V14.7.1!

[Ant]

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT212623 for v14.7.1's security fixes' details.
--
Meh to that Olympic 2020's opening ceremony (2008 Beijing's is still the best), but understandable. Will 2021 repeat 2020? :(
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

[paul]

Ant wrote on 26.07.2021 22:41

> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT212623 for v14.7.1's security fixes' details.

Each & every time Apple does this, it how _primitive_ iOS truly is indeed.

Does anyone notice Apple's iOS is the _only_ common consumer operating
system using the archaic monolithic update such that _every_ security fix
requires the entire operating system to be updated (per phone's prior iOS)?

Nobody does that.

Just Apple.
And just iOS.

It's laughably primitive.
*Why do iPhone owners put up with this crap, release after release?*
--
Alan Baker, Chris, Haemactylus, Joerg Lorenz, Jolly Roger, Lewis, Lewis,
nospam, Rod Speed, Savageduck, Wade Garrett, Wolffan, Your Name, et al.
are ignorant that security updates require the entire OS to be updated.

[nospam]

In article <sdn7su$irs$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, paul <nos...@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

> Does anyone notice Apple's iOS is the _only_ common consumer operating
> system using the archaic monolithic update such that _every_ security fix
> requires the entire operating system to be updated (per phone's prior iOS)?

it doesn't do that.

the 14.7.1 update is tiny, taking just mere seconds to download.

another one of your 'facts' that's totally wrong, making an already
long list of your bullshit even longer.

[paul]

nospam wrote on 26.07.2021 23:36

>> Does anyone notice Apple's iOS is the _only_ common consumer operating
>> system using the archaic monolithic update such that _every_ security fix
>> requires the entire operating system to be updated (per phone's prior iOS)?
>
> it doesn't do that.
>
> the 14.7.1 update is tiny, taking just mere seconds to download.
>
> another one of your 'facts' that's totally wrong, making an already
> long list of your bullshit even longer.

You ignore what I said, nospam, *because you _hate_ that iOS is primitive.*
I said "per phone's prior iOS" which means I'm well aware of how it works.

*The iOS update mechanism is a joke that _no_ modern operating system uses.*

--
Alan Baker, Chris, Haemactylus, Joerg Lorenz, Jolly Roger, Lewis, Lewis,
nospam, Rod Speed, Savageduck, Wade Garrett, Wolffan, Your Name, et al.

are all reading from the script Tim Cook (brilliantly) has fed them.

[nospam]

In article <sdne93$vtn$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, paul <nos...@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

> I said "per phone's prior iOS" which means I'm well aware of how it works.

you are not aware of anything, except maybe that the sun rises every
morning. your level of intelligence is on par with cavemen.

> *The iOS update mechanism is a joke that _no_ modern operating system uses.*

except for windows, linux, mac os and android, you mean?

[paul]

nospam wrote on 27.07.2021 01:00

> you are not aware of anything, except maybe that the sun rises every
> morning. your level of intelligence is on par with cavemen.

You have _never_ come through when asked to "name just one" fact
underpinning your entire wholly imaginary belief system, nospam.

*Where's just _one_ functionality on iOS that isn't already on Android?*

Name just one.

--
Alan Baker, Chris, Haemactylus, Joerg Lorenz, Jolly Roger, Lewis,

nospam, Rod Speed, Savageduck, Wade Garrett, Wolffan, Your Name, et al.

all fail a simple three word adult test of belief systems: Name just one.

[badgolferman]

paul <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
> You have _never_ come through when asked to "name just one" fact
> underpinning your entire wholly imaginary belief system, nospam.
>
> *Where's just _one_ functionality on iOS that isn't already on Android?*
>
> Name just one.

iOS has native hearing aid support. No manufacturer app required. In fact I
prefer the native iOS controls over the Signia app because I can call it up
from the Control Center or by triple-clicking the Wake button. It also
connects to the hearing aid much faster than the app.

Does Android have native hearing aid support? Only you know that answer.

[sms]

Android doesn't have that. You have to use an app. See
<https://www.truhearing.com/getstarted/using-your-hearing-aids-with-a-smartphone>

I added this to the list of iOS features in the document.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26 iOS Features Some of Which [many] Android Users Wish they Had
99 Android Features Some of Which [many] iOS Users Wish they Had

<https://tinyurl.com/fzje7h9e> or
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JznrWfGJDA8CYVfjSnPTwfVy8-gAC0kPyaApuJTcUNE>

38 Pages of Extensively Referenced Information with Hundreds of
Citations

✓ 100% Fact Checked ✓
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[paul]

badgolferman wrote on 27.07.2021 01:54

> iOS has native hearing aid support. No manufacturer app required. In fact I
> prefer the native iOS controls over the Signia app because I can call it up
> from the Control Center or by triple-clicking the Wake button. It also
> connects to the hearing aid much faster than the app.
>
> Does Android have native hearing aid support? Only you know that answer.

Hi badgolferman,

I don't use hearing aids but I know how to use google.
Android has open source native support for hearing aids; does iOS?

It's an open source API (is Apple's streaming to hearing aids open sourced?)
<https://source.android.com/devices/bluetooth/asha>

*Android has "wireless streaming to hearing aids"*
<https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2018/08/streaming-support-spec-for-hearing-aids_16.html>

*Android has "live captioning" for the hearing disabled*
<https://www.hearingtracker.com/news/google-android-q-live-caption-feature-is-a-killer-app>

*Does iOS provide an open source API for _any_ desired hearing aid?*

*Does iOS provide sound amplifiers which drive up the SNR over background?*
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.accessibility.soundamplifier>

*Does iOS provide amplified sound notifications of detected warnings?*
<https://www.razmobility.com/assistive-technology-blog/analysis-of-pixel/>

This list can go on and on for as long as we want it to go on.
It's fundamental _how_ iOS fundamentally differs from Android.

Apple prevents the market from providing (some) functionality to its users.
Google can't.

If Android does things differently (e.g., provides the API for hearing aid
apps) and if Apple does things differently (e.g., locks down the access to
hearing aid functionality), then we need to note those fundamental
differences. It's what adults do.

Fundamentally, what matters is whether the functionality exists or not.
In many cases, the functionality of Android is _impossible_ on iOS.

Interfacing with hearing aids isn't one of those many cases.
Android has open source fully native support for hearing aids.

The question is, does iOS have open source native hearing aid support?

--
Alan Baker, Chris, Haemactylus, Joerg Lorenz, Jolly Roger, Lewis,
nospam, Rod Speed, Savageduck, Wade Garrett, Wolffan, Your Name, et al.

only believe in marketing (they own no independent thought processes).

[paul]

sms wrote on 27.07.2021 04:16

>> Does Android have native hearing aid support? Only you know that answer.
>
> Android doesn't have that.

Bullshit.
See my response to badgolferman with plenty of cites (it's in Android 10).

While I have Android & iOS, I don't use hearing aids but a quick search
shows Android has what you claim it doesn't, and, the way Android does it
(open source APIs) appears to be potentially far more useful overall to the
consumer than the typically proprietary closed source Apple methods.

Those of you with Android and iOS and who own hearing aids will know more.

Specifically *does iOS provide natively these open source APIs* for hearing
aids like Android does?
<https://source.android.com/devices/bluetooth/asha>

Does iOS have these for the hearing impaired features that Android has?
<https://www.engadget.com/2019-02-04-google-android-accessibility-deaf.html>

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 27.07.21 um 01:00 schrieb nospam:

> In article <sdne93$vtn$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, paul <nos...@nospam.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> I said "per phone's prior iOS" which means I'm well aware of how it works.
>
> you are not aware of anything, except maybe that the sun rises every
> morning. your level of intelligence is on par with cavemen.

Stop feeding this Troll.

[badgolferman]

paul wrote:

>badgolferman wrote on 27.07.2021 01:54
>> iOS has native hearing aid support. No manufacturer app required.
>>In fact I prefer the native iOS controls over the Signia app
>>because I can call it up from the Control Center or by
>>triple-clicking the Wake button. It also connects to the hearing
>>aid much faster than the app.
>> Does Android have native hearing aid support? Only you know that
>>answer.
>
>Hi badgolferman,
>
>I don't use hearing aids but I know how to use google.
>Android has open source native support for hearing aids; does iOS?
>
>It's an open source API (is Apple's streaming to hearing aids open
>sourced?) <https://source.android.com/devices/bluetooth/asha>
>
>*Android has "wireless streaming to hearing aids"*
><https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2018/08/streaming-support-spec-for-hearing-aids_16.html>
>
>*Android has "live captioning" for the hearing disabled*
><https://www.hearingtracker.com/news/google-android-q-live-caption-feature-is-a-killer-app>
>

>*Does iOS provide an open source API for any desired hearing aid?*

>
>*Does iOS provide sound amplifiers which drive up the SNR over
>background?*
><https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.accessibility.soundamplifier>
>
>*Does iOS provide amplified sound notifications of detected warnings?*
><https://www.razmobility.com/assistive-technology-blog/analysis-of-pixel/>
>
>This list can go on and on for as long as we want it to go on.

>It's fundamental how iOS fundamentally differs from Android.

>
>Apple prevents the market from providing (some) functionality to its
>users. Google can't.
>
>If Android does things differently (e.g., provides the API for
>hearing aid apps) and if Apple does things differently (e.g., locks
>down the access to hearing aid functionality), then we need to note
>those fundamental differences. It's what adults do.
>
>Fundamentally, what matters is whether the functionality exists or

>not. In many cases, the functionality of Android is impossible on

>iOS.
>
>Interfacing with hearing aids isn't one of those many cases.
>Android has open source fully native support for hearing aids.
>
>The question is, does iOS have open source native hearing aid support?

I'm sure what you say is correct, but from what I am reading it seems
Android provides a pathway for the maufacturer apps to use those
functionalities. Android doesn't seem to provide a native way for the
user to control their hearing aids without the manufacturer app. The
Pixel phones may do that though.

In any case, the functionality exists, but the method seems to be
different. Is my understanding correct? Otherwise the hearing aid
providers who told me Apple phones work better with the hearing aids
were wrong.

[sms]

On 7/27/2021 4:36 AM, badgolferman wrote:

<snip>

> In any case, the functionality exists, but the method seems to be
> different. Is my understanding correct? Otherwise the hearing aid
> providers who told me Apple phones work better with the hearing aids
> were wrong.

It depends on your definition of "better."

If "better" is that no app is necessary for the hearing aid to work,
then sure, the iPhone would be considered "better" by the hearing aid
manufacturer.

Practically speaking, no hearing aid manufacturer would fail to provide
the necessary app for Android considering that Android market share is
about 3x that of iOS
<https://www.statista.com/statistics/272698/global-market-share-held-by-mobile-operating-systems-since-2009/>.

To the consumer the only difference is that they have to install the
necessary app unless the Android manufacturer has already added the
capability to their Android distribution.

There are other features that some Android device manufacturers include
in their Android distribution that require an app on other
manufacturers' Android distribution. It can be annoying when you switch
between Android phones to find that some feature is no longer there,
though the same thing happens occasionally on the iPhone as well.

For example, on Samsung phones the capability to set different volumes
for Ringtone, Media, Notifications, and System is built in to the
Android distribution. On some Android phones you need an app like Volume
Manager <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.hp.volume> to
get this functionality.

On iOS you have to Jailbreak to get the volume control functionality
<https://ioshacker.com/cydia/smartvolumemixer2-tweak-supercharges-volume-controls-on-your-iphone>.
My sister-in-law, who switched from a Samsung Galaxy S7 to an iPhone
refused to believe me that it was not possible on the iPhone to set
different volumes for the ringer and for notifications and went to the
Genius Bar at an Apple Store to inquire as to how to do this. They said
that it's a question that they get often, and it's also a frequent
inquiry on discussions.apple.com
<https://discussions.apple.com/thread/252190542>, but there is no real
solution, though they suggested a clunky workaround. It may be the case
that there is a patent on this functionality and that Apple is not able
to add it to iOS until the patent expires, it makes no sense that such
capability is missing.

[nospam]

In article <sdp5el$lk0$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

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

>
> If "better" is that no app is necessary for the hearing aid to work,
> then sure, the iPhone would be considered "better" by the hearing aid
> manufacturer.

and by users, which is what matters.

> Practically speaking, no hearing aid manufacturer would fail to provide
> the necessary app for Android considering that Android market share is
> about 3x that of iOS

global market share does not matter *at* *all*. as usual, you have no
clue about app development.

what matters for hearing aid makers is the breakdown of those who use
hearing aids, which is likely different for different hearing aid
companies.

if the bulk of hearing aid users own iphones, then they might choose to
not bother with an android app, which may cost more than the additional
revenue it might bring.

ios support for all types of assistive devices, not just hearing aids,
is *much* better than on android, including visual impairments and
motor impairments, much of it without app developers needing to do
anything extra. that makes it a *very* attractive platform for
manufacturers of a variety of assistive devices.

> On iOS you have to Jailbreak to get the volume control functionality

not this shit again.

that's an app function and fully supported without any need to
jailbreak.

apple provides the apis and app developers can use them or ignore them.

there's nothing apple or anyone else can do to force developers to use
those or any other apis.

if an app developer thinks independent volume is important, they'll add
it. many games do.

once again, you haven't any clue how ios works.

[paul]

badgolferman wrote on 27.07.2021 11:36

> I'm sure what you say is correct,

Hi badgolferman,

It's good you had asked because there are only three or four (or so) adults
on this newsgroup, so if you had a question, then it's worth answering.

As you'll notice, I assume you own adult cognitive skills so I don't need to
vastly dumb down the message with you like I must for the dozen apologists.

For the ignorant apologists, two sentences are all they can possibly absorb.
1. *iOS will _always_ lack the functionality of Android (for simple reasons)
2. Apple purposefully limits what the market can provide; Google can't.

> but from what I am reading it seems Android provides a pathway for
> the maufacturer apps to use those functionalities.

As you seem to have understood, which apologists never can, is that just as
with iOS security updates, Apple and Android do the same thing differently.

I openly & publicly admit I never used a hearing aid so take anything I say
from my quick searches with a grain of salt, but it does seem to be how you
just summarized it, given you own adult cognitive skills so there is nuance.

1. Android provides the open-source API which anyone can use to write apps
2. I'm not sure _how_ Apple provides the functionality (can you tell us?)

Android natively supports ANSI C63.19-2011 specifications.
<https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/9393002>

American National Standard Methods of Measurement
of Compatibility between Wireless Communications Devices and Hearing Aids
<https://standards.ieee.org/standard/C63_19-2011.html>

> Android doesn't seem to provide a native way for the
> user to control their hearing aids without the manufacturer app. The
> Pixel phones may do that though.

All the apologists can't figure out nuance but I'm assuming all adults can,
so the nuance here is whether or not the functionality exists.

Not that it's native.

Even so, Android does seem to natively support the open source API.
*Connect hearing aids to your device*
<https://support.google.com/accessibility/android/answer/9426888>
1. Open your device's Settings app
2. Tap Connected devices and then Pair new device.
3. Choose your hearing aid from the list of available devices
If you have more than one hearing aid:
Wait for the first hearing aid to connect,
then tap the other hearing aid in the list of available devices.
To change the settings, next to the name of the hearing aid,
tap Settings

Does iOS support the open source standards? I don't know. Do you?

BTW, a problem with picking whether it's "native" or not is the same problem
with picking "the best app", which is we can go down the feature set ad
infinitum down to the point of whether it allows changing of the fonts.

The functionality exists on Android; the functionality exists on iOS.
This isn't one of those cases where the functionality is impossible.

> In any case, the functionality exists, but the method seems to be
> different. Is my understanding correct?

Since you're an adult I can be more nuanced with you in that I didn't even
search for _how_ iOS does it (I simply assume it's _not_ open sourced based
on the fact that Apple is almost always walled garden closed source).

I was hoping one of the apologists would tell us _how_ Apple does it, but
that would require them to actually be purposefully helpful people.

As you are aware, all the apologists are unprepossessing despicable people.

Not one of the apologists owns a purposefully helpful bone in their bodies.
They only respond when they feel Apple is being attacked with facts.

> Otherwise the hearing aid providers who told me Apple phones work better
> with the hearing aids were wrong.

Since you're an adult, you can handle the nuance that "working better" is
completely different than "impossible to do".

Whether or not hearing aids "work better" on Android isn't something I'm
prepared to expound upon simply because I didn't try to answer that
question.

However, I saw a ton of functionality in the Android apps (e.g., pairing
multiple devices at once, remote control of hearing aid volume, warnings for
the hearing impaired, transcriptions of audio, closed captioning,
translations, etc.) that may or may not exist in the iOS apps, so you may
not have been correctly apprised.

I have both iOS and Android so I test most (if not all) my factual
assessments before I post them, which is why I know the apologists always
fabricate imaginary iOS functionality that simply doesn't exist.

However, tying phones to a hearing aid isn't one of those functionalities.

I suspect the major difference between Android & iOS in terms of hearing
aids is that Apple uses a closed approach while Android uses an open one.

If there are any purposefully helpful people with experience on both
platforms, they could add helpful value to this conversation, as I never
thought about hearing aid functionality until you asked the question.
--
BTW, it's hilarious that Steve "added" this to his list without even testing
it once. The article he references in his list is _years_ old in fact.
It's further proofe his list is a fabrication based on his own fantasies.

[nospam]

In article <sdpa3l$1iat$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, paul <nos...@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

>
> I openly & publicly admit I never used a hearing aid so take anything I say
> from my quick searches with a grain of salt,

if you insist.

>
> 1. Android provides the open-source API which anyone can use to write apps
> 2. I'm not sure _how_ Apple provides the functionality (can you tell us?)

on ios, hearing aid support is *part* *of* *the* operating* *system*,
which means there is *no* need for developers to write an app.

that also means there no need for users to download, install and
configure an app and then launch it when needed.

on ios, support is *native*.

this also applies to many other assistive technologies which is why
those with any type of impairment overwhelmingly choose ios,
particularly visual impairments.

>
> I suspect the major difference between Android & iOS in terms of hearing
> aids is that Apple uses a closed approach while Android uses an open one.

as usual, you suspect wrong.

[badgolferman]

nospam wrote:

>In article <sdpa3l$1iat$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, paul
><nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>>
>> I openly & publicly admit I never used a hearing aid so take
>>anything I say from my quick searches with a grain of salt,
>
>if you insist.
>
>
>
>>
>> 1. Android provides the open-source API which anyone can use to

>>write apps 2. I'm not sure how Apple provides the functionality
>>(can you tell us?)
>
>on ios, hearing aid support is part of the operating* system,
>which means there is no need for developers to write an app.

>
>that also means there no need for users to download, install and
>configure an app and then launch it when needed.
>

>on ios, support is native.

>
>this also applies to many other assistive technologies which is why
>those with any type of impairment overwhelmingly choose ios,
>particularly visual impairments.
>
>

Settings - Accessibility - Hearing Devices

The general operating system options are on that page but if a set of
MFI hearing devices are paired then there are more specific options at
the next level.

I also do have the Signia app installed which duplicates some of the
same settings as iOS (volume and sound profile), but it also provides
tone and spatial controls which are rarely used. The Signia app takes
30-45 seconds to connect to the devices whereas the iOS built in
controls connect immediately. Not sure why there is a difference.

So yes, on iOS support is native and built in, but it also provides app
pathways to the manufacturer for added functionality. I can use either
set of controls, but I prefer the iOS controls because they are only a
triple-click away.

[nospam]

In article <xn0n0vu5v...@nntp.aioe.org>, badgolferman

<REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I also do have the Signia app installed which duplicates some of the
> same settings as iOS (volume and sound profile), but it also provides
> tone and spatial controls which are rarely used. The Signia app takes
> 30-45 seconds to connect to the devices whereas the iOS built in
> controls connect immediately. Not sure why there is a difference.

because they don't know how to write quality software.

i haven't looked at their app but they're probably rescanning for
bluetooth devices each time, which is not needed and only serves to
slow things down, although it should not be anywhere close to 30-45
seconds, they must be doing something really dumb.

they probably aren't bothering with state restoration either, which is
a pain to do, but results in a *significantly* better use experience,
where the app doesn't even need to be launched, except once to
initially pair the device (which will be instant). after that, ios
manages the connection.

it's possible that they want the app to have the same features on both
ios and android, maybe even using a cross-platform framework to do
that, which means the ios version will be dumbed down, with native ios
functionality never being used since it doesn't exist on android and
they're not about to add it to android (if they even could).

tl;dr - nothing can prevent incompetent people from writing shitty apps.

[Wilf]

On 27/07/2021 17:56, Jolly Roger wrote:

> Yep, it's tiny. I just downloaded it in only 8 seconds on my iPhone 11
> Pro Max..
>

I downloaded it very quickly (XR 64GB) but it did seem to take a long
time to verify and then to install.
--
Wilf

[paul]

nospam wrote on 27.07.2021 19:28

> it's possible that they want the app to have the same features on both
> ios and android, maybe even using a cross-platform framework to do
> that, which means the ios version will be dumbed down, with native ios
> functionality never being used since it doesn't exist on android and
> they're not about to add it to android (if they even could).

*Does the closed iOS hearing aid system have the functionality of Android?*
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.accessibility.soundamplifier>
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.audio.hearing.visualization.accessibility.scribe>

I don't yet know the answer but usually the Apple locked down system fails
over time to provide the functionality of free open source Android systems.
<https://www.razmobility.com/assistive-technology-blog/analysis-of-pixel/>

What's interesting to note is nospam is yet again apparently brazenly
fabricating purely imaginary iOS functionality because he _hates_ that
Apple's closed proprietary system doesn't allow for better integration.
<https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/4/18209546/google-live-transcribe-sound-amplifier-accessibility-android-deaf-hard-hearing>

I'm just looking into this hearing aid stuff, but it could be as bad as
you're stuck with the iOS walled garden Apple-way-or-the-highway method.
<https://www.engadget.com/2019-02-04-google-android-accessibility-deaf.html>

*It could be yet another classic Apple case of "_you're holding it wrong_".*

Adults will note Android had _tons_ of functionality for the hearing
impaired, which was as diverse as lowering background noise to special
warnings for classic alarm sounds, to automatic captioning & transcription.
<https://support.google.com/accessibility/android/answer/6006564?hl=en>

Does the closed dark code of iOS allow for this huge functionality?
I don't know (as I can't test hearing aids for myself on iOS or Android).

However, in practice, the locked down iOS tightly controlled closed system
usually fails to provide the open plethora of functionality of Android.

Meanwhile, Android appears to have gone down the route of standards, with
wide open source API's which everyone has full access to so they can provide
their consumer with the functionality they feel the consumer wants.

Which one is more feature rich today?
Which will be more feature rich tomorrow?

It's clear that the open source system will provide more than the closed
locked down Apple system over time - but I don't know what the current
status is.

Looking at what iOS provides, it does appear to be paltry functionality:
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210070>

However primitive the iOS functionality may be, it support many devices:
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210386>

Where the support ratings of the closed iOS system appears to be M3, T4:
<https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202186>

When we compare features with the modern Android hearing aid ecosystem,
it seems, at least upon initial inspection, Android does much more than iOS.
<https://www.engadget.com/2019-09-03-android-10-transforms-hearing-aids-bluetooth-headsets.html>

For example, does the primitive iOS hearing aid ecosystem have live
transcribe and sound amplification functionality? I don't (yet) know.
<https://www.fastcompany.com/90302345/google-aims-to-help-people-with-hearing-loss-with-two-cool-inclusive-android-apps>

Does the locked down closed iOS hearing aid system offer the wide berth of
open source APIs which open Android to everything people will ever want?

I don't (yet) know.
Do you?

--
Alan Baker, Chris, Haemactylus, Joerg Lorenz, Jolly Roger, Lewis,
nospam, Rod Speed, Savageduck, Wade Garrett, Wolffan, Your Name, et al.

love to be imprisoned in the walled garden because it makes them feel safe.

[Bob Campbell]

paul <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> I openly & publicly admit I have never used an iPhone or an iPad, so take
> everything I say regarding iOS as coming directly out of my ass

Yes, that is abundantly clear, “I only deal in facts” troll child.

[paul]

Bob Campbell wrote on 30.07.2021 05:53

> Yes, that is abundantly clear, 'I only deal in facts' troll child.

You apologists are who make this Apple ng your own kindergarten cesspool.

*Have you ever thought about why you apologists _hate_ facts about Apple?*
I have.

What's revealing is that on the adult OS Usenet newsgroups, nobody tries to
defend Microsoft to the death, nor Ubuntu, nor Google with their very lives.

Nobody on the adult OS newsgroups calls all facts about Google trolls.
It's only on the Apple newsgroups that these childlike apologists abound.

*These cultists like Bob Campbell clearly _hate_ all facts about Apple.*

In fact, they call all facts about Apple they happen to not like, trolls.
These apologists are no different than flat earthers or Trumpist cultists.

Why?
I don't know why.

I suspect their entire belief system was fed to them by Apple's web site.
Hence, _any_ fact found outside the Apple web site is, to them, a troll.

There is no difference between apologists and any Trump-like cultist.
They are all ignorant people who only believe what they are fed to believe.

And this Bob Campbell proved me right, yet again (I'm right every time!).
--
Alan Baker, Bob Campbell, Chris, Haemactylus, Joerg Lorenz, Jolly Roger,

Lewis, nospam, Rod Speed, Savageduck, Wade Garrett, Wolffan, Your Name,

et al. own imaginary beliefs which can only remain intact by ignorance.

[nospam]

In article <sdvu9i$1s0r$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, paul <nos...@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

> Nobody on the adult OS newsgroups calls all facts about Google trolls.

they call *you* a troll.

[paul]

nospam wrote on 30.07.2021 06:36

>> Nobody on the adult OS newsgroups calls all facts about Google trolls.
>
> they call *you* a troll.

My job on this newsgroup is to continue to post facts about Apple.

*All you apologists _hate_ what Apple is.*
*Which is why you _hate_ most facts about Apple products.*
*Which is why you brazenly deny all facts about Apple you don't like.*
*And it's why apologists incessantly fabricate imaginary iOS functionality.*

You can't stand the fact that the market can't provide even some of the most
basic functionalities in iOS simply because Apple limits that functionality.

That's just a simple obvious fact you _hate_ about Apple products, nospam.

As a result of you hating most facts about Apple (those facts can't fit into
your imaginary belief system about Apple products), what I've learned over
time is how despicable you apologists are (_because_ of your own hatred).

All of you are apologists are truly unprepossessing people devoid of value.
Every single thing you do is to deny facts of Apple being what Apple is.

Why?
I don't know why.

I suspect it's as simple as you _hate_ what Apple is so you deny all facts
you happen not to like about Apple products (which is a _lot_ of facts).

My job on this newsgroup is to continue to post facts about Apple.

--
Alan Baker, Bob Campbell, Chris, Haemactylus, Joerg Lorenz, Jolly Roger,
Lewis, nospam, Rod Speed, Savageduck, Wade Garrett, Wolffan, Your Name,

et al., all _hate_ what Apple is so they deny every fact they don't like.

[nospam]

In article <se079s$tht$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, paul <nos...@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

> >> Nobody on the adult OS newsgroups calls all facts about Google trolls.
> >
> > they call *you* a troll.
>

> My job on this newsgroup is to continue to troll about Apple.

ftfy

[badgolferman]

paul <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
> All of you are apologists are truly unprepossessing people devoid of value.
> Every single thing you do is to deny facts of Apple being what Apple is.
>
> Why?
> I don't know why.
>

My observation has been that for *some* people Apple is like a religion.
Everything about it is beyond reproach. Their reactions are exactly like a
devout Moslem who feels their religion is being attacked by heretics.

By the way, I find it ironic that your email address has <nospam> in it.

[nospam]

In article <se0ppc$1s3n$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, badgolferman

<REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> paul <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > All of you are apologists are truly unprepossessing people devoid of value.
> > Every single thing you do is to deny facts of Apple being what Apple is.
> >
> > Why?
> > I don't know why.
> >
>
> My observation has been that for *some* people Apple is like a religion.
> Everything about it is beyond reproach. Their reactions are exactly like a
> devout Moslem who feels their religion is being attacked by heretics.

that applies to *every* product family and is always a very small
minority.

it also applies to non-products, such as sports teams, politicians, etc.

[sms]

On 7/30/2021 5:02 AM, badgolferman wrote:

<snip>

> My observation has been that for *some* people Apple is like a religion.
> Everything about it is beyond reproach. Their reactions are exactly like a
> devout Moslem who feels their religion is being attacked by heretics.

I wouldn't single out devout Muslims, devout Christians behave like that
too, witness the phony "War on Christmas," see
<https://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/imaginary-enemies-sarah-palin-s-phony-fight-against-the-war-on-christmas>.

It's a very very small number of "some" people that act like that. The
vast majority of users of products or services from any manufacturer or
provider don't consider it a religion, they are just sticking with
products that they like and are comfortable with.

Alas, it's the zealots that promulgate the greatest false narrative. Not
all Republicans are anti-vaxxers, Q-Anon conspiracy theorists, and
racists, but that small subset gets the attention. Not all Apple users
behave like nospam, who when unable to respond coherently simply writes
"bullshit," and moves on, and not all Android users behave like Paul
with his whole "adult" schtick. Fortunately, it's easy to simply filter
out and ignore those individuals.

It's odd behavior because when someone behaves like this it demonstrates
deep-seated insecurity about the choices that they've made "if you don't
do like I do then you're doubting my intelligence." And as we've seen,
these individuals almost never support anything they claim with any kind
of proof.

Especially on Usenet, if you want to be taken seriously it's vitally
important to back up your statements with citations and references,
because you have so many people whose depth of knowledge is limited to
responding with "bullshit."

Personally, I could give someone a list of reasons to buy products using
iOS, iPadOS, watchOS, and MacOS, and a list of reasons to buy products
using Android or Windows. I could give someone reasons why they should
choose AT&T, T-Mobile, or Verizon, and why they shouldn't. It's much
more convincing to someone when you can be honest about the pros and
cons of a product or service, and that's something that people like
nospam and Paul should try to learn."

[paul]

nospam wrote on 30.07.2021 14:16

>> My observation has been that for *some* people Apple is like a religion.
>> Everything about it is beyond reproach. Their reactions are exactly like a
>> devout Moslem who feels their religion is being attacked by heretics.
>
> that applies to *every* product family and is always a very small
> minority.
>
> it also applies to non-products, such as sports teams, politicians, etc.

My job here is simply to present the facts about Apple & its products.
Every time the apologists brazenly deny those facts, I prove them wrong.

However, what badgolferman said, and what nospam said, I fully agree with.

These Apple cultists are almost exactly like those idiots who stormed the
Capitol after listening to a speech by Trump (their messiah being Tim Cook).

The _problem_ is these apologists comprise _most_ of the posts on this ng.
*Hence the apologists turn this newsgroup into their kindergarten cesspool.*

Nobody on the adult OS newsgroups defends the mother ship like they do.

--
Alan Baker, Bob Campbell, Chris, Haemactylus, Joerg Lorenz, Jolly Roger,
Lewis, nospam, Rod Speed, Savageduck, Wade Garrett, Wolffan, Your Name,

et al., are all reading from the script Tim Cook (brilliantly) has fed them.

[paul]

nospam wrote on 30.07.2021 13:08
>> My job on this newsgroup is to continue to post facts about Apple.
>
> ftfy

And yet, while you're almost always wrong nospam, you've never found even
one fact I've ever posted in decades on Usenet that has ever been wrong.

The reason isn't that I'm smarter than you are, nor that I'm vastly more
well educated than you are, nor even that I'm more helpful than you are.

*The reason you deny facts about Apple is simply that you _hate_ them.*

--
Alan Baker, Bob Campbell, Chris, Haemactylus, Joerg Lorenz, Jolly Roger,
Lewis, nospam, Rod Speed, Savageduck, Wade Garrett, Wolffan, Your Name,

et al., don't comprehend the difference between a fact & assessment of it.

[paul]

sms wrote on 30.07.2021 16:37

> not all Android users behave like Paul
> with his whole "adult" schtick.

While I haven't figured out why Steve shills for Verizon, nor why Steve
claims known functionality on Android doesn't exist (e.g., security
updates), what I have studied is why the apologists are such strange people.

My curiosity started when cruel people like Jolly Roger, Lewis, and nospam
brazenly sent innocent users on wild-goose chases with no chance of success.

*I wondered what kind of truly unprepossessing person is that despicable.*

--
Alan Baker, Bob Campbell, Chris, Haemactylus, Joerg Lorenz, Jolly Roger,
Lewis, nospam, Rod Speed, Savageduck, Wade Garrett, Wolffan, Your Name,

et al., believe everything Apple fed them to believe. And I mean everything.

[nospam]

In article <se12r6$fj$1...@dont-email.me>, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

> Alas, it's the zealots that promulgate the greatest false narrative. Not
> all Republicans are anti-vaxxers, Q-Anon conspiracy theorists, and
> racists, but that small subset gets the attention.

those are not a small subset, and they're growing like a cancer.

> Especially on Usenet, if you want to be taken seriously it's vitally
> important to back up your statements with citations and references,
> because you have so many people whose depth of knowledge is limited to
> responding with "bullshit."

the 'citations and references' you provide to support your bogus claims
are so easily refuted it's not even funny.

whenever anyone corrects you, you double-down and refuse to learn
anything.

your 'list' of android versus ios is so full of incorrect information,
which numerous people have corrected (and *with* links), yet you refuse
to fix it.

> Personally, I could give someone a list of reasons to buy products using
> iOS, iPadOS, watchOS, and MacOS, and a list of reasons to buy products
> using Android or Windows. I could give someone reasons why they should
> choose AT&T, T-Mobile, or Verizon, and why they shouldn't. It's much
> more convincing to someone when you can be honest about the pros and
> cons of a product or service,

give me a fucking break.

you're as dishonest as it gets.

you continually lie about pros and cons to push your agenda and to
troll, with grossly inaccurate and highly misleading disinformation
that is easily refuted.

> and that's something that people like
> nospam and Paul should try to learn."

when someone resorts to insults, you know they're full of shit.

[nospam]

In article <se1aqv$juf$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, paul <nos...@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

>
> My job here is simply to troll.

ftfy.

[paul]

nospam wrote on 30.07.2021 19:22

> your 'list' of android versus ios is so full of incorrect information,
> which numerous people have corrected (and *with* links), yet you refuse
> to fix it.

I agree with nospam and badgolferman on this point of view which is Steve
has been provided the facts many times which he refuses to incorporate.

That's his prerogative to have a biased list, but then it's not accurate.

> you're as dishonest as it gets.

Again, I agree with nospam that Steve does seem to shill for Verizon even as
he himself, isn't paying for the full Verizon service plans from Verizon.

> you continually lie about pros and cons to push your agenda and to
> troll, with grossly inaccurate and highly misleading disinformation
> that is easily refuted.

While I agree with nospam that Steve seems to have an agenda on his
inexorable endless shilling for Verizon at the expense of T-Mobile,
nospam has _often_ sent innocent users on cruel wild goose chases doomed to
failure, simply because nospam _hates_ when iOS can't do even basic tasks.

>> and that's something that people like
>> nospam and Paul should try to learn."
>
> when someone resorts to insults, you know they're full of shit.

And yet, that's basically the only way you know of to respond to facts.

--
Alan Baker, Bob Campbell, Chris, Haemactylus, Joerg Lorenz, Jolly Roger,
Lewis, nospam, Rod Speed, Savageduck, Wade Garrett, Wolffan, Your Name,

et al., are all despicable people devoid of purposefully helpful intent.

[paul]

sms wrote on 30.07.2021 16:37

> Personally, I could give someone a list of reasons to buy products using
> iOS, iPadOS, watchOS, and MacOS, and a list of reasons to buy products
> using Android or Windows.

The topic of what kind of person buys Apple verses other products is
something I've studied (e.g., while on the line at Costco, I ask people).

Usually I get the same answer I'd get off the Apple web site when I ask
people why they like Apple products (almost all of which is marketing BS).

As with "Techron", people don't actually understand their brains are fed by
Tim Cook's web site into believing whatever Apple tells them to believe.

However, even some people (mostly the non technical girls) love Apple
products, so it's one reason I recently purchased the iPhone 12 mini.

When I ask _them_ why they prefer Apple, I get mostly what you'd expect.
1. The _feeling_ of safety & privacy (two different things, by the way)
2. The _feeling_ of ease of use (e.g., they believe "it just works")
3. The _simplicity_ of facetime & iMessage & iCloud backup/restore
etc.

I suspect if you ask Windows/Android users why they prefer them, you'd get
completely different (and far more complex) answers to the same questions.

--
Alan Baker, Bob Campbell, Chris, Haemactylus, Joerg Lorenz, Jolly Roger,
Lewis, nospam, Rod Speed, Savageduck, Wade Garrett, Wolffan, Your Name,

et al., don't even understand why they defend the mosther ship to the death.

[Bob Campbell]

paul <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> I suspect if you ask Windows/Android users why they prefer them, you'd get
> completely different (and far more complex) answers to the same questions.

Yes. The answer would be “it is cheaper than Apple”.

[nospam]

In article <hpOdnSgYldtoqJr8...@supernews.com>, Bob

Campbell <nu...@none.none> wrote:

> paul <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > I suspect if you ask Windows/Android users why they prefer them, you'd get
> > completely different (and far more complex) answers to the same questions.
>

> Yes. The answer would be łit is cheaper than Apple˛.

except it isn't.

[Your Name]

Ah, the usual blinkered bollocks about Apple being more expensive.

Most of the supposed cheaper Android devices are not comparable to
Apple's devices, while the higher-end Android devices from the likes of
Samsung which are comparable actually cost about the same as Apple's
devices.

Many of the cheap Android devices are horrible, slow, and supported for
about as long as it takes to get them into a customer's hands (some of
the no-name companies don't even stick around that long). After that
you're outta luck.

[sms]

Hardly.

The difference in the cost of the hardware of a Macbook Pro versus a
flagship Windows laptop is minimal and often the Windows machine is more
expensive because it has features that aren't available on the Macbook
at any price and that require external hardware to get that functionality.

Sure, you can buy a junky Windows laptop for just a few hundred dollars,
but you're likely to regret such a purchase which is basically a machine
built with "parts from all over the world that no one else wants.

For MacOS versus Windows the correct answer would usually be "available
applications." For MacOS you have Mac-only applications like Garage Band
and Final Cut Pro. For Windows you have a long list of commercial,
industrial, scientific, statistical, database, medical, and educational
applications that are Windows-only.

For iPhone versus Android there's a long list of reasons to prefer one
platform or another, see "26 iOS Features Some of Which [many] Android
Users Wish they Had and 100 Android Features Some of Which [many] iOS
Users Wish they Had" at <https://tinyurl.com/fzje7h9e> or
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JznrWfGJDA8CYVfjSnPTwfVy8-gAC0kPyaApuJTcUNE>.

[nospam]

In article <se7ifj$l5j$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

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

> The difference in the cost of the hardware of a Macbook Pro versus a
> flagship Windows laptop is minimal and often the Windows machine is more
> expensive

true.

> because it has features that aren't available on the Macbook
> at any price and that require external hardware to get that functionality.

no, that's not why.

you are also ignoring that macbooks have numerous features not
available on any windows laptop or desktop pc for that matter. this is
going to increase with future products.

> Sure, you can buy a junky Windows laptop for just a few hundred dollars,
> but you're likely to regret such a purchase which is basically a machine
> built with "parts from all over the world that no one else wants.

true.

> For MacOS versus Windows the correct answer would usually be "available
> applications." For MacOS you have Mac-only applications like Garage Band
> and Final Cut Pro.

along with shitloads more that are mac-only.

> For Windows you have a long list of commercial,
> industrial, scientific, statistical, database, medical, and educational
> applications that are Windows-only.

there's also a long list of apps for mac in all of those industries,
often with titles not available on windows, and often much better.

you are also ignoring that macs can natively run all unix software,
which has a significant amount of software in those industries,
particularly scientific and industrial.

there are some vertical market applications that are windows only,
however, they are mostly for turnkey products (e.g., a dental x-ray
machine, bank atm, etc.) and not anything an end user will care about.

> For iPhone versus Android there's a long list of reasons to prefer one
> platform or another,

your bogus 'list' has been debunked many, many times.

in particular, you are intentionally ignoring more than 70 items that
are available on ios and not on android to further your agenda, all of
which have been explained to you before and you continue to ignore. you
also have not removed the numerous items on the android side that exist
for ios, also explained to you before.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 02.08.21 um 02:06 schrieb nospam:

> In article <hpOdnSgYldtoqJr8...@supernews.com>, Bob
> Campbell <nu...@none.none> wrote:
>
>> paul <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>> I suspect if you ask Windows/Android users why they prefer them, you'd get
>>> completely different (and far more complex) answers to the same questions.
>>

>> Yes. The answer would be ³it is cheaper than Apple².
>
> except it isn't.

Especially if users don't value their time at 0 (=Zero).

Hardware of Windows is much more expensive because Snake-Oil like Norton
and other crappy stuff reduce performance by one device-generation. Mac
OS user don't need such things. Windows-user have to upgrade to much
more expensive hardware to compensate for this loss.

And the "cheap Android-device" is obsolete after 3 years because support
ends. IOS-based devices can be safely used for at least 5 years.


--
De gustibus non est disputandum

[Bob Campbell]

Your Name <Your...@YourISP.com> wrote:

>> Yes. The answer would be "it is cheaper than Apple".
>
> Ah, the usual blinkered bollocks about Apple being more expensive.
>
> Most of the supposed cheaper Android devices are not comparable to
> Apple's devices, while the higher-end Android devices from the likes of
> Samsung which are comparable actually cost about the same as Apple's
> devices.
>
> Many of the cheap Android devices are horrible, slow, and supported for
> about as long as it takes to get them into a customer's hands (some of
> the no-name companies don't even stick around that long). After that
> you're outta luck.

Yes, I understand all of that. All I am saying is “It is cheaper than
Apple” would be the answer. I did not say anything about it being true.

[knuttle]

On 8/2/2021 3:33 PM, Bob Campbell wrote:
> Yes, I understand all of that. All I am saying is It is cheaper than
> Apple would be the answer. I did not say anything about it being true.

You don't get it most people buy Android because it is built for freedom.
It's the same reason people buy Windows laptops instead of a Chromebook.

The Chromebook locks you into Google just like the iPhone does with Apple.
People who buy Android want the freedom they couldn't get with Apple's iOS.

[Your Name]

On 2021-08-03 07:06:57 +0000, knuttle said:

> On 8/2/2021 3:33 PM, Bob Campbell wrote:
>> Yes, I understand all of that. All I am saying is It is cheaper than
>> Apple would be the answer. I did not say anything about it being true.
>
> You don't get it most people buy Android because it is built for freedom.

Wrong. Most people buy the cheap (often nasty) Android devices because
that's all they can sensibly afford.

> It's the same reason people buy Windows laptops instead of a Chromebook.

Wrong. Most people buy Windows laptops because God-awful Windoze is
what they're used to from work or school.

> The Chromebook locks you into Google just like the iPhone does with Apple.
> People who buy Android want the freedom they couldn't get with Apple's iOS.

Absolute crap. Most buyers don't know and couldnt care less about being
supposedly "locked in". They simply want a device that works "well
enough" and they can afford.

[nospam]

In article <seapu3$gv5$1...@dont-email.me>, knuttle

<keith_...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> > Yes, I understand all of that. All I am saying is It is cheaper than
> > Apple would be the answer. I did not say anything about it being true.
>
> You don't get it most people buy Android because it is built for freedom.

no they don't.

> It's the same reason people buy Windows laptops instead of a Chromebook.

two very different use cases.

schools are buying chromebooks in droves because of the numerous
advantages they offer.

> The Chromebook locks you into Google just like the iPhone does with Apple.

nope.

> People who buy Android want the freedom they couldn't get with Apple's iOS.

no, that's not why.

there is no more lock-in with ios than any other operating system.

people who buy android are locked into android. they can't run android
apps on other devices (outside of emulation which doesn't work well).

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 03.08.21 um 09:06 schrieb knuttle:

> You don't get it most people buy Android because it is built for freedom.

*ROTFLSTC*
Android is the worst prison ever with the big brother watching you.

The only free OS is Linux or open source derivatives of Linux. Linux on
mobile devices was killed by Google and Apple.

[johnson]

On 2021-08-03, Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 03.08.21 um 09:06 schrieb knuttle:
>> You don't get it most people buy Android because it is built for freedom.
>
> *ROTFLSTC*
> Android is the worst prison ever with the big brother watching you.
>
> The only free OS is Linux or open source derivatives of Linux.

[...]

Not so: vide *BSD (_not_ a Linux 'derivative')

[Heron]

On 8/1/2021 9:13 PM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> Hardware of Windows is much more expensive because Snake-Oil like Norton
> and other crappy stuff reduce performance by one device-generation. Mac
> OS user don't need such things. Windows-user have to upgrade to much
> more expensive hardware to compensate for this loss.
>
> And the "cheap Android-device" is obsolete after 3 years because support
> ends. IOS-based devices can be safely used for at least 5 years.

Do you believe all that unbelievable bullshit you just wrote above?
Or are you trying to justify why you spent five or six times as much?
Why don't you just tell the truth which is you enjoy paying too much?

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 04.08.21 um 16:07 schrieb Heron:

> Do you believe all that unbelievable bullshit you just wrote above?
> Or are you trying to justify why you spent five or six times as much?
> Why don't you just tell the truth which is you enjoy paying too much?

You are disqualifying yourself and qualify as Troll:

Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <see6uu$hue$1...@gioia.aioe.org>

[nospam]

In article <see6uu$hue$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Heron

iphones are not 'five or six times as much' for similar specs.

there are very cheap android phones, but they don't do as much and will
be obsolete in a year or two.

[knuttle]

On 8/3/2021 2:29 AM, Your Name wrote:
>> You don't get it most people buy Android because it is built for freedom.
>
> Wrong. Most people buy the cheap (often nasty) Android devices because
> that's all they can sensibly afford.

Wrong. Most people buy Android for the freedom that Apple doesn't give its
iPhone users. You disparage freedom because you enjoy not having freedom.

>> It's the same reason people buy Windows laptops instead of a Chromebook.
>
> Wrong. Most people buy Windows laptops because God-awful Windoze is
> what they're used to from work or school.

Most people buy Windows for the same reason they buy Android which is
Windows gives them the most freedom without the complexity of Linux.

>> The Chromebook locks you into Google just like the iPhone does with Apple.
>> People who buy Android want the freedom they couldn't get with Apple's iOS.
>
> Absolute crap. Most buyers don't know and couldnt care less about being
> supposedly "locked in". They simply want a device that works "well
> enough" and they can afford.

Absolute crap. Nobody wants a Chromebook because it locks them into Google.
Most people want Windows & Android because they don't want to be locked in.
Apple users seem to like the benefits of being locked into using only Apple.

[knuttle]

On 8/3/2021 2:54 AM, nospam wrote:
>> You don't get it most people buy Android because it is built for freedom.
>
> no they don't.

Yes. They do.
Most people buy Android mainly for the freedom that choice provides them.

>> It's the same reason people buy Windows laptops instead of a Chromebook.
>
> two very different use cases.

The Chromebook locking people into Google is the same as Apple with iOS.
Google copied Apple's use case even down to selling to educational accounts.

> schools are buying chromebooks in droves because of the numerous
> advantages they offer.

Yes. There are advantages to locking down the chromebook just as Apple does.
Google copied Apple's lockdown use case even down to selling to schools.

>> The Chromebook locks you into Google just like the iPhone does with Apple.
>
> nope.

Google copied Apple's locking the Chromebook down almost exactly.

>> People who buy Android want the freedom they couldn't get with Apple's iOS.
>
> no, that's not why.

Yes that's why.
People buy Android because of the freedom Android gives them.

> there is no more lock-in with ios than any other operating system.

If you don't know that there is only one app store then you know nothing.
The Chromebook copied Apple's use case exactly by locking people into it

> people who buy android are locked into android. they can't run android
> apps on other devices (outside of emulation which doesn't work well).

If you don't know how open Android is then you know nothing about Android.
It's Apple (and the Chromebook) that lock you into their own app stores.

People buy Android (and Windows) because they want the freedom provided.
People who buy iPhones (and Macs) don't care they're locked into them.

[knuttle]

On 8/2/2021 10:44 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> Yes. The answer would be "it is cheaper than Apple".
>

> And that "cheapness" comes out as expensive in the end.

Many Android phones are in the same price range as Apple iPhones are.

The main reason people buy Android is for the freedom Android allows them.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 04.08.21 um 17:39 schrieb knuttle:

> On 8/3/2021 2:29 AM, Your Name wrote:
>>> You don't get it most people buy Android because it is built for freedom.
>>
>> Wrong. Most people buy the cheap (often nasty) Android devices because
>> that's all they can sensibly afford.
>
> Wrong. Most people buy Android for the freedom that Apple doesn't give its
> iPhone users. You disparage freedom because you enjoy not having freedom.

Utter bullshit.
You are brainwashed.

>>> It's the same reason people buy Windows laptops instead of a Chromebook.
>>
>> Wrong. Most people buy Windows laptops because God-awful Windoze is
>> what they're used to from work or school.
>
> Most people buy Windows for the same reason they buy Android which is
> Windows gives them the most freedom without the complexity of Linux.

More bullshit. You do not know anything about Linux.
Linux is free and easy to use. Windows is the most inferior and at the
same time the most expensive OS with a GUI on any device category.
Private users buy it because they think they know it. But they buy a
Trojan Horse as they do with Android.

>>> The Chromebook locks you into Google just like the iPhone does with Apple.
>>> People who buy Android want the freedom they couldn't get with Apple's iOS.
>>
>> Absolute crap. Most buyers don't know and couldnt care less about being
>> supposedly "locked in". They simply want a device that works "well
>> enough" and they can afford.
>
> Absolute crap. Nobody wants a Chromebook because it locks them into Google.
> Most people want Windows & Android because they don't want to be locked in.
> Apple users seem to like the benefits of being locked into using only Apple.

*ROTFLSTC*
Two Trojan Horses at the same time? Not really!
Complicated and inferior performance on all levels.
I keep my Android completely separate from my Apple/Linux infrastructure.

[Heron]

On 8/4/2021 11:12 AM, nospam wrote:>> On 8/1/2021 9:13 PM, Joerg Lorenz

He wrote bullshit about Windows being more expensive (it's not) because of
Norton (which nobody needs) and then he tried to bullshit us more saying
Windows users have to "upgrade" because of the Norton they didn't install.
https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/blog/best-antivirus/
"Most people can use Windows Defender alone to keep their computers secure."

Then he said the "cheap Android device is obsolete after 3 years" which, if
it's that cheap then it's five or six times cheaper than the iPhone which is
obsolete in just as many years based on the buying cycle of either iPhones
or Android phones being about the same time frames for all smartphones.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/619788/average-smartphone-life/

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 04.08.21 um 17:50 schrieb knuttle:

Big Brother is watching you.
It is prison with no doors to the outside world. It is a bit the same
story like the Americans still believing they live in a free country
because two year old kids can shoot their parents by mistake.

[knuttle]

On 8/4/2021 11:04 AM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> *ROTFLSTC*

Most people buy Windows & Android because they want the freedom of choices.

[sms]

Jorge is wrong of course™ regarding Norton. With Windows 7 and Windows
10 there is no need for an after-market program like Norton, the
capabilities of Norton are build into the OS. Also, the CPUs and
graphics chip are so much faster now that even if you do, unnecessarily,
add a program like Norton to a Windows machine, the performance hit is
lost in the noise. That wasn't the case back in the days of Windows XP
and 65nm Intel Core Duo processors where Norton caused a significant
performance hit.

Of course Symantec is also trying to sell Norton security software for
Mac <https://www.nortonlifelockpartner.com/norton-for-mac.html>.

Remember the W. C. Fields quote of "It's morally wrong to allow a sucker
to keep his money." When Symantec bought Lifelock, my first thought was,
"well that's appropriate,"
<https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/blog/2015/12/lifelock-agrees-pay-100-million-allegedly-violating-ftc-order>.
Are there actually people paying $34.99 per month for Norton 360 with
Lifelock?

Regarding hardware cost, an equivalent Windows desktop is usually less
expensive than a Mac desktop, but not always. If you're looking at Xeon
based workstations, despite the high cost of a Mac Pro, other Xeon based
workstations are also expensive, see
<https://zworkstations.com/mac-pro-vs-hp-z-workstation/> and the big
advantage of the Mac Pro is that you can dual boot Windows which is very
popular in the film-making industry where Final Cut Pro is used for
simpler productions and Avid for Windows is used for productions with a
lot of special effects. While Avid says that they are working on a
version of their software that will run on M1 processors, for now they
are simply saying "In the meantime, we recommend that you continue to
use previously qualified operating systems until further notice." I
wonder if the Apple will do a Mac Pro with multiple M1 processors, I
kind of doubt it since the current market for the Mac Pro would not want
such a product.

A Windows laptop of equivalent performance and quality to a Macbook does
cost nearly as much as a Macbook. Sometimes the cost for Windows
machines is actually higher when you look at commercial Windows laptop
models with extra features not offered on the Macbook Pro such as
internal LTE and 5G modems, touch screens, and active stylus support,
none of which are available yet on Macbooks, but are hopefully coming soon.

Comparisons will really be moot once all the Macs transition to the M1
since almost no Windows users will purchase an M1 based Macbook since
dual boot will no longer be possible and running Windows in a VM would
result in significant performance degradation. Apple essentially wrote
off the business, commercial, scientific, and industrial markets with
the transition to M1, but they had very little of that market anyway
because those users had to run Windows and paying extra for hardware was
not going to happen.

Of course Jorge is wrong of course™ when he claims that Android devices
are obsolete after three years. They continue to function just fine but
they don't get the latest version of the Android OS. And of course with
the average phone replacement cycle at 33.6 months in 2020
<https://www.statista.com/statistics/786876/replacement-cycle-length-of-smartphones-worldwide/>,
updates for five years, while nice, are not such a big deal. Samsung is
now guaranteeing four years of security updates for its Galaxy line.
Even in Western Europe, where the replacement cycle is a staggering 40
months, four years of updates are sufficient (the replacement cycle is
actually predicted to get shorter once 5G deployment is complete
<https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210108005371/en/Strategy-Analytics-Smartphone-Replacement-Cycle-Will-Shorten-to-33-Months-in-Western-Europe-by-2025>.

Also, while iOS definitely wins the prize for privacy, the same can't be
said any more for security; in terms of hacking, the latest Android
phones are now even more secure than iPhones, see
<https://www.indiatvnews.com/technology/news-android-phone-harder-hack-than-iphone-know-how-584609>;
this is a huge accomplishment for Android.

While I appreciate the continuous security updates for my iPhone, the
endless "urgent update" warnings are getting tiring. Updates are being
rolled out on a seemingly weekly basis. I'm beginning to worry since
it's now been 7 whole days since my last iOS update. Can't they modify
the OS so that the security updates don't require a whole version
update? That's what Android does. I believe that that capability is
coming in iOS 15, and it can't come soon enough. At least my Apple Watch
is right now updating to 7.6.1 so I know that security updates are still
occurring.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 04.08.21 um 18:10 schrieb Heron:

> He wrote bullshit about Windows being more expensive (it's not) because of
> Norton (which nobody needs) and then he tried to bullshit us more saying
> Windows users have to "upgrade" because of the Norton they didn't install.
> https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/blog/best-antivirus/
> "Most people can use Windows Defender alone to keep their computers secure."

There is only one way to operate a consumer device securely: The correct
and secure set up of the OS and the application software. Windows
Defender is crap and does not ad to security. Au contraire! You have no
clue what security in IT means. Certainly not Defender or other snakeoil
antivirus software or so called "Firewalls" running on the device that
should be shielded or protected.

> Then he said the "cheap Android device is obsolete after 3 years" which, if
> it's that cheap then it's five or six times cheaper than the iPhone which is
> obsolete in just as many years based on the buying cycle of either iPhones
> or Android phones being about the same time frames for all smartphones.
> https://www.statista.com/statistics/619788/average-smartphone-life/

OS-Support has absolutely nothing to do with the buying cycles.

[knuttle]

On 8/4/2021 12:12 PM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> Big Brother is watching you.
> It is prison with no doors to the outside world. It is a bit the same
> story like the Americans still believing they live in a free country
> because two year old kids can shoot their parents by mistake.

Most people buy Android because they want the freedom Android allows them.
Most Apple users seem to like the many benefits of being locked into Apple.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 04.08.21 um 18:17 schrieb knuttle:

I run a Linux Mint on MacBook. But I guess you have no clue what I want
to tell you.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 04.08.21 um 18:23 schrieb knuttle:

cmd+c and cmd+v
alt+cmd+Backspace

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 04.08.21 um 18:30 schrieb Joerg Lorenz:
> cmd+c and cmd+v
> alt+cmd+Backspace

alt+cmd+PowerButton

[knuttle]

On 8/4/2021 12:25 PM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> Most people buy Windows & Android because they want the freedom of choices.
>> Apple users seem to like the benefits of being locked into using only Apple.
>
> I run a Linux Mint on MacBook. But I guess you have no clue what I want
> to tell you.

I run RedHat on a Windows desktop (and in a virtual machine when I want to).
But I guess you have no clue what you are talking about.

People seem to buy Android & Windows for the freedom they each allow them.
People seem to buy iPhones & Macs because of the benefits of walled gardens.

[nospam]

In article <seecab$mg3$1...@dont-email.me>, knuttle

<keith_...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> >> You don't get it most people buy Android because it is built for freedom.
> >
> > Wrong. Most people buy the cheap (often nasty) Android devices because
> > that's all they can sensibly afford.
>
> Wrong. Most people buy Android for the freedom that Apple doesn't give its
> iPhone users. You disparage freedom because you enjoy not having freedom.

nope. android has no more freedom than ios. it's actually the opposite,
since ios can do a lot of things android cannot.

the limitation is the user and what they can do with whatever they have.

> >> It's the same reason people buy Windows laptops instead of a Chromebook.
> >
> > Wrong. Most people buy Windows laptops because God-awful Windoze is
> > what they're used to from work or school.
>
> Most people buy Windows for the same reason they buy Android which is
> Windows gives them the most freedom without the complexity of Linux.

nonsense. microsoft *loves* to lock people into their ecosystem.

one example was wmv/wma, which they didn't license. the format was
eventually reverse engineered, but it doesn't always work properly in
third party players.

other examples include internet explorer, .net, c#, active-x and much
more. they got into a fair amount of legal trouble too.

> >> The Chromebook locks you into Google just like the iPhone does with Apple.
> >> People who buy Android want the freedom they couldn't get with Apple's iOS.
> >
> > Absolute crap. Most buyers don't know and couldnt care less about being
> > supposedly "locked in". They simply want a device that works "well
> > enough" and they can afford.
>
> Absolute crap. Nobody wants a Chromebook because it locks them into Google.

many people want a chromebook because it's easy to use and offers
features they can't get anywhere else at a price that's very
affordable.

> Most people want Windows & Android because they don't want to be locked in.
> Apple users seem to like the benefits of being locked into using only Apple.

as opposed to being locked into using only google or microsoft, you
mean?

microsoft is famous for lock-in, creating proprietary standards and not
licensing them, which got them into a fair amount of legal trouble.

[nospam]

In article <seecv5$qua$1...@dont-email.me>, knuttle

<keith_...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> >> You don't get it most people buy Android because it is built for freedom.
> >
> > no they don't.
>
> Yes. They do.
> Most people buy Android mainly for the freedom that choice provides them.

it doesn't provide any more freedom than anything else.

the limitation is the user.

> >> It's the same reason people buy Windows laptops instead of a Chromebook.
> >
> > two very different use cases.
>
> The Chromebook locking people into Google is the same as Apple with iOS.

nonsense and the comparison is just silly. they are two wildly
different products for two very different use cases.

> Google copied Apple's use case even down to selling to educational accounts.

no they didn't.

chromebooks are ideal for schools because they use the cloud, which
means any student can use any chromebook and have full access to their
work simply by logging into their account.

also, because chromebooks are cheap, if a student damages one of them,
the loss is minimal, plus they can just grab another chromebook and log
into their account and keep working.

> > schools are buying chromebooks in droves because of the numerous
> > advantages they offer.
>
> Yes. There are advantages to locking down the chromebook just as Apple does.
> Google copied Apple's lockdown use case even down to selling to schools.

you don't understand chromebooks or apple, and quite a bit more.

>
> > people who buy android are locked into android. they can't run android
> > apps on other devices (outside of emulation which doesn't work well).
>
> If you don't know how open Android is then you know nothing about Android.

you clearly don't know anything about ios or chromebooks.

> It's Apple (and the Chromebook) that lock you into their own app stores.

same for google and microsoft.

remember windows 10s, which *only* allowed apps from the microsoft
store?

>
> People buy Android (and Windows) because they want the freedom provided.
> People who buy iPhones (and Macs) don't care they're locked into them.

nonsense.

[nospam]

In article <seeeoi$87a$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

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

> Comparisons will really be moot once all the Macs transition to the M1
> since almost no Windows users will purchase an M1 based Macbook since
> dual boot will no longer be possible and running Windows in a VM would
> result in significant performance degradation.

very few windows users are buying macbooks so even if that were true,
it doesn't actually matter.

> Apple essentially wrote
> off the business, commercial, scientific, and industrial markets with
> the transition to M1,

no they didn't. apple is *extremely* strong in all of those markets and
continues to be strong.

> but they had very little of that market anyway
> because those users had to run Windows and paying extra for hardware was
> not going to happen.

also wrong.

> Of course Jorge is wrong of course when he claims that Android devices
> are obsolete after three years. They continue to function just fine but
> they don't get the latest version of the Android OS.

not having the latest os makes them obsolete.

> And of course with
> the average phone replacement cycle at 33.6 months in 2020

that is a meaningless statistic, which doesn't mean what you think it
does either.

> updates for five years, while nice, are not such a big deal. Samsung is
> now guaranteeing four years of security updates for its Galaxy line.

apple currently is supporting *eight* year old phones with security
updates and *six* year old phones with os updates.

> While I appreciate the continuous security updates for my iPhone, the
> endless "urgent update" warnings are getting tiring. Updates are being
> rolled out on a seemingly weekly basis.

you're lying again. there are no 'urgent update' warnings and the
updates are *not* weekly.

> I'm beginning to worry since
> it's now been 7 whole days since my last iOS update. Can't they modify
> the OS so that the security updates don't require a whole version
> update?

incrementing the version number is so that people know that they have
the latest version.

the update itself is an incremental, and contains only the changed
components.

you consistently get so much wrong.

> That's what Android does. I believe that that capability is
> coming in iOS 15, and it can't come soon enough.

you're confused, as usual.

> At least my Apple Watch
> is right now updating to 7.6.1 so I know that security updates are still
> occurring.

and will continue to occur for many years.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 04.08.21 um 18:42 schrieb knuttle:

> I run RedHat on a Windows desktop

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

*ROTFLSTC*

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 04.08.21 um 18:44 schrieb nospam:

> In article <seecab$mg3$1...@dont-email.me>, knuttle
> <keith_...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> Most people buy Windows for the same reason they buy Android which is
>> Windows gives them the most freedom without the complexity of Linux.
>
> nonsense. microsoft *loves* to lock people into their ecosystem.

+1, Windows is a Trojan Horse.

[sms]

Well I have two Android phones, an Android tablet, one iPhone, one iPad
Pro, and one Apple Watch.

I did not buy the Android devices because I wanted "freedom" I bought
them because they had features and applications that are not available
on iOS.

I did not buy the Apple devices because I wanted to be locked into
Apple. There is one iPad OS app that I use that is no longer offered on
Android tablets. The Apple Watch is far superior to any of the Android
smart watches in most ways (though an old Samsung Tizen watch that I got
at a conference has two nice features that I miss, IR and a camera). The
iPhone I got because I wanted an iPhone when I visited Apple for
meetings and thought that showing appropriate; I continued to need an
iPhone when I got the Apple Watch.

Flagship Android devices are comparably priced to flagship iPhones, and
in fact there are Android "super flaghships" that cost way more than any
iPhone, i.e. the Sony Xperia PRO 5G costs nearly $2500. These "super
flagships" are not mass market devices, they're designed for specific
markets. So price is not really an issue, at least for flagships. But
for el-cheapo phones that sell for very low prices, yes price is an
Android advantage. For many users those phones are perfectly adequate.

[knuttle]

On 8/4/2021 12:44 PM, nospam wrote:
> many people want a chromebook because it's easy to use and offers
> features they can't get anywhere else at a price that's very
> affordable.

Google copied Apple's locked stratagem when they created the Chromebook.
Same idea exactly. Same locked app store concept. Same target market.
The only difference is the price. Which is why schools prefer them.

[knuttle]

On 8/4/2021 12:44 PM, nospam wrote:

>> The Chromebook locking people into Google is the same as Apple with iOS.
>
> nonsense and the comparison is just silly. they are two wildly
> different products for two very different use cases.

People buy Android for the freedom that the Android open design allows them.
Schools buy Chromebooks because they are cheap and locked down like iPads.

The locked down use case with Chromebooks and an iPad is exactly the same.
The only difference is the price. Which is why schools now use Chromebooks.

[knuttle]

On 8/4/2021 2:22 PM, sms wrote:
> I did not buy the Android devices because I wanted "freedom" I bought
> them because they had features and applications that are not available
> on iOS.

That's freedom.

> So price is not really an issue, at least for flagships.

People are buying flagship Androids because Android gives them that freedom.

[sms]

On 8/4/2021 11:41 AM, knuttle wrote:
> On 8/4/2021 2:22 PM, sms wrote:
>> I did not buy the Android devices because I wanted "freedom" I bought
>> them because they had features and applications that are not available
>> on iOS.
>
> That's freedom.

Perhaps, but there was also one application on the iPad that is not
available on Android, and it was an application that I use a tremendous
amount. The company dropped the Android version. So I had the freedom to
use it on the iPad.

[nospam]

In article <seen0k$4nn$1...@dont-email.me>, knuttle

<keith_...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> > I did not buy the Android devices because I wanted "freedom" I bought
> > them because they had features and applications that are not available
> > on iOS.
>
> That's freedom.

you don't understand what freedom means.

there are numerous apps available on ios that aren't available on
android. by your metric, ios is also freedom.

[nospam]

In article <seemj1$1j2$1...@dont-email.me>, knuttle

<keith_...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Google copied Apple's locked stratagem when they created the Chromebook.

you don''t understand either one, or much else.

[Your Name]

On 2021-08-04 15:39:05 +0000, knuttle said:

> On 8/3/2021 2:29 AM, Your Name wrote:
>>> You don't get it most people buy Android because it is built for freedom.
>>

>> Wrong. Most people buy the cheap (often nasty) Android devices because
>> that's all they can sensibly afford.
>
> Wrong. Most people buy Android for the freedom that Apple doesn't give its
> iPhone users. You disparage freedom because you enjoy not having freedom.

Only in the fairyland of your own lunatic delusions.

Another anti-Apple known-nothing moron joins the killfile. :-\

[knuttle]

On 8/4/2021 5:02 PM, nospam wrote:
>> That's freedom.
>
> you don't understand what freedom means.

You don't understand people choose Android for the freedom Android provides.

> there are numerous apps available on ios that aren't available on
> android. by your metric, ios is also freedom.

You don't know anything about Android if you think there is only one
repository - which is what most iOS users are locked into - one repository.

On Android you have the freedom to choose any repositories you want to.

[knuttle]

On 8/4/2021 3:24 PM, sms wrote:
>> That's freedom.
>
> Perhaps, but there was also one application on the iPad that is not
> available on Android, and it was an application that I use a tremendous
> amount. The company dropped the Android version. So I had the freedom to
> use it on the iPad.

Android gives you the freedom to choose any repository you want to use.
You're not stuck with a single repository limited by the whims of Apple.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 04.08.21 um 23:42 schrieb Your Name:

+1