist. For example, I estimate Alan Baker's IQ to be no greater than
about 40 or 50 - where I just don't have the tools to deal with people
that shockingly stupid.

But rest assured, lots of people are shockingly stupid (e.g., Rudy Wieser
for example); but that alone doesn't make them a Type III apologist.

What makes Alan Baker a Type III apologist is he actually _believes_ that
Apple is his messiah, his savior, his all and one God whom he reveres,
where he, much in the way of a religious fanatic, believes Apple can do
no wrong.

Well-known examples of facts these apologists deny:
o Type I: You just saw nospam deny that Apple scans iCloud content even as
Apple themselves already admitted they scan uploaded content.

o Type II: Steve Scharf actually believes total cost of ownership for Apple
iPhones is less than that of Android even in the face of all the facts
showing otherwise (where, for example, the mere California Sales Tax on
his beloved iPhone is more than I paid, in total, for my far more
functional Android phone, as just one example), where it's completely
lost on Steve that something like "sales tax" (and plenty of other
calculations such as the ubiquitous availability of free apps like
the encryption apps which don't exist, for free on iOS, is all lost
since Apple MARKETING didn't include these facts in their bogus claims).

o Type III: Alan Baker not only actually claims all facts about Apple
that he simply doesn't like must be "lies by liars", but Alan Baker
will simply ask for cites even after you've handed him on a silver
platter scores of reliable cites. Alan Baker will simply claim the
cites you gave him didn't exist, and then Alan Baker will go right
back to claiming all facts about Apple he doesn't like are all
"lies by liars".

Trust me, I could go on and on as I've studied these peculiar people.
o None of them cares one whit about their utter lack of credibility.

My estimate at their credibility is simple (and accurate):
o Type I will be 100% wrong on facts detrimental to Apple, and yet, nospam
will be roughly around 80% correct on actual facts as long as those facts
have no detrimental impact to Apple MARKETING messaging.

o Type II will be about 50% to 75% accurate on facts, since they don't have
an ax to grind as the other two types have; they just believe the
bullshit, e.g., they're the type to believe Chevron gas is "better" than,
oh, say, Costco Tier I fuels, simply because Chevron advertises
only Chevron has "Techron"... while Costco simply says they have
the exact same chemicals and Tier I certification using the same stuff
in the same quantities (they're simply polyetheramines); but Type II
apologists say Chevron is "better" only because nobody but Chevron
can use the "brand name" of "Techron" for polyetheramines.

o Type III like Alan Baker will simply claim that only high test gas
is "good for your car" (even if your car was designed for the 87AKI
rated fuel) without ever even once comprehending what an "octane rating"
is, and worse, not only without comprehending that there isn't any
"octane" in automotive fuels to speak of (gas is mostly alkenes, with
some alkynes) but even more so, believing that the Apple branded octane
rating is the only good gas anyone can put in their engine.
but very few alkanes) and they'll point you to an Apple/Exxon commercial
"proving" it, where it shows a "tiger running across the road", and that,
in and of itself, proves to them that the Apple-branded gasoline has
"more power" (of course, because they used a tiger, stupid).

If you point these imbeciles like Alan Baker to your organic chemistry
textbook showing him exactly how the anti-knock index is calculated (it's
the average of the research and motor octane numbers in the USA), Alan
Baker will repeatedly scream that those aren't facts and even if they
were facts, they don't exist, and even if they do exist, they must be
"lies by liars" simply because he, himself, can't process facts at the
level of an actual cognitive adult.

See also this constantly updated thread (facts added almost weekly):

o What are the common well-verified psychological traits of the Apple Apologists on this newsgroup?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/18ARDsEOPzM>

--
To be fair, none of the apologists, not even nospam, can process facts
at the level of an _intelligent_ adult, simply because they're never
actually interested in the facts; their goal is to defend Apple at all
costs.

Alan Baker

unread,

Dec 30, 2020, 6:36:56 PM12/30/20

to

On 2020-12-30 7:08 a.m., james wrote:

Where's your cite for that claim?