Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Android automatic call recording for free on Apple iOS iPhones sans jailbreaking
10 views
Skip to first unread message
Tomos Davies
May 1, 2017, 9:58:52 AM5/1/17
to
Android is powerful; iOS is crippled in functionality.
That's a verified fact.
For example, Android has free incoming/outgoing automatic call recording of
length (multiple apps) which store the automatically recorded calls limited
only by the size of your internal or external storage cards.
When I mentioned that this useful functionality isn't allowed by Apple for
non-jailbroken Apple iOS phones, nospam says it exists (but doesn't provide
any useful links).
It's not the hardware that cripples what iOS users can do with their phone,
as the hardware on iPhone is actually comparable to Android hardware - so
iPhone hardware certainly *can* automatically record incoming and outgoing
calls for free onto the internal storage of an iPhone.
It's *Apple* who cripples what non-jailbroken iOS apps can do!
Yet, nospam (in another thread about Patty Winter's friend) insists the
functionality exists.
OK. Let's find out the truth, shall we.
Does free incoming/outgoing automatic call recording functionality to
internal storage exist on non-jailbroken Apple iOS phones or not?
Heck, let's make the functionality challenge even simpler for the shackled
iOS users by eliminating the Android freedom to store on the local device
cards any length they can fit.
So let's make the challenge kindergarten simple for the crippled iOS users,
shall we?
Does automatic call recording exist on nonjailbroken iOS phones?
That's a verified fact.
For example, Android has free incoming/outgoing automatic call recording of
length (multiple apps) which store the automatically recorded calls limited
only by the size of your internal or external storage cards.
When I mentioned that this useful functionality isn't allowed by Apple for
non-jailbroken Apple iOS phones, nospam says it exists (but doesn't provide
any useful links).
It's not the hardware that cripples what iOS users can do with their phone,
as the hardware on iPhone is actually comparable to Android hardware - so
iPhone hardware certainly *can* automatically record incoming and outgoing
calls for free onto the internal storage of an iPhone.
It's *Apple* who cripples what non-jailbroken iOS apps can do!
Yet, nospam (in another thread about Patty Winter's friend) insists the
functionality exists.
OK. Let's find out the truth, shall we.
Does free incoming/outgoing automatic call recording functionality to
internal storage exist on non-jailbroken Apple iOS phones or not?
Heck, let's make the functionality challenge even simpler for the shackled
iOS users by eliminating the Android freedom to store on the local device
cards any length they can fit.
So let's make the challenge kindergarten simple for the crippled iOS users,
shall we?
Does automatic call recording exist on nonjailbroken iOS phones?
John McWilliams
May 3, 2017, 12:41:35 PM5/3/17
to
Tomos Davies
May 7, 2017, 11:35:12 AM5/7/17
to
In <news:oed11s$8i3$2...@dont-email.me>, John McWilliams suggested:
>> Does automatic call recording exist on nonjailbroken iOS phones?
>>
> Whatever!
Even nospam can't and won't refute the facts.
The fact is, I could open thread after thread after thread of what app
power exists already on Android that will probably never be on iOS.
Why?
Not because of the hardware.
Apple hardware is only marginally inferior to decent Android hardware.
The reason is that Apple cripples what iOS can do.
>> Does automatic call recording exist on nonjailbroken iOS phones?
>>
> Whatever!
The fact is, I could open thread after thread after thread of what app
power exists already on Android that will probably never be on iOS.
Why?
Not because of the hardware.
Apple hardware is only marginally inferior to decent Android hardware.
The reason is that Apple cripples what iOS can do.
badgolferman
May 7, 2017, 11:41:11 AM5/7/17
to
Maybe it's better to keep the first phone user out of trouble and also
Apple free from lawsuits.
nospam
May 7, 2017, 11:46:34 AM5/7/17
to
In article <oenf0h$cfc$1...@dont-email.me>, badgolferman
> Maybe it's better to keep the first phone user out of trouble and also
> Apple free from lawsuits.
it's more so that apps can't record calls *without* your knowledge.
<REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Isn't recording of phone calls illegal without the other person's consent?
depends where, but the troll doesn't give a shit about what's legal.
> Isn't recording of phone calls illegal without the other person's consent?
> Maybe it's better to keep the first phone user out of trouble and also
> Apple free from lawsuits.
badgolferman
May 7, 2017, 5:29:45 PM5/7/17
to
Voice Recorder (FREE) by TapMedia Ltd https://appsto.re/us/-gq2O.i
John McWilliams
May 7, 2017, 9:03:57 PM5/7/17
to
Tomos Davies
May 7, 2017, 11:07:39 PM5/7/17
to
In <news:070520171146335606%nos...@nospam.invalid>, nospam suggested:
>> Isn't recording of phone calls illegal without the other person's consent?
>
> depends where, but the troll doesn't give a shit about what's legal.
The whole legality thing is only something iOS people bring up because they
can't do it.
It's like their momma tells them they can't wear pink and so, to
rationalize it, they say "oh, pink is for sissies anyway".
The whole legality thing is a red herring.
Like so many other bits of functionality, iOS can't do it not because the
hardware is inferior; the best Apple hardware is only slightly inferior to
the best Android hardware.
The reason you can't do it is because of Apple.
Why?
It's probably what you say below - but it's clear it has nothing to do with
laws (since there are plenty of ways around the laws, e.g., witness what
our rooftop radios do every day to stay within the laws of each country).
>
>> Maybe it's better to keep the first phone user out of trouble and also
>> Apple free from lawsuits.
>
> it's more so that apps can't record calls *without* your knowledge.
Badgolferman,
It has NOTHING to do with laws.
Nothing.
It has everything to do with decisions made by Apple.
What they decide is up to them.
It makes their life easier, for sure, to not have to deal with the user
having the app power that Android users have.
In control there is money.
Apple controls almost everything.
And Apple makes a LOT of money.
>> Isn't recording of phone calls illegal without the other person's consent?
>
> depends where, but the troll doesn't give a shit about what's legal.
can't do it.
It's like their momma tells them they can't wear pink and so, to
rationalize it, they say "oh, pink is for sissies anyway".
The whole legality thing is a red herring.
Like so many other bits of functionality, iOS can't do it not because the
hardware is inferior; the best Apple hardware is only slightly inferior to
the best Android hardware.
The reason you can't do it is because of Apple.
Why?
It's probably what you say below - but it's clear it has nothing to do with
laws (since there are plenty of ways around the laws, e.g., witness what
our rooftop radios do every day to stay within the laws of each country).
>
>> Maybe it's better to keep the first phone user out of trouble and also
>> Apple free from lawsuits.
>
> it's more so that apps can't record calls *without* your knowledge.
It has NOTHING to do with laws.
Nothing.
It has everything to do with decisions made by Apple.
What they decide is up to them.
It makes their life easier, for sure, to not have to deal with the user
having the app power that Android users have.
In control there is money.
Apple controls almost everything.
And Apple makes a LOT of money.
Tomos Davies
May 7, 2017, 11:07:40 PM5/7/17
to
In <news:oenf0h$cfc$1...@dont-email.me>, badgolferman suggested:
> Isn't recording of phone calls illegal without the other person's consent?
> Maybe it's better to keep the first phone user out of trouble and also
> Apple free from lawsuits.
The whole "legality" issue is a complete red herring (same with bit
torrenting apps) but I'll answer your legality questions anyway.
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm familiar with the laws of the USA in general,
where there are 1 party and 2 party states and states without laws
altogether on the topic, I would think.
A one party state is one where only one person has to know about it. This
precludes a third person (not in the conversation) recording the call.
A two party state requires both to know about it.
All states allow you to record conversations involved with safety such as
if you're being threatened or stalked or bothered in a potentially harmful
way. (HINT: it's just like the cellphone laws, in a way, which allow you to
call 911 using your hands.)
In other parts of the world, I'm sure the laws vary, but the USA is all
that I care about so I'll let Rod Speed talk about Australia and others
handle the rest of the world as they see fit (Sobriquet for eastern europe,
for example).
> Isn't recording of phone calls illegal without the other person's consent?
> Maybe it's better to keep the first phone user out of trouble and also
> Apple free from lawsuits.
torrenting apps) but I'll answer your legality questions anyway.
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm familiar with the laws of the USA in general,
where there are 1 party and 2 party states and states without laws
altogether on the topic, I would think.
A one party state is one where only one person has to know about it. This
precludes a third person (not in the conversation) recording the call.
A two party state requires both to know about it.
All states allow you to record conversations involved with safety such as
if you're being threatened or stalked or bothered in a potentially harmful
way. (HINT: it's just like the cellphone laws, in a way, which allow you to
call 911 using your hands.)
In other parts of the world, I'm sure the laws vary, but the USA is all
that I care about so I'll let Rod Speed talk about Australia and others
handle the rest of the world as they see fit (Sobriquet for eastern europe,
for example).
Tomos Davies
May 7, 2017, 11:23:01 PM5/7/17
to
In <news:oeo3e3$l1k$1...@dont-email.me>, badgolferman suggested:
> I wouldn't want an automatic one myself. Is this close enough.
>
>
> Voice Recorder (FREE) by TapMedia Ltd https://appsto.re/us/-gq2O.i
There is huge power in automation.
Anything else is just audio recording.
It's like the difference between an automatically driven car and one you
drive manually. The Big Thing(TM) is the automation; not the audio
recording.
That is, if you just want *manual* audio recording, those apps abound.
I took a look at your app:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/voice-recorder-free/id685310398
which might work on phone calls, but there are plenty of phone recording
apps that are probably more to the point.
I think all of them (on iOS) cost money though, last I checked anyway, so,
like most things iOS, your choices are limited by how much money someone
wants to wring out of you as they're usually subscription services.
One reason to *never* pay for voice recording apps, by the way, is that
your culpable deniability and ability to chuck the sd card goes out the
window once you pay for the privilege and perhaps even store your data on
someone's servers.
So, subscription services for phone recording is a "bad idea"(TM).
So is storing the recorded audio on a cloud server.
The Good Idea(TM) is just turning on automatic voice recording using a free
app, and, voila. Your last 200 phone calls are saved, in their entirety, to
your sd card, where the 201st call wipes out the first as it loops back
through them.
That's how the free Android app works anyway.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.appstar.callrecorder
If you want more than 200 calls at a time, you can then pay for an upgrade.
However, if you use any decent file redirector, you can have the directory
where the calls are stored moved the moment the file closes, so the app
thinks there is only one file at any time.
This is what I use for that purpose (but it's completely optional):
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.tobino.redirectsfree
--
Jolly Roger will insist that we an get automatic call recording on iOS if
we jailbreak the device, which I don't doubt (even though most of what JR
says is wrong - he is probably right on that one); so it's not the hardware
that limits what you can do - it's Apple who limits what apps can do.
> I wouldn't want an automatic one myself. Is this close enough.
>
>
> Voice Recorder (FREE) by TapMedia Ltd https://appsto.re/us/-gq2O.i
Anything else is just audio recording.
It's like the difference between an automatically driven car and one you
drive manually. The Big Thing(TM) is the automation; not the audio
recording.
That is, if you just want *manual* audio recording, those apps abound.
I took a look at your app:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/voice-recorder-free/id685310398
which might work on phone calls, but there are plenty of phone recording
apps that are probably more to the point.
I think all of them (on iOS) cost money though, last I checked anyway, so,
like most things iOS, your choices are limited by how much money someone
wants to wring out of you as they're usually subscription services.
One reason to *never* pay for voice recording apps, by the way, is that
your culpable deniability and ability to chuck the sd card goes out the
window once you pay for the privilege and perhaps even store your data on
someone's servers.
So, subscription services for phone recording is a "bad idea"(TM).
So is storing the recorded audio on a cloud server.
The Good Idea(TM) is just turning on automatic voice recording using a free
app, and, voila. Your last 200 phone calls are saved, in their entirety, to
your sd card, where the 201st call wipes out the first as it loops back
through them.
That's how the free Android app works anyway.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.appstar.callrecorder
If you want more than 200 calls at a time, you can then pay for an upgrade.
However, if you use any decent file redirector, you can have the directory
where the calls are stored moved the moment the file closes, so the app
thinks there is only one file at any time.
This is what I use for that purpose (but it's completely optional):
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.tobino.redirectsfree
--
Jolly Roger will insist that we an get automatic call recording on iOS if
we jailbreak the device, which I don't doubt (even though most of what JR
says is wrong - he is probably right on that one); so it's not the hardware
that limits what you can do - it's Apple who limits what apps can do.
Tomos Davies
May 7, 2017, 11:45:09 PM5/7/17
to
In <news:oeofvo$ohb$1...@dont-email.me>, John McWilliams suggested:
Nospam makes it all up, playing to the iOS gullible.
Here is nospam's original response.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/clYb_hfa2ds/9_pWkm6NBgAJ
Notice that he plays to the gullible by omitting what matters by way of
functionality...
> Tell us then, how do you do something as trivially simple as automatic call
> recording on iOS without jailbreaking it?
install a call recording app. duh.
here's a few:
<http://www.tapeacall.com>
<http://www.telestarint.net/call-recorder-ltwqw>
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/call-recorder-free-record-phone-calls-for-iphone/id637819447?mt=8>
>> The reason is that Apple cripples what iOS can do.
>>
> OK.
Remember I only speak verifiable facts.
>>
> OK.
Nospam makes it all up, playing to the iOS gullible.
Here is nospam's original response.
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/clYb_hfa2ds/9_pWkm6NBgAJ
Notice that he plays to the gullible by omitting what matters by way of
functionality...
> Tell us then, how do you do something as trivially simple as automatic call
> recording on iOS without jailbreaking it?
install a call recording app. duh.
here's a few:
<http://www.tapeacall.com>
<http://www.telestarint.net/call-recorder-ltwqw>
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/call-recorder-free-record-phone-calls-for-iphone/id637819447?mt=8>
Rod Speed
May 8, 2017, 8:30:46 PM5/8/17
to
"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:oenf0h$cfc$1...@dont-email.me...
> Maybe it's better to keep the first phone user out of trouble
it easy to do. Pain in the arse IMO.
> and also Apple free from lawsuits.
Rod Speed
May 9, 2017, 2:48:05 AM5/9/17
to
news:oeo3e3$l1k$1...@dont-email.me...
I do. It isnt always possible to know in advance when you will
want to refresh your memory about some detail of what was said.
Nope, its not completely automatic and I don’t
want to have them get all my phone conversations.
want to refresh your memory about some detail of what was said.
Nope, its not completely automatic and I don’t
want to have them get all my phone conversations.
Tomos Davies
May 9, 2017, 1:41:01 PM5/9/17
to
In <news:end712...@mid.individual.net>, Rod Speed suggested:
>> I wouldn't want an automatic one myself.
>
> I do. It isnt always possible to know in advance when you will
> want to refresh your memory about some detail of what was said.
>
>> Is this close enough.
>
>> Voice Recorder (FREE) by TapMedia Ltd https://appsto.re/us/-gq2O.i
>
> Nope, its not completely automatic and I don┤
Automation is a functionality in and of itself.
The reason for wanting the automation is the same reason you have calendar
apps beep you and why you have bells indicating period changes at the high
school and why you have automatic file redirectors which move the files the
moment they are written to and closed, etc.
You have automation in your trash pickup, and automation in your sprinkler
system, and automation in on street lights, etc.
Sure, nospam might say that putting a cop in every street corner is a
manual equivalent of the functionality of automation, but my argument is
that automation is a functionality in and of itself.
It's not that the Apple iOS devices can't be automated (since Jolly Roger
constantly tells us that the apps exist on Cydia); it's just that Apple
doesn't allow you that power.
Android does.
>> I wouldn't want an automatic one myself.
>
> I do. It isnt always possible to know in advance when you will
> want to refresh your memory about some detail of what was said.
>
>> Is this close enough.
>
>> Voice Recorder (FREE) by TapMedia Ltd https://appsto.re/us/-gq2O.i
>
> want to have them get all my phone conversations.
I agree completely with Rod Speed.
Automation is a functionality in and of itself.
The reason for wanting the automation is the same reason you have calendar
apps beep you and why you have bells indicating period changes at the high
school and why you have automatic file redirectors which move the files the
moment they are written to and closed, etc.
You have automation in your trash pickup, and automation in your sprinkler
system, and automation in on street lights, etc.
Sure, nospam might say that putting a cop in every street corner is a
manual equivalent of the functionality of automation, but my argument is
that automation is a functionality in and of itself.
It's not that the Apple iOS devices can't be automated (since Jolly Roger
constantly tells us that the apps exist on Cydia); it's just that Apple
doesn't allow you that power.
Android does.
Tomos Davies
May 9, 2017, 1:54:06 PM5/9/17
to
In <news:oeooak$2vq$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Tomos Davies suggested:
> One reason to *never* pay for voice recording apps, by the way, is that
> your culpable deniability and ability to chuck the sd card goes out the
> window once you pay for the privilege and perhaps even store your data on
> someone's servers.
Freudian slip perhaps?
It's not "culpable deniability".
It's plausible deniability!
Sheesh. I'm officially embarrassed by my error.
Luckily, nobody seems to have noticed my error.
http://barrettworks.com/culpable-deniability-innocence/
[quote]
Culpable deniability is an interesting concept that reached its zenith in
2009 at the height of the Iran-Contra affair. This term implies that
someone can be held accountable because they stood by and watched while
others participated in an illegal or immoral activity.[/quote]
> One reason to *never* pay for voice recording apps, by the way, is that
> your culpable deniability and ability to chuck the sd card goes out the
> window once you pay for the privilege and perhaps even store your data on
> someone's servers.
It's not "culpable deniability".
It's plausible deniability!
Sheesh. I'm officially embarrassed by my error.
Luckily, nobody seems to have noticed my error.
http://barrettworks.com/culpable-deniability-innocence/
[quote]
Culpable deniability is an interesting concept that reached its zenith in
2009 at the height of the Iran-Contra affair. This term implies that
someone can be held accountable because they stood by and watched while
others participated in an illegal or immoral activity.[/quote]
0 new messages