XPost: comp.mobile.android, misc.phone.mobile.iphone

In article <tug9c1$1ctc3$1@paganini.bofh.team>, Andy Burnelli <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:

Can you (or Steve) please explain better what Steve's argument is?

trolling

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, comp.sys.mac.advocacy

nospam wrote:

In article <tuksm2$258vo$1@paganini.bofh.team>, Andy Burnelli <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:

The hardware bits are likely all built in, as part of the Qualcomm
modem, but they decided to not include this capability in iPadOS.

because that's how they were able to get cheaper ipad data plans which
can be activated on the device itself and benefits far more people
(i.e., everyone with a cellular ipad) versus the tiny number of people
who might want to use an ipad as a phone.

Hehhehhehh... good one... nospam... that's funny. It's a good joke.

it's not a joke.

You can't make those ungodly profits off of an intelligent consumer,
nospam, so for you to claim Apple tries to lower consumer costs, is a joke.

Everything Apple does is to lead the ignorant sheep to slaughter.
Meanwhile, regarding your joke, Apple is laughing all the way to the bank.

You don't really think Apple is as stupid as you just claimed, do you?
Apple crippled cellular iPads for the same reason they cripple everything.

they didn't cripple anything.

You forget that while you've never used an Android device in your entire
life, I own both platforms - and - get this - I use them _both_ every day.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Xq5SpS4D/tmopromo02.jpg> Half my devices are iOS

To compare Android functionality to iOS is to _know_ iOS is crippled.
To claim iOS isn't crippled is to not understand a thing about Android.

ipads were launched with an optional no-contract pay-as-you-go $15/mo
or $30/mo data plan, which was much cheaper than what was available on
phones (ios or android) and could be activated and deactivated on the
device as needed without needing to go to a store or web site.

a couple of years later, apple introduced a universal sim (what later
became an e-sim), which was not tied to only one carrier. that meant a
user could *switch* carriers at any time for any reason, without
needing to get another sim. this was particularly useful for travelers,
who could activate their ipad with a few taps upon arrival.

that's also how t-mobile was able to offer a 200mb plan for free, which
they blocked on phones.

The fact is I have that $200MB/month free tablet SIM and it works on both Android and on iOS so clearly there's no advantage at all on the iPad.
<https://i.postimg.cc/nhpbcP50/tmopromo04.jpg> free tablet SIM card

that's quite a lot of functionality, the very opposite of crippled.

As the most basic of the simplest of all possible examples, just to show
you how shockingly crippled iOS is, it can't even list all the apps you've installed on it into an editable text file for God's sake, nospam.

Rest assured I know if you _add_ a few thousand dollars of PC hardware,
then (and only then) can you do these simplest of things with iOS.

I can't think of a _simpler_ task for iOS, and yet it can't even do that!

*If anyone says iOS is not crippled, then they have never used iOS*

Or... they're joking...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2023-03-12 10:23, Andy Burnelli wrote:

nospam wrote:

In article <tuksm2$258vo$1@paganini.bofh.team>, Andy Burnelli
<nospam@nospam.net> wrote:

The hardware bits are likely all built in, as part of the Qualcomm
modem, but they decided to not include this capability in iPadOS.

because that's how they were able to get cheaper ipad data plans which >>>> can be activated on the device itself and benefits far more people
(i.e., everyone with a cellular ipad) versus the tiny number of people >>>> who might want to use an ipad as a phone.

Hehhehhehh... good one... nospam... that's funny. It's a good joke.

it's not a joke.

You can't make those ungodly profits off of an intelligent consumer,
nospam, so for you to claim Apple tries to lower consumer costs, is a joke.

So Samsung doesn't make "ungodly profits" off its top offerings, Arlen?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: comp.mobile.android, misc.phone.mobile.iphone

On 2023-03-13 17:38, sms wrote:

On 3/13/2023 8:59 AM, JAB wrote:

<snip>

Can someone explain why they can't agree on whether it's the same or not?

LOL, a lot of non-technical people confuse VoLTE with LTE. That is the
source of the confusion.

Simply put, voice calls (and SMS) that use VoLTE are treated differently
than LTE data but many people don't understand this and think that voice calls and data are treated the same by the network.

VoLTE has prioritization for voice packets. So if the LTE network is congested, with low data rates and high latency and jitter, voice calls
are not affected (or less affected) if they are using VoLTE.

This is basic for telephony.

It goes back many years. For instance, on landlines with digital
switching, if the network was congested, there was a reserved capacity
for priority users, like government services. These things still have to
be supported by the new technologies.

A service like Google Voice, TextNow, or other VOIP apps that are using
LTE data, but are not VoLTE, can suffer if the network is congested
because they don't have priority.

"4G technology allows for the prioritization and transmission of voice traffic as packets with higher priority via the data plane. That is essentially VoLTE. The control plane packets have the highest priority.
In essence, VoLTE is a sort of IP telephony (VoIP) adapted for use over cellular networks," <https://usa.kaspersky.com/blog/volte-insecurity/6233/>

"He who must not be named" can learn about VoLTE by reading the VoLTE Implementation Guide at <https://www.gsma.com/aboutus/workinggroups/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/VoLTE-Implementation-Guide-Jan-2021.pdf>. That should help him understand how it works.

BTW, ATA Analog Telephone Adapter) devices like the Ooma and the Obi
will also prioritize voice packets over data packets if installed and configured correctly, though if the broadband network is overly
congested even that prioritization may not be sufficient to ensure the
best voice quality.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: comp.mobile.android, misc.phone.mobile.iphone

On 13.03.23 20:28, nospam wrote:

Simply put, voice calls (and SMS) that use VoLTE are treated differently
than LTE data but many people don't understand this and think that voice
calls and data are treated the same by the network.

they're both data. how they are treated by the network is irrelevant.

if they're as similar as you say, why doesn't the ipad do what the android tablets can do when you put the sim card into each of them & try to use it?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: comp.mobile.android, misc.phone.mobile.iphone

On 3/14/2023 4:52 PM, Neil wrote:

On 3/14/2023 3:23 PM, nospam wrote:

nobody ever said that.

Why do you constantly lie to protect Apple from every perceived slight?

Why can't you accept he's right the iPad doesn't do what he said Android tablets do without you lying about it to only in the end concede he was
right all along and you were just lying to protect Apple's perceived honor.

I don't think that it was really even "a slight." It was just
information about the capabilities of different platforms. It's totally understandable that someone that has an iPad with a SIM slot would
believe that the device could be used to place and receive calls,
especially given the fact that it is assigned a phone number.


“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)