An ADULT example of what the iKooks don't understand about modern operating systems

[Andy Burnelli]

*iKooks are completely ignorant of how all modern operating systems update*

See the article for details, where the point is that Apple merely updates
phones for a few years, whereas Android is updated essentially forever.

Apple doesn't advertise how primitive the monolithic iOS update mechanism
is, so the iKooks are completely unaware that _all_ modern operating systems
update differently than does the primitive monolithic iOS update mechanism.

Case in point, (almost) *_all_ Android phones are getting the March update*.

*The March 2022 Google System Update is chock-full of changes*
<https://www.androidcentral.com/phones/the-march-2022-google-system-update-is-chock-full-of-changes>
"Google has released the March 2022 System Updates.
*These updates are available for all Android devices, not just Pixels*
The update will arrive through the Play Store and Play Services."

As is the case whenever a new month rolls around, Google is pushing
these updates out to almost all Android users (not just Pixel phones).

"The Google System Update for March 2022 is now rolling out to
*pretty much anyone who owns an Android device*. In this update,
there are quite a few different bug fixes, including one that
fixes "device connectivity". Additionally, the Play Games Services
profile has been updated, providing users with a way to
"better manage their privacy settings". "

See the article for details, where the point is that Apple merely updates
phones for a few years, whereas Android is updated essentially forever.
--
I don't care that iKooks are uneducated & of low IQ & low self esteem, but
_because_ of that, iKooks believe _everything_ Apple MARKETING feeds them,
but even that I wouldn't care about if iKooks didn't make claims on Usenet
that are always wrong (because they don't understand anything about iOS).

[Steve]

Andy Burnelli wrote:
>
tl;dr. Boring shit.

Fuck right out off utm, Arlen.
If anyone is bored enough to read the rantings of an obsessed aspie
kook they'll know where to find you bleating on about your favourite
whinge.

fu2 set.

[Andy Burnelli]

Steve wrote:

> Fuck right out off utm,

The facts are that threads here are almost completely _not_ related to utm.
How many of these previous threads, for example, are even related to utm?
Sluggish smartphone (Pamela)
Rich Communication Services (Richmond)
O2 gouging (notya)
Keyboards for mobiles (David)
SIM for a new Samsung (David)
Google Contacts (Pamela)
Is a mobile switched on (Pamela)
Presentation numbers (Andrew Gabriel)
Traffic generated by synching apps (Pamela)
Android (Samsung) question (Scott)
Controlling smartplugs (Pamela)
Vodaphone turn off 3G (Tweed)
Jug for Krups coffee machine (Scott)
Emergency call ap (Chris Green)
BlackBerry Still Working (Mark)
Is agreeing to cookies futile (Chris)
How long can a 3 SIM be inactive (Murmansk)
4G Router (Peter)
Phone Reset (Scott)
storm worning (Andy Burns)
Transferring SMS (Pamela)
Extend Ring Time (Steve)
Zoomable Text Processor (Pamela)
App to show connected cell tower (Pamela)
Save to gallery on Android (Pamela)
iFictitious mobile numbers (Scott)
Andother unknown phone icon (Peter Johnson)
Recommissioning vintage phones (Peeler)
Android question (Scott)
Another phone problem (Scott)
Telephone reception vs signal strength (Roger Mills)
Photo Settings (Scott)
Phone icon significance (Peter Johnson)
etc.

[Steve]

Nearly all of these posts are by UK posters to a UK* newsgroup about
UK mobile phones (that's cell phones in American English), or UK
mobile networks.
You aren't in the UK. You aren't using a UK phone or network.
So fuck off with your off topic shit.

[Andy Burns]

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> The facts are that threads here are almost completely _not_ related to utm.

What do you think uk.telecom.mobile is for then?

> How many of these previous threads, for example, are even related to utm?

Almost all of them?

[Andy Burnelli]

Andy Burns wrote:

>> How many of these previous threads, for example, are even related to utm?
>
> Almost all of them?

Hi Andy,

While that Steve troll is an ignorant worthless piece of excrement, I
respect your opinion; hence if you believe those threads have anything
whatsoever to do with u.t.m, then it must be a strange group indeed.

It's easy to show they're not at all related to u.t.m for the most part, but
I don't wish to get into that discussion with _you_ if you truly believe
they are somehow (by some magical decree perhaps?) at all related to the UK.

Nonetheless, since I respect you as a fellow adult, I will beg out and
strive to not post to u.t.m items unrelated to the UK, even as I must
register that almost none of those threads had _anything_ to do with the UK.

If you need me, you know where to find me as I add tremendous value to the
Android newsgroup, and have been adding that value for many years running.

I will not respond further to this thread (nor read further responses).

[Steve]

Andy Burnelli wrote:
>
> Andy Burns wrote:
>
> >> How many of these previous threads, for example, are even related to utm?
> >
> > Almost all of them?
>
> Hi Andy,
>
> While that Steve troll is an ignorant worthless piece of excrement, I
> respect your opinion; hence if you believe those threads have anything
> whatsoever to do with u.t.m, then it must be a strange group indeed.
>
> It's easy to show they're not at all related to u.t.m for the most part, but
> I don't wish to get into that discussion with _you_ if you truly believe
> they are somehow (by some magical decree perhaps?) at all related to the UK.
>
> Nonetheless, since I respect you as a fellow adult, I will beg out and
> strive to not post to u.t.m items unrelated to the UK, even as I must
> register that almost none of those threads had _anything_ to do with the UK.

They are from *UK* posters about *UK* phones and *UK* networks.

> If you need me, you know where to find me as I add tremendous value to the
> Android newsgroup, and have been adding that value for many years running.
>
> I will not respond further to this thread (nor read further responses).

Hmm. I've heard that from you before.
<tinyurl.com/3yre7yx8> or
<http://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3Cr2cl43%246rp%241%
40news.mixmin.net%3E>

[Andy Burnelli]

nospam wrote:

>> Having a college education in and of itself sets me apart from the iKooks.
>
> whatever you supposedly had was wasted.

I know you nospam, perhaps far better than you know yourself.

What's interesting is decades ago I had heard about the flame wars between
the Apple (usually Mac) aficionados and those on the Windows side, but I
wasn't part of them (as I was using tin/rn and the like on SunOS/Solaris in
the beginning) until I got my iPads to test out how well they worked with
Linux and asked the child-like Apple newsgroups for guidance & help.

Having been already familiar with the adult OS newsgroups (mostly Linux and
Windows), I had _expected_ the people on the iOS newsgroup to be adults.

To their inestimable credit, some were helpful such as Michele Steiner (who
started m.p.m.i, I think) & David Empson, but wholly unprepossessing
child-like people like you were also here, unfortunately, & you still are.

My first questions were about the iPad all of a sudden no longer working
with Linux simply by an iOS update (lesson learned the very first time),
where I came here to ask for help from those who supposedly know iOS.

The answers that you and the other child-like iKooks provided were always
not only wrong, but purposefully unhelpful (as if you literally _hated_ the
fact that the Apple product offended you when it turned out to be broken).

Rest assured, this attitude that the mother ship can do no wrong is _only_
found on the child-like Apple newsgroups - not Linux or Windows or Android.

Only the Apple newsgroups.

What at first confused me is how wrong people like you always were, where I
couldn't figure out (at first) in any given post if you were just
incredibly stupid or if you were simply a despicable brazen liar, since you
couldn't possibly _believe_ a word you said when people asked for help.
a. You'd deny everything they experienced
b. You'd claim you told them how (and yet, you didn't and you can't)
c. You'd fabricate masses of app functionality that simply doesn't exist
d. You'd tell people they have no right to any functionality they'd expect
etc.

It's when you and Jolly Roger & Lewis _repeatedly & _purposefully_
(sadistically so!) sent numerous innocent people on brutally perverse
doomed-to-fail barbarous wild-goose chases simply because all you iKooks
hated to admit iOS couldn't do something, that I realized you are a truly
disgusting and brutally vicious human being (much like Putin is).

It bothers you not a whit that you don't own a "nice" bone in your body.

All you iKooks are despicable worthless pieces of shit, personality wise.
a. You all _hate_ that Apple products are never what Apple said they were
b. So you brazenly _fabricate_ imaginary functionality that doesn't exist
c. Simply because you can't admit to _yourself_ that iOS is crippled.

And then, much like Putin does, you _repeat_ your brazen fabrications of
functionality that, by then, there's zero chance that you're not lying.

That's when I learned how viciously despicable you iKooks truly are.

The fact that iOS is crippled isn't what makes you all pieces of shit.
It's the fact you will brazenly lie about it because you hate that fact.

You don't give a shit that you sent innocent people on wild goose chases.
That's the clearest indicator of all that you iKooks are pieces of shit.

There's not a single sincere purposefully helpful "nice" bone in your body.
--
Jolly Roger, Lewis, nospam, Joerg Lorenz, Alan Baker, Rod Speed, Snit et al

[*Hemidactylus*]

Andy Burnelli <sp...@nospam.com> wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>
>>> Having a college education in and of itself sets me apart from the iKooks.
>>
>> whatever you supposedly had was wasted.
>
> I know you nospam, perhaps far better than you know yourself.
>

Knowing nospam here you’re the idiot. I doubt you know yourself. If you
did the shame alone would shut you up.

[snip]

[Andy Burnelli]

Joel wrote:

> I actually have had some differences with nospam, over the years, but
> in this thread, they have been pretty consistently accurate.

Hi Joel,

I have studied nospam, and I've studied all these strange iKooks for years.

As you noted, he has the "potential" to actually be helpful whereas most of
the iKooks do not (e.g., Alan Baker, who has been pecking at this thread).

All I care, really, is to help you and the others, and to learn from them,
and, since an Apple newsgroup is involved, my goal is also to point out who
they are.

I started that years ago when I watched Jolly Roger & nospam _sadistically_
lead an innocent user on a doomed-to-fail wild-goose chase, which
infuriated me because they were cruelly doing it on purpose (by using
innuendo which nospam always uses - so I know they're just liars even more
than they're ignorant). They won't get away with that with me.

> I tend
> to disagree that Apple's desktop/laptop hardware is competitively
> priced *in a head to head comparison of the individual parts*, but as
> I suggested, it can be more durable, particularly in laptops, so it
> could be fair to say it *is* competitively priced on that basis.

Well, to agree with you, nospam is the king of cherry picking one or two
(never more than a minor meaningless handful) of Apple devices which don't
fit the general mold - so it matters a lot when we talk overall costs.

I own plenty of Apple devices, and I've studied the pricing also, where, in
general, Apple's not one of the most profitable companies on the planet for
no good reason. They hire brilliant marketing people whose strategies, are
like those of China, in that they last for decades.

You see Apple's fundamental strategy everywhere, even as it seems like each
item is different - they're quite clever - for example, Apple's fundamental
strategy on iPhones is to remove functionality from the user so that Apple
can then constrain the users' remaining choices.

They make tons of profit on this one simple strategy, which raises the
overall cost in the end because your choices have been limited by Apple.

I don't know if I need to provide examples, but not providing the sd slot
is one, because it constrains the user, just as removing the 3.5mm jack
constrains the user, just as not providing the proper charger causes the
user to frantically buy it back (usually when they're at the APple store
because who wants a dead iPhone or a new car with old tires by way of
analogy), etc.

Even the laughably puny substandard el cheapo expensive batteries Apple
cleverly inserts into the iPhone are designed to limit your choices,
although that's in the long run where the phone will age below capacity
(due to pure physics) sooner than a phone using a modern battery inside.

Everything about Apple products is designed with the strategy of limiting
your choices so that you're forced to buy back what Apple has constrained.

They're not one of the most profitable companies on the planet for their
products, that's for sure, as their MARKETING is quite stellar indeed!

BTW, it's a running joke on the Apple newsgroups that nospam has only 7
excuses for why Apple does _everything_ Apple does where one of those seven
reaqsons is "nobody wants it" and "nobody needs it", e.g., when you ask him
why the iPHone can't do automatica call recording, or run a system wide
on-device firewall, or swap out the web browser for something private like
the Guardian's TOR browser, or graphically dispay Wi-Fi signal strength for
all nearby access points, or change the name of an app icon, or move icons
around the screen where you want them, or delete a default app, or set the
default to any app you want, or spoof the gps location, or installing apps
without the apple id, or using a different app repository, use a free
apk/ipa on another phone, save the apk/ipa upon install, extract that
apk/ipa for re-use after it's installed, etc.

All these things _every_ operating system _except_ iOS has, and yet, nospam
says that "nobody wants it" and "nobody needs it" for each & every one.

> And
> the iPhone is certainly priced in a way reflective of its standing in
> the smartphone industry. I wouldn't buy one, but that's just
> preference, not a more elite status than someone else.

Actually we ran a study which found that the iPhone is not "normal" in the
consumer electronics industry, where in general (actually, almost always),
consumer electronics gets (a) better, (b) faster, and (c) cheaper over the
years.

Only extremely highly marketed products can buck that trend, which, you
guessed it, an iPhone is. It's the iPhone, IMHO, which pulls up the prices
of "equivalently priced" Androids, more so than the benefit of the product.

Because of Apple's stellar marketing, Apple produces more gimmicks than you
can shake a stick at - and - sadly to affirm - those gimmicks work!
<https://youtu.be/1S8L7t2tu0U> *Brand new exciting YELLOW! iPhone 14!!!!!*

I'm never not going to say Apple marketing is as incredibly brilliant as
the Apple consumer who falls for these mere gimmicks is incredibly stupid.

For example, people are swayed by marketing not to realize the iPhone is
the most insecure phone in history for five years running, with more
zero-day bugs told to Apple (by definition, Apple never finds them) than
any other smartphone on this planet - e.g., NSO's Pegasus infects the
kernel of only Apple devices - never once for Android devices...

These huge holes in Apple's product are not marketed by Apple, of course,
where the very fact that iOS is the _only_ primitive monolith of all the
consumer operating system is the main reason that _half_ those zero-day
bugs are exploited in the wild before Apple rolls out yet another of their
primitive monolithic releases (which only slightly changed in iOS 16).

What Apple markets, instead, is the face-id gimmick, which is nothing more
than telling people that their own wives and children, friends and
neighbors, are their biggest threat - which is why when nospam compares
Apple's gimmicks to Samsung's copy of Apple's gimmick, I tell him that it's
meaningless to compare what is merely a marketing gimmick which every
company, Samsung included, would love to copy since it works on idiots.

Sigh. I could go on, but suffice to say that I agree with you that
nospam, of all these rather strange quite abnormal iKooks, has the most
capacity to actually contribute to a technical discussion.

However his cruel sadism and delight in sending innocent people on wild
goose chases is what tells me he's an unprepossessing cruel unhelpful
person, whose only goal, it seems, is to defend Apple's honor at any price.

[notya...@gmail.com]

Quite agree. He seems to forget that the reason that there are crApple afficionados is precisely because they neither need nor want to know about modern operating systems only that "it works" and crApple will provide this albeit at an inflated price.

Those of us who are techie haven't touched crApple products for forty years.

Interestingly
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-competitive_practices_of_Apple_Inc.
has mysteriously disappeared...

[Andy Burnelli]

Jolly Roger wrote:

>> Doesn't Apple say that you should buy a new device if you want the
>> full security updates that Apple provides only for iOS 16 and iPadOS
>> 16?
>>
>> An iOS half patch, while better than none, is still only half an iOS
>> patch.
>
> You have yet to point out the specific vulnerabilities you claim aren't
> patched in iOS 15.

It's no longer shocking how much the iKooks _hate_ Apple's own policies.
Every single belief strongly held by iKooks turns out to be make believe.

*Where are Jolly Roger's make-believe purely imaginary fantastical*
*reference cites backing his belief system OS 15 is fully patched?*

HINT: Jolly Roger's child-like belief system is purely imaginary.
These strange infantile iKooks still believe in Santa Claus.

What Jolly Roger owns is a belief system which is devoid of any facts.
Literally, for _years_ the iKooks have always _lied_ about Apple's updates.
<https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>

Even *Apple was caught lying* about _all_ updates other than the latest.
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>

The only OS that Apple promises to fully patch with all known bugs, is the
latest one & only single operating system (which, currently, is iOS 16).
<https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a/web>

Any iOS device that can't take iOS 16 you may as well throw into the trash.
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to prove how all iKooks think like small children.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-04-11, Andy Burnelli <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>>> Doesn't Apple say that you should buy a new device if you want the
>>> full security updates that Apple provides only for iOS 16 and iPadOS
>>> 16?
>>>
>>> An iOS half patch, while better than none, is still only half an iOS
>>> patch.
>>
>> You have yet to point out the specific vulnerabilities you claim
>> aren't patched in iOS 15.
>
> It's no longer shocking how much the iKooks _hate_ Apple's own
> policies. Every single belief strongly held by iKooks turns out to be
> make believe.
>
> *Where are Jolly Roger's make-believe purely imaginary fantastical*
> *reference cites backing his belief system OS 15 is fully patched?*
>
> HINT: Jolly Roger's child-like belief system is purely imaginary.
> These strange infantile iKooks still believe in Santa Claus.
>
> What Jolly Roger owns is a belief system which is devoid of any facts.
> Literally, for _years_ the iKooks have always _lied_ about Apple's
> updates.
>

> Even *Apple was caught lying* about _all_ updates other than the
> latest.
>

> The only OS that Apple promises to fully patch with all known bugs, is
> the latest one & only single operating system (which, currently, is
> iOS 16).
>

> Any iOS device that can't take iOS 16 you may as well throw into the
> trash.

As expected, you still can't point out the specific vulnerabilities you
claim aren't patched in iOS 15. Like a child caught in a lie, you resort
to ad hominem attacks and repeat the same old tired lies over and over
because it's all you know to do, all while claiming superiority over
everyone else. It's a pathetic display of juvenile mentality. You're a
sad, little man Arlen.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[Andy Burnelli]

Jolly Roger wrote:

> As expected, you still can't point out the specific vulnerabilities you
> claim aren't patched in iOS 15.

My belief system is based on facts - facts which Apple themselves supplied.

<https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a/>
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>
<https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>

Your belief system is based only on a make believe world of your fantasies.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-04-11, Andy Burnelli <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:

> Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> As expected, you still can't point out the specific vulnerabilities
>> you claim aren't patched in iOS 15.
>
> My belief system is based on facts - facts which Apple themselves
> supplied.
>

> Your belief system is based only on a make believe world of your
> fantasies.

As expected, you still can't point out the specific vulnerabilities you
claim aren't patched in iOS 15.

[Andy Burnelli]

Jolly Roger wrote:

> As expected, you still can't point out the specific vulnerabilities you
> claim aren't patched in iOS 15.

What you don't understand is that I pointed to Apple saying they don't
& won't patch them - which - you don't comprehend means they're not patched
even if Apple knows about them - because Apple says very clearly they will
not fully patch any release other than the one latest iOS & macOS release.

<https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>\
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>

What's no longer shocking is you iKooks are ignorant of Apple's own policy.
<https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a/>

For years, you claimed Apple patched what even Apple won't claim to have patched.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-04-11, Andy Burnelli <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:

> Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> As expected, you still can't point out the specific vulnerabilities
>> you claim aren't patched in iOS 15.
>
> What you don't understand is that I pointed to Apple saying they don't
> & won't patch them - which - you don't comprehend means they're not
> patched even if Apple knows about them - because Apple says very
> clearly they will not fully patch any release other than the one
> latest iOS & macOS release.
>

> What's no longer shocking is you iKooks are ignorant of Apple's own
> policy.
>

> For years, you claimed Apple patched what even Apple won't claim to
> have patched.

As expected, you still can't point out the specific vulnerabilities you
claim aren't patched in iOS 15.

[Bob Campbell]

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

> As expected, you still can't point out the specific vulnerabilities you
> claim aren't patched in iOS 15.

Of course not.

I always wonder who is the alleged “adult” he is referring to in these
childish topics.

[Andy Burnelli]

Jolly Roger wrote:

> As expected, you still can't point out the specific vulnerabilities you
> claim aren't patched in iOS 15.

Only fools dispute facts...
<https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>

1. The entire belief system of the iKooks is _completely_ imaginary.
2. Jolly Roger can't find a _single_ fact backing up his belief system.
3. The entire belief system of these iKooks is completely wishful thinking.

It's like the iKooks _still_ believe in the imaginary Easter Bunny.

FACT:
*Apple says they do NOT fully patch any release other than iOS 16*
<https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a/>

NORMAL ASSESSMENT of that fact:
From _that_ fact, a normal person believes what Apple put in writing.

NORMAL ASSESSMENT of that fact:
All normal people assess that Apple does what Apple says they do.

But not iKooks.
The iKooks are _not_ normal people. They're stupid people. IQ of around 40.

IKOOK ASSESSMENT of that fact:
From _that_ very same fact, the iKooks assess that Apple must have lied.

Jesus Christ.
Who is as stupid as these iKooks are?
I've never met anyone in real life who can't process any simple facts.

It's like the iKooks still believe in the Easter Bunny.
Their make-believe belief systems are comprised only of wishful thinking.

No facts.

My assessment of iKook behavior is...
a. They all suffer from no education and abnormally low IQs
b. Such that they gravitate to Apple's brilliant advertising
c. And yet, they think Apple lied when Apple publishes their release method

FACT:
Apple said they do NOT fully update any release but the latest
a. That's iOS 16 and no other release, and,
b. That's macOS 13 and no other release.

That's just a fact.
*Only fools dispute facts* (that's _why_ they're fools after all)
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>

[nospam]

In article <u16ip2$13rpi$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Andy Burnelli
<nos...@nospam.net> wrote:

>
> Only fools dispute facts...

that explains your voluminous posts.

[Andy Burnelli]

nospam wrote:

>> Only fools dispute facts...
>
> that explains your voluminous posts.

What's interesting is that my posts would be a billionth of what they are
if you iKooks didn't dispute every fact you _hate_ about Apple products.

Like Snit who disputed two hundred times (literally) that iOS can't do
something as trivial as graph the Wi-Fi signal strength over time...
*It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/PZuec56EWB0>

All you low-IQ iKooks disputed that simple fact - which only fools do:
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0>

Snit went way beyond even what you iKooks do, nospam, to dispute facts:
<https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo> Low-IQ iKooks can't see the fatal flaw!

So you're right, nospam, that I would post a lot less if you iKooks
didn't own completely imaginary make-believe belief systems about iPhones.

For example...

Jolly Roger has disputed scores of times this simple fact that Apple was
forced (by security researchers) to recently admit they lied about updates.
<https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>

And yet, it's just a fact Apple has never fully patched older releases:
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>

Even Apple published that fact when security researchers forced Apple to:
<https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a/>

Nobody but a fool disputes facts.
iKooks, unfortunately, are fools.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-04-12, Andy Burnelli <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> As expected, you still can't point out the specific vulnerabilities
>> you claim aren't patched in iOS 15.
>
> Only fools dispute facts...
>

> Blah blah blah

As expected, you still can't point out the specific vulnerabilities you
claim aren't patched in iOS 15.

[Andy Burnelli]

Jolly Roger wrote:

> As expected, you still can't point out the specific vulnerabilities you
> claim aren't patched in iOS 15.

The entire belief system of an iKooks requires them to act like small
children who can't process the fact that the Easter Bunny is imaginary.

I gave you Apple's policy stating they fully patch only the latest release.
<https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/about-software-updates-depc4c80847a/>

I also provided the security researcher impetus which forced Apple to
clarify that Apple has never fully updated anything but the latest release.
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/apple-clarifies-security-update-policy-only-the-latest-oses-are-fully-patched/>

It's not me stating this fact - it's _everyone_ stating this fact.
<https://hothardware.com/news/apple-admits-only-fully-patches-security-flaws-in-latest-os-releases>

What makes the iKooks so strange they can't even believe what Apple said?
*It's like telling a five year old that the Easter Bunny isn't real*

Only fools dispute facts.
That's why they're fools.