I have a Motorola Stylus (2020). It's a good phone, but
the battery doesn't hold a charge well anymore, and I think
I need more system RAM. If I play youtube music in the car
while navigating, the UI becomes very slow, almost locks up.
I think I need some more horesepower and RAM.
The Stylus was a great deal at $200, but I'm looking around
for something newer. The important points are:
* Huge display, the bigger the better. At least 1080p, more
is great. I really want a phablet.
* Large battery would be nice.
* I like an aspect ration that is not too tall/skinny. The
aspect of a modern movie would be good.
Should be under $400. Maybe a tad more for an awesome pone.
Near-field communication would be cool, as would wireless
charging.
But they are not "phablets".
Screen is 6.5 inches (161,83 73,96 8,59 mm). 2400x1080 pixels, 20:9.
I have a Motorola Stylus (2020). It's a good phone, but the battery
doesn't hold a charge well anymore, and I think I need more system
RAM. If I play youtube music in the car while navigating, the UI
becomes very slow, almost locks up. I think I need some more
horesepower and RAM.
Batteries always wan on capacity over time, so they eventually lose how
long you have for up time. They are chemical. When buying a phone with
a non-serviceable or non-replaceable battery, consider how long you want
to own the phone, and if you're willing to replace the non-replaceable battery yourself. Costs too much to have a shop do it.
Since the old
phone would otherwise become disposable unless you repurpose it for some other use, like a web cam for your car or house where it remains
constantly plugged into a power source, you lose nothing by attempting a battery replace yourself.
I have a Motorola Stylus (2020). It's a good phone, but
the battery doesn't hold a charge well anymore, and I think
I need more system RAM. If I play youtube music in the car
while navigating, the UI becomes very slow, almost locks up.
I think I need some more horesepower and RAM.
The Stylus was a great deal at $200, but I'm looking around
for something newer. The important points are:
* Huge display, the bigger the better. At least 1080p, more
is great. I really want a phablet.
* Large battery would be nice.
* I like an aspect ration that is not too tall/skinny. The
aspect of a modern movie would be good.
Should be under $400. Maybe a tad more for an awesome pone.
Near-field communication would be cool, as would wireless
charging.
On 6/26/23 12:28 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
<vast amount of useful stuff...>
Batteries always wan on capacity over time, so they eventually lose how
long you have for up time. They are chemical. When buying a phone with
a non-serviceable or non-replaceable battery, consider how long you want
to own the phone, and if you're willing to replace the non-replaceable
battery yourself. Costs too much to have a shop do it.
Battery for the Pixel 2 costs ~$20 from various ebay sellers. The video convinced me that I might be able to do it, but would probably botch the
job. Local guy charged me $60 (including the battery) to do it. I
watched him and KNEW I would have botched it. Fair price to avoid
having to buy a new phone, especially since I really like this one. We
have a lot of competition in the cellphone repair field here, so maybe
that makes a difference. Call around and find the one who's been in
business the longest.
I did envy the nice blue silicone mat with little compartments he used
and wished I had a horizontal surface on which to put such a thing -- essential if you want to repair a small item with small easily-losable
parts.
On Jun 26, 2023, Carlos E.R. wrote
(in article<news:suuomjxtdb.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>):
But they are not "phablets".
Screen is 6.5 inches (161,83 � 73,96 � 8,59 mm). 2400x1080 pixels, 20:9.
I've had as many phones as anyone, just like I've had as many computers as anyone, or as many watches (real watches, not computerized ones) as anyone.
At some point in all emerging technologies, the technology matures to the point that it gets so cheap and so good that the details stop mattering.
I think Android is at that level where even a two hundred dollar Android comes with essentially the same capabilities as a four or eight hundred dollar Android.
What's going to be different is mostly the camera, and the wireless
charging, as batteries are almost always larger than they need to be for Android phones.
Other differences are:
Screen-refresh rate
Screen Resolution
OLED versus LCD
IP rating
Wireless charging capability
NFC
Processor performance
eSIM availability
5G mmWave
$300-350 is the sweet spot for a upper mid-range Android phone.
Motorola Edge 2022 is around $350 unlocked <https://www.motorola.com/us/smartphones-motorola-edge-gen-3/p?skuId=819>. Medical professionals and veterans can get 10% off.
Processor benchmark of your Motorola Stylus 2020: <https://nanoreview.net/en/soc/qualcomm-snapdragon-665>
Processor benchmark of Motorola Edge 2022: <https://nanoreview.net/en/soc/mediatek-dimensity-1050>
The Motorola Edge 2022 is much faster. 144 Hz 6.6" display. Still a
mid-range phone though. No Micro-SD card slot and no headphone jack, unfortunately. 1080 x 2400
The Samsung A53 5G is another option though it lacks wireless charging.
About $290 with $15% off, unlocked after 60 days of service (1 year of service is included <https://www.hsn.com/products/samsung-galaxy-a53-5g-tracfone-unlimited-talk-and-text-/20821040>.
Slightly lower processor performance than the Motorola Edge 2022 <https://nanoreview.net/en/soc/samsung-exynos-1280>.
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/26/23 12:28 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
<vast amount of useful stuff...>
Batteries always wan on capacity over time, so they eventually lose how
long you have for up time. They are chemical. When buying a phone with >>> a non-serviceable or non-replaceable battery, consider how long you want >>> to own the phone, and if you're willing to replace the non-replaceable
battery yourself. Costs too much to have a shop do it.
Battery for the Pixel 2 costs ~$20 from various ebay sellers. The video
convinced me that I might be able to do it, but would probably botch the
job. Local guy charged me $60 (including the battery) to do it. I
watched him and KNEW I would have botched it. Fair price to avoid
having to buy a new phone, especially since I really like this one. We
have a lot of competition in the cellphone repair field here, so maybe
that makes a difference. Call around and find the one who's been in
business the longest.
I did envy the nice blue silicone mat with little compartments he used
and wished I had a horizontal surface on which to put such a thing --
essential if you want to repair a small item with small easily-losable
parts.
I use magnetic metal tray to store the tiny parts, and multiple trays
for sizing. I also have a magnetic mat, so I can layout the screws in
the same order as they were removed (the screws form an outline of the
screw holes). Too many times there are 1, or 2, screws that are longer
than the rest, and installing them in the shorter recess can cause
damage to what's underneath or split the plastic stud into which the
screws screw into.
Not really much to damage other than the case seal and the double-stick
tape holding the battery in its compartment. If you're contemplating
getting a new phone just to get longer up-time from the battery, do you really care if you damage the seal or tape to replace the battery? What
are you going to do with that old phone that requires water resistance,
or complete silence instead of the battery possibly rattling around
inside. Ddouble-stick cellophane tape (NOT foam tape) is readily
available at stationery stores. Just layer it up to make sure it
conforms to the case and battery, and fills the gap between.
considering tossing the old phone, so does it matter that it is no
longer water resistant?
The worst part of taking apart the phone is the butyl seal around the
case. That's used for water resistance. If careful when prying apart,
and not prying to far at any point, but slowly wedging the halves apart,
the seal is reusable. If stretched, it won't fit back where it was.
You can stretch butyl, but not compress it back into shape. However, if
the case seal gets damaged, all you lose is water resistance. Just stop dropping your phone into the toilet when done and getting up to have it
fall out of a pocket.
When on vacation, really go on vacation, and stop taking the phone to
the beach or pool to interrupt your rest and play.
OMG, leave your phone behind. Some folks just can't do that. They
suffer phone withdrawl. Just terribly disappointing how phone users get addicted to their phones. Poor kids go frantic when going on a camping
trip, and then collecting their phones before the hike.
but a new battery is
more critical than water resistance.
VanguardLH wrote:
Not really much to damage other than the case seal and the
double-stick tape holding the battery in its compartment. If you're
contemplating getting a new phone just to get longer up-time from
the battery, do you really care if you damage the seal or tape to
replace the battery? What are you going to do with that old phone
that requires water resistance, or complete silence instead of the
battery possibly rattling around inside. Ddouble-stick cellophane
tape (NOT foam tape) is readily available at stationery stores.
Just layer it up to make sure it conforms to the case and battery,
and fills the gap between.
The Alien Tape ("As Seen On TV") is amazingly good. You get a huge
quantity of it, so you might want to share with a friend. It's maybe a
little thinner than that foam tape. I've stuck stuff to walls with it,
and stuffed some between the steering wheel and the cover I bought
because the Corolla wheel is stupidly slippery and a bit undersized.
Have I mentioned that I think the idiot who designed the Corolla
interior was an idiot?
You were considering tossing the old phone, so does it matter that it
is no longer water resistant?
Not me, I just needed a new battery because the old one was behaving
badly. 6 years old, 3 in actual use, I can't complain.
The worst part of taking apart the phone is the butyl seal around the
case. That's used for water resistance. If careful when prying apart,
and not prying to far at any point, but slowly wedging the halves apart,
the seal is reusable. If stretched, it won't fit back where it was.
You can stretch butyl, but not compress it back into shape. However, if
the case seal gets damaged, all you lose is water resistance. Just stop
dropping your phone into the toilet when done and getting up to have it
fall out of a pocket.
The guy used a heat gun and was as careful as he could be in separating
the case. He also put the whole phone in some sort of warmer he had in
his back room. You could see some of the glue/whatever after he'd put
it back together (also with heat), but that doesn't bother me.
The only thing I've ever dropped in a toilet (besides the stuff that
you're supposed to drop in there) is a hairbrush. No problem.
When on vacation, really go on vacation, and stop taking the phone to
the beach or pool to interrupt your rest and play.
OMG, leave your phone behind. Some folks just can't do that. They
suffer phone withdrawl. Just terribly disappointing how phone users get
addicted to their phones. Poor kids go frantic when going on a camping
trip, and then collecting their phones before the hike.
I'm addicted to the camera part. The off-line google maps leave a lot
to be desired. I wish OSMand weren't so battery hungry, I like it
better than google maps. OTOH, you don't want to know how much time I
spend on a REAL computer...
I have a Motorola Stylus (2020). It's a good phone, but
the battery doesn't hold a charge well anymore, and I think
I need more system RAM. If I play youtube music in the car
while navigating, the UI becomes very slow, almost locks up.
I think I need some more horesepower and RAM.
The Stylus was a great deal at $200, but I'm looking around
for something newer. The important points are:
* Huge display, the bigger the better. At least 1080p, more
is great. I really want a phablet.
* Large battery would be nice.
* I like an aspect ration that is not too tall/skinny. The
aspect of a modern movie would be good.
Should be under $400. Maybe a tad more for an awesome pone.
Near-field communication would be cool, as would wireless
charging.
Thanks!
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
Ddouble-stick cellophane
tape (NOT foam tape) is readily available at stationery stores.
Just layer it up to make sure it conforms to the case and battery,
and fills the gap between.
... That's why I suggested as a
substitute to get double-stick cellophane tape from the stationery
store: if 1 ply isn't enough, you can add more plies to get the
appropriate thickness of tape to hold the battery without contorting the cover when snapped back together.
You were considering tossing the old phone, so does it matter that it
is no longer water resistant?
Not me, I just needed a new battery because the old one was behaving
badly. 6 years old, 3 in actual use, I can't complain.
But you expressed concern that you would damage the phone.
You might
damage the case seal when prying the halves apart, but a new battery is
more critical than water resistance.
Yep, a heat gun makes the butyl tape more pliable and allows more
stretch without distorting the tape making permanently over stretched.
The YT videos that I've seen all incorporate a heat gun not only to make
the case seal more pliable, but also make the battery tape more pliable
to facilitate removing the battery.
As with someone suggesting you can solder in a new port, resistor,
diode, or whatnot, you need the appropriate tools for the job. You
don't use a soldering gun when a low-watt fine tip soldering iron is
needed for small and delicate soldering. The soldering kit should have
lots of tools, like wick, solder sucker, heat clamps, etc. Watch the
videos to see what tools they use. A pryer, spludger, guitar pick, and
heat gun should be in your tool kit for working on phones.
The only thing I've ever dropped in a toilet (besides the stuff that
you're supposed to drop in there) is a hairbrush. No problem.
Guys don't carry purses. Their phones are in their pockets.
Pockets
can easily get overturned when dropping your pants to sit on a toilet,
or flipped when pulling up your pants.
But taking your phone into the
swimming pool or hot tub are not recommended. That the phone says it is water resistant isn't really a good excuse to take it into the surf.
I'm addicted to the camera part. The off-line google maps leave a lot
to be desired. I wish OSMand weren't so battery hungry, I like it
better than google maps. OTOH, you don't want to know how much time I
spend on a REAL computer...
You vacation at home?
Both home and work are what I get away from when
on vacation. I carry a phone in the backpack inside a plastic bag and
turned off, not to use it to get or receive non-emergency calls. Ah,
the silence of the deep woods. RING!!! Well, that got spoiled.
VanguardLH wrote:
but a new battery is more critical than water resistance.
While I have nothing against water resistance, unless you're a
swimmer, how often does your phone get dunked under water anyway?
Mine never.
I'd rather have a big fat new battery than a water tight phone casing.
Google 6A discounted.
On 6/26/2023 10:45 PM, David Taylor wrote:
<snip>
Google 6A discounted.You can get one in the U.S. for around $200. But the screen size is a
lot smaller than the original poster is looking for.
Aside: The Ryobi corded electric weed whacker switch stopped working.
It turns out that the switch you touch pushes a microswitch (yeah,
those tiny ones with the roller-thing) which is held in place with
some cheesy plastic ears and which switches a bigger switch. It's
loose within it's little nest and eventually moves so that it doesn't
switch any more. Then you have to take the handle apart (maybe a
dozen screws) stuff the microswitch back into its nest and put it
back together. It will work for maybe another half hour. I bought a
canopy switch to replace the whole switch assembly but never got
around to actually doing it. Stuff is just made cheesily and some of
it is really not repairable. Bits and pieces that should be made of
aluminum are made of plastic. Feh.
We've got one of those pretty blue soldering irons around somewhere,
along with a lifetime supply of super-thin eutectic solder.
Somewhere. I KNOW that Harry Potter uses a spludger...
Last driving trips I went on I took a tablet and a phone, but only used
them in the motel at night.
Long ago -- before computers, even -- we did cross-country driving
trips at least once a year. Map books worked just fine.
I find the 6.7-inch display of the 6 Pro (6A is 6.1-inch) just a little
large for the pocket.
On Jun 27, 2023, sms wrote
(in article<news:u7da63$14fj3$2@dont-email.me>):
The OP asked for NFC but what real use is NFC for what the OP asks for?
Daniel Washington <DanielWashington@discussion.org> wrote:
VanguardLH wrote:
Your phone could be in your pocket. That isn't a waterproof container.
Never been in a canoe or seen someone in one that got tipped over? Went
on a camping trip, and a gal tipped the canoe as she got out on shore.
I was in the back end. Didn't have a phone with me, but had to search
for my eyeglasses. Another boob on a hunting trip fired sideways from a canoe at a moose while we were paddling along a stream to get to another lake. By the time I noticed and yelled "NO!", he already shot. Canoe tipped, we all went in, and so did all the backpacks.
Never got caught in a downpour? Go to one of the theme parks around
Orlando, Florida. Sunny in the morning, and then a sudden torrential
rain.
On 27/06/2023 06:32, VanguardLH wrote:
but a new battery is
more critical than water resistance.
While I have nothing against water resistance, unless you're a swimmer, how often does your phone get dunked under water anyway?
Mine never.
I'd rather have a big fat new battery than a water tight phone casing.
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
Long ago -- before computers, even -- we did cross-country driving
trips at least once a year. Map books worked just fine.
When hiking, ALWAYS carry a paper map and compass. Batteries die.
Depending on a phone to tell you where you are in the woods is like
relying on the existence of outhouses that also have toilet paper along
a groomed trail.
You could carry a power pack, or a spare battery (if the phone uses replaceable batteries), but that adds weight, and how long they are
usable depends on the length of the hike.
My short hikes nowadays are a
week: 3 days in, 1 day at the destination to explore, and 3 days back.
The battery in the phone, a spare, and a power pack won't last a 2-week
trek through the Rockies, and then another 2 weeks to get back (my Jeep
was back at the starting point). I rarely follow trails. Those are WAY
too short. No way a phone would last that long even with a spare
battery and power pack -- unless you turn it off to keep in reserve for
an emergency, but then it won't be on for GPS mapping, waypoint
recordings, etc.
I came across one other hiker during that month-long hike, and instead
of feeling "Oh, goodie, another person" I felt like "Jesus Christ, who
the hell is this trespasser in my woods" similar to how you'd feel when walking into your living room and finding a stranger standing there. No matter how remote you go, there's still humans around, even in the
middle of the Northwest Territories. They're everywhere. Everywhere.
On 6/26/23 9:32 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
The only thing I've ever dropped in a toilet (besides the stuff that
you're supposed to drop in there) is a hairbrush. No problem.
Guys don't carry purses. Their phones are in their pockets.
They need to learn about purses, then. We can't carry our phones in our pockets because they're neither wide nor long enough and you can't sit
if you put something besides paper in one.
Pockets
can easily get overturned when dropping your pants to sit on a toilet,
or flipped when pulling up your pants.
For a while I thought that man-purses would catch on, but apparently not.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-27 07:37, The Real Bev wrote:
On 6/26/23 9:32 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
...
I use a shoulder bag.The only thing I've ever dropped in a toilet (besides the stuff that >>>>> you're supposed to drop in there) is a hairbrush. No problem.
Guys don't carry purses. Their phones are in their pockets.
They need to learn about purses, then. We can't carry our phones in our >>> pockets because they're neither wide nor long enough and you can't sit
if you put something besides paper in one.
Pockets
can easily get overturned when dropping your pants to sit on a toilet, >>>> or flipped when pulling up your pants.
For a while I thought that man-purses would catch on, but apparently not. >>
I once lost my TomTom in a supermarket, because it was to warm to wear a
jacket with big enough pockets, so I put the device in the basket and
forgot to pick it up when emptying the basket for payment. A minute
later I remembered, but it was too late. Gone.
No more.
I bought a shoulder bag.
Is that a man purse? It's amazing the amount of things I can put inside,
so it is impossible I now go back to pockets only.
Pretty tough to be lawn mowing, construction, skydiving, or anything
physical with a shoulder bag dangling around.
The only time I use a shoulder bag is when flying. I noticed women were allowed 1 carry-on bag, but also a purse (as long as it fit under the
seat ahead of them). Hell, I'll carry a bag, too, to up how much I can
tote on the plane, but mine is more like a soft briefcase with zippers
that can unzip to enlarge capacity or compact the bag. But I certainly
am not going to carry this thing going to the grocery store, doing
yardwork, home repair, going to a party, or anywhere that I don't need a
lot more storage than my pockets and belt can accomodate.
Not sure what qualifies as a man-purse. Soft briefcases have been a
hell of lot longer than the "man purse" phrase showed up. I still
remember a Seinfeld show where he was made fun of for carrying one. I
think if I wanted a lot more storage for always carry, I'd get a small backpack or napsack.
Remember those fanny packs? I have a couple that add more storage than
my hiking backpack can carry. I suppose you could sling one over your shoulder, too. But for everyday carry, nope, too clumsy, too much in
the way. If I get to carrying more than my pockets or belt can carry, I reconsider what all I'm carrying. At that point, I'm carrying more than
I really need.
On 2023-06-27 07:37, The Real Bev wrote:
On 6/26/23 9:32 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
...
The only thing I've ever dropped in a toilet (besides the stuff that
you're supposed to drop in there) is a hairbrush. No problem.
Guys don't carry purses. Their phones are in their pockets.
They need to learn about purses, then. We can't carry our phones in our
pockets because they're neither wide nor long enough and you can't sit
if you put something besides paper in one.
Pockets
can easily get overturned when dropping your pants to sit on a toilet,
or flipped when pulling up your pants.
For a while I thought that man-purses would catch on, but apparently not.
I use a shoulder bag.
I once lost my TomTom in a supermarket, because it was to warm to wear a jacket with big enough pockets, so I put the device in the basket and
forgot to pick it up when emptying the basket for payment. A minute
later I remembered, but it was too late. Gone.
No more.
I bought a shoulder bag.
Is that a man purse? It's amazing the amount of things I can put inside,
so it is impossible I now go back to pockets only.
Some amusement parks have water attractions.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
Some amusement parks have water attractions.
Those you are usually aware beforehand by having to stand in a line.
They have lockers to stow your goodies: wallet, phone, clothes, and
shoes (bring and change into swimwear for the water rides). I suppose a sudden torrential rainfall could be called, ahem, a water attraction,
but you don't need to buy a theme park ticket for those.
On 6/26/23 9:32 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
Ddouble-stick cellophane
tape (NOT foam tape) is readily available at stationery stores.
Just layer it up to make sure it conforms to the case and battery,
and fills the gap between.
No tape was needed on the Pixel2. I mention the Alien tape for other
uses -- you expect the AsSeenOnTV stuff to be crap, but this isn't.
... That's why I suggested as a
substitute to get double-stick cellophane tape from the stationery
store: if 1 ply isn't enough, you can add more plies to get the
appropriate thickness of tape to hold the battery without contorting the
cover when snapped back together.
You were considering tossing the old phone, so does it matter that it
is no longer water resistant?
Not me, I just needed a new battery because the old one was behaving
badly. 6 years old, 3 in actual use, I can't complain.
But you expressed concern that you would damage the phone.
Through general ineptitude. Loss of tiny screws, etc. Breaking
mysterious tiny plastic parts...
Aside: The Ryobi corded electric weed whacker switch stopped working.
It turns out that the switch you touch pushes a microswitch (yeah, those >tiny ones with the roller-thing) which is held in place with some cheesy >plastic ears and which switches a bigger switch. It's loose within it's >little nest and eventually moves so that it doesn't switch any more.
Then you have to take the handle apart (maybe a dozen screws) stuff the >microswitch back into its nest and put it back together. It will work
for maybe another half hour. I bought a canopy switch to replace the
whole switch assembly but never got around to actually doing it. Stuff
is just made cheesily and some of it is really not repairable. Bits and >pieces that should be made of aluminum are made of plastic. Feh.
You might
damage the case seal when prying the halves apart, but a new battery is
more critical than water resistance.
I wouldn't have known about new sealing stuff for the case and would >certainly have torn the stuff that was already in there. BTW, the phone
was sold as 'refurbished' at a significant discount, but had never been >disassembled. It was just old. Good to know.
Yep, a heat gun makes the butyl tape more pliable and allows more
stretch without distorting the tape making permanently over stretched.
The YT videos that I've seen all incorporate a heat gun not only to make
the case seal more pliable, but also make the battery tape more pliable
to facilitate removing the battery.
As with someone suggesting you can solder in a new port, resistor,
diode, or whatnot, you need the appropriate tools for the job. You
don't use a soldering gun when a low-watt fine tip soldering iron is
needed for small and delicate soldering. The soldering kit should have
lots of tools, like wick, solder sucker, heat clamps, etc. Watch the
videos to see what tools they use. A pryer, spludger, guitar pick, and
heat gun should be in your tool kit for working on phones.
We've got one of those pretty blue soldering irons around somewhere,
along with a lifetime supply of super-thin eutectic solder. Somewhere.
I KNOW that Harry Potter uses a spludger...
The only thing I've ever dropped in a toilet (besides the stuff that
you're supposed to drop in there) is a hairbrush. No problem.
Guys don't carry purses. Their phones are in their pockets.
They need to learn about purses, then. We can't carry our phones in our >pockets because they're neither wide nor long enough and you can't sit
if you put something besides paper in one.
I have a Motorola Stylus (2020). It's a good phone, but
the battery doesn't hold a charge well anymore, and I think
I need more system RAM. If I play youtube music in the car
while navigating, the UI becomes very slow, almost locks up.
I think I need some more horesepower and RAM.
The Stylus was a great deal at $200, but I'm looking around
for something newer. The important points are:
* Huge display, the bigger the better. At least 1080p, more
is great. I really want a phablet.
* Large battery would be nice.
* I like an aspect ration that is not too tall/skinny. The
aspect of a modern movie would be good.
Should be under $400. Maybe a tad more for an awesome pone.
Near-field communication would be cool, as would wireless
charging.
I have a Motorola Stylus (2020). It's a good phone, but
the battery doesn't hold a charge well anymore,
Tobiah <toby+esnews@tobiah.org> wrote:
I have a Motorola Stylus (2020). It's a good phone, but
the battery doesn't hold a charge well anymore, and I think
I need more system RAM. If I play youtube music in the car
while navigating, the UI becomes very slow, almost locks up.
I think I need some more horesepower and RAM.
The Stylus was a great deal at $200, but I'm looking around
for something newer. The important points are:
* Huge display, the bigger the better. At least 1080p, more
is great. I really want a phablet.
* Large battery would be nice.
* I like an aspect ration that is not too tall/skinny. The
aspect of a modern movie would be good.
Should be under $400. Maybe a tad more for an awesome pone.
Near-field communication would be cool, as would wireless
charging.
I'm biased, but I suggest to have a look at the Samsung Galaxy A
Series and pick one which ticks most of your boxes at the - for you -
best price.
For US$400, you probably can have an A54 5G, the current top of that
line.
It ticks all your boxes, except wireless charging. At least I
think it doesn't have wireless chargings, as I didn't see it in the
specs.
IMO, wireless charging isn't a big deal.
disconnecting the charge cable, then just get a magnetic cable and it
will be nearly as easy as putting the phone on a wireless charging
stand.
[Rewind/repeat:]
I have a Motorola Stylus (2020). It's a good phone, but
the battery doesn't hold a charge well anymore,
I have a Samsung Galaxy A51 (a pre-decessor of the A54), bought in
August 2020, so probably of similar age. My battery is still fine, but I >didn't keep it connected to the charger when full/100%, because that
ruins batteries [1] and later it got a software update (now standard) to >limit the charge at 85% (can still set it to 100% if you want), which is
much more gentle on the battery.
BTW, (car) navigation is one of my major uses. Mainly OsmAnd+ and
sometimes Google Maps. So the A54 should be fine or even better.
[1] I learned that the hard way, ruined several laptop batteries.
On 2023-06-27 03:12, RonTheGuy wrote:
On Jun 27, 2023, sms wrote
(in article<news:u7da63$14fj3$2@dont-email.me>):
...
The OP asked for NFC but what real use is NFC for what the OP asks for?
All phones today should include NFC, unless very cheap. It is used for payments, and maybe other things like transferring photos to another
device that is very close. It can also be used when configuring IoT
devices.
On 2023-06-27 06:52, Daniel Washington wrote:
On 27/06/2023 06:32, VanguardLH wrote:
but a new battery is
more critical than water resistance.
While I have nothing against water resistance, unless you're a
swimmer, how
often does your phone get dunked under water anyway?
Mine never.
Mine once.
I went for a swim once and forgot about the phone. 5 seconds killed it.
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
I'm biased, but I suggest to have a look at the Samsung Galaxy A
Series and pick one which ticks most of your boxes at the - for you -
best price.
For US$400, you probably can have an A54 5G, the current top of that
line. It ticks all your boxes, except wireless charging. At least I
think it doesn't have wireless chargings, as I didn't see it in the
specs.
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
...Stuff is just made cheesily and some of
it is really not repairable. Bits and pieces that should be made of
aluminum are made of plastic. Feh.
Sounds like a good use of a hot-glue gun.
I have a Ryobi battery-powered lawn mower that after 2 seasons would
stop after rolling it only about 10 feet. ... I hot-glued the
plug into the recess. Shouldn't walk itself out anymore.
Long ago -- before computers, even -- we did cross-country driving
trips at least once a year. Map books worked just fine.
When hiking, ALWAYS carry a paper map and compass. Batteries die.
Depending on a phone to tell you where you are in the woods is like
relying on the existence of outhouses that also have toilet paper along
a groomed trail.
I came across one other hiker during that month-long hike, and instead
of feeling "Oh, goodie, another person" I felt like "Jesus Christ, who
the hell is this trespasser in my woods" similar to how you'd feel when walking into your living room and finding a stranger standing there. No matter how remote you go, there's still humans around, even in the
middle of the Northwest Territories. They're everywhere. Everywhere.
On 2023-06-27 07:37, The Real Bev wrote:
On 6/26/23 9:32 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
The only thing I've ever dropped in a toilet (besides the stuff that
you're supposed to drop in there) is a hairbrush. No problem.
Guys don't carry purses. Their phones are in their pockets.
They need to learn about purses, then. We can't carry our phones in our >> pockets because they're neither wide nor long enough and you can't sit
if you put something besides paper in one.
Pockets
can easily get overturned when dropping your pants to sit on a toilet,
or flipped when pulling up your pants.
For a while I thought that man-purses would catch on, but apparently not.
I use a shoulder bag.
I once lost my TomTom in a supermarket, because it was to warm to wear a jacket with big enough pockets, so I put the device in the basket and
forgot to pick it up when emptying the basket for payment. A minute
later I remembered, but it was too late. Gone.
No more.
I bought a shoulder bag.
Is that a man purse? It's amazing the amount of things I can put inside,
so it is impossible I now go back to pockets only.
For US$400, you probably can have an A54 5G, the current top of that >>line.
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
It ticks all your boxes, except wireless charging. At least I
think it doesn't have wireless chargings, as I didn't see it in the
specs.
IMO, wireless charging isn't a big deal.
I think I've said it here before, but to me, wireless charging is
almost useless. I do most of my reading with Kindle on my phone and I
usually read in bed before I go to sleep. I usually charge my phone
while I'm reading so I use a wired charger.
On 2023-06-27 09:55, VanguardLH wrote:
I came across one other hiker during that month-long hike, and instead
of feeling "Oh, goodie, another person" I felt like "Jesus Christ, who
the hell is this trespasser in my woods" similar to how you'd feel when
walking into your living room and finding a stranger standing there. No
matter how remote you go, there's still humans around, even in the
middle of the Northwest Territories. They're everywhere. Everywhere.
Hey, here city folk walking in the mountains salute one another,
friendly like. Same people don't say a word in the city :-D
Does that happen over your way?
If I get to carrying more than my pockets or belt can carry, I
reconsider what all I'm carrying. At that point, I'm carrying more than
I really need.
Motorcyclists have always waved at each other. Walkers in the suburbs,
at least those not recognizably homeless, are so infrequent that we at
least nod to one another as we pass. Sometimes we exchange greetings. Slightly higher frequency if one is walking a dog.
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
That is not the U.S. model for $314.95. It might work on T-Mobile, but
AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to activate it.
The description even discloses this "Unlocked Worldwide Dual Sim (Only T-Mobile/Mint/Metro USA Market)." In the U.S., T-Mobile has serious
coverage issues, you only want to use T-Mobile if you rarely venture
outside of urban areas.
On 6/27/2023 8:01 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
<snip>
I'm biased, but I suggest to have a look at the Samsung Galaxy A
Series and pick one which ticks most of your boxes at the - for you -
best price.
For US$400, you probably can have an A54 5G, the current top of that line. It ticks all your boxes, except wireless charging. At least I
think it doesn't have wireless chargings, as I didn't see it in the
specs.
Last year's A53 5G can be purchased, in the U.S., for under $200. No
wireless charging. No IP rating.
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/27/2023 8:43 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
<snip>
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
That is not the U.S. model for $314.95. It might work on T-Mobile, but
AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to activate it.
The description even discloses this "Unlocked Worldwide Dual Sim (Only
T-Mobile/Mint/Metro USA Market)." In the U.S., T-Mobile has serious
coverage issues, you only want to use T-Mobile if you rarely venture
outside of urban areas.
Boy, oh boy! This silly US business, when will it ever stop!? :-(
In The Real World (tm) all that matters is if the phone has the right technology (2G/3G/4G/5G) and the right bands for those technology for
the providers you want/need to use and it will work, no-one in their
right mind is pulling stunts like "are unlikely to activate it"!
Yes, I feel much better now.
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 08:43:11 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
For US$400, you probably can have an A54 5G, the current top of that
line.
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
If I were in the market for a new Android, I'd buy that one too!
I don't buy phones without both the card slot & handy jack though.
$1000.
On 6/27/2023 8:43 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
<snip>
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
That is not the U.S. model for $314.95. It might work on T-Mobile, but
AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to activate it.
The description even discloses this "Unlocked Worldwide Dual Sim (Only T-Mobile/Mint/Metro USA Market)." In the U.S., T-Mobile has serious
coverage issues, you only want to use T-Mobile if you rarely venture
outside of urban areas.
On 6/27/2023 8:43 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
<snip>
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
That is not the U.S. model for $314.95. It might work on T-Mobile, but
AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to activate it.
The description even discloses this "Unlocked Worldwide Dual Sim (Only >T-Mobile/Mint/Metro USA Market)." In the U.S., T-Mobile has serious
coverage issues, you only want to use T-Mobile if you rarely venture
outside of urban areas.
Probably single-SIM, unlike the European (et al) dual-SIM model.
(Well, my European A51 is dual-SIM, so I assume the European successors
are also dual-SIM.) Dual-SIM is a big plus for me. Used my Australian
SIM in the US to WhatsApp back home to/from NL! :-)
On 6/27/2023 11:20 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/27/2023 8:43 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
<snip>
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
That is not the U.S. model for $314.95. It might work on T-Mobile, but
AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to activate it.
The description even discloses this "Unlocked Worldwide Dual Sim (Only
T-Mobile/Mint/Metro USA Market)." In the U.S., T-Mobile has serious
coverage issues, you only want to use T-Mobile if you rarely venture
outside of urban areas.
Boy, oh boy! This silly US business, when will it ever stop!? :-(
As long as the carriers are the main seller of new phones in the U.S., because of the de-facto contracts in order to get a lower price on the
phone, it will not stop. They offer significant monthly discounts on
plans, as well as big rebates, if you finance a phone for 24-36 months.
Also, other than Verizon, the phone will not be unlocked until it is
paid off.
In The Real World (tm) all that matters is if the phone has the right technology (2G/3G/4G/5G) and the right bands for those technology for
the providers you want/need to use and it will work, no-one in their
right mind is pulling stunts like "are unlikely to activate it"!
We don't have the consumer protections in the U.S. that are available in
the EU. Campaign contributions by the telecommunications companies
ensure that this will not change, in regards to mobile services and devices.
Yes, I feel much better now.
Good.
Sometimes you can activate service in an approved device and then move
the SIM card to an unapproved device. But the carriers can, if they
wish, figure this out via the IMEI, and stop service.
Boy, oh boy! This silly US business, when will it ever stop!? :-(
On 6/27/2023 11:10 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
<snip>
Probably single-SIM, unlike the European (et al) dual-SIM model.
(Well, my European A51 is dual-SIM, so I assume the European successors
are also dual-SIM.) Dual-SIM is a big plus for me. Used my Australian
SIM in the US to WhatsApp back home to/from NL! :-)
The U.S. carriers hate dual SIM
and they compel the phone manufacturers
to omit that capability in U.S. versions.
Now you can buy a SIM card that adds multiple eSIMs to an Android that
lacks eSIM but then you lose the ability to also use a physical SIM.
The iPhone 14 models sold in the U.S. have zero physical SIM slots. The >iPhones sold in China have two physical SIM slots but no eSIM
capability. You don't want to buy a U.S. iPhone 14 if you do a lot of >foreign travel. Even though data-only eSIMs are readily available, it's >difficult to find eSIMs that provide voice and SMS.
Boy, oh boy! This silly US business, when will it ever stop!?
On 6/27/23 3:34 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
If I get to carrying more than my pockets or belt can carry, I
reconsider what all I'm carrying. At that point, I'm carrying more than
I really need.
I ALWAYS carry more than I really need, but there are things that I just WANT. Like the high-power 'tactical' flashlight. You never can tell
when you might want to explore a cave.
Tobiah <toby+esnews@tobiah.org> wrote:
IMO, wireless charging isn't a big deal. If you dislike connecting/ disconnecting the charge cable, then just get a magnetic cable and it
will be nearly as easy as putting the phone on a wireless charging
stand.
[Rewind/repeat:]
I have a Motorola Stylus (2020). It's a good phone, but
the battery doesn't hold a charge well anymore,
I have a Samsung Galaxy A51 (a pre-decessor of the A54), bought in
August 2020, so probably of similar age. My battery is still fine, but I didn't keep it connected to the charger when full/100%, because that
ruins batteries [1] and later it got a software update (now standard) to limit the charge at 85% (can still set it to 100% if you want), which is
much more gentle on the battery.
BTW, (car) navigation is one of my major uses. Mainly OsmAnd+ and sometimes Google Maps. So the A54 should be fine or even better.
[1] I learned that the hard way, ruined several laptop batteries.
We don't have the consumer protections in the U.S. that are available in
the EU. Campaign contributions by the telecommunications companies
ensure that this will not change, in regards to mobile services and devices.
See above. It's purely a technical matter. *If* the carrier/MVNO
should refuse to 'activate' the new phone, people should complain loudly
and publicly. ('active' in scare quotes, because there's no such
process. Just swap the SIM from the old phone to the new phone. End of story.)
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 08:43:11 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
For US$400, you probably can have an A54 5G, the current top of that >>line.
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
If I were in the market for a new Android, I'd buy that one too!
I don't buy phones without both the card slot & handy jack though.
SIM Single SIM (Nano-SIM, eSIM)[...]
or Hybrid Dual SIM (Nano-SIM, dual stand-by)
MEMORY[...]
Card slot microSDXC (uses shared SIM slot)
Internal 128GB 6GB RAM, 128GB 8GB RAM, 256GB 6GB RAM, 256GB 8GB RAM
barometer (USA only)[...]
Models SM-A546V, SM-A546U, SM-A546U1, SM-A546B, SM-A546B/DS,
SM-A546E, SM-A546E/DS, SM-A5460
Price $ 292.00 / $343.00[...]
https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_a54-12070.php
On 6/27/23 2:28 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2023-06-27 07:37, The Real Bev wrote:
On 6/26/23 9:32 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
The only thing I've ever dropped in a toilet (besides the stuff that >>>>> you're supposed to drop in there) is a hairbrush. No problem.
Guys don't carry purses. Their phones are in their pockets.
They need to learn about purses, then. We can't carry our phones in
our pockets because they're neither wide nor long enough and you
can't sit if you put something besides paper in one.
Pockets
can easily get overturned when dropping your pants to sit on a toilet, >>>> or flipped when pulling up your pants.
For a while I thought that man-purses would catch on, but apparently
not.
I use a shoulder bag.
I once lost my TomTom in a supermarket, because it was to warm to wear a
jacket with big enough pockets, so I put the device in the basket and
forgot to pick it up when emptying the basket for payment. A minute
later I remembered, but it was too late. Gone.
I lost a really good nylon mesh permanent shopping bag that way. I
still miss it.
No more.
I bought a shoulder bag.
Is that a man purse? It's amazing the amount of things I can put inside,
so it is impossible I now go back to pockets only.
Men's liberation! Now you can join the search (mine has lasted over 60 years) for the perfect purse. It should be lightweight but sturdy, have
an adjustable-length shoulder strap, be big enough to hold my laptop,
have a light-colored interior to make it easier to find stuff, a number
(but not too large a number) of internal dividers or pockets, and a
zipper (NOT a flap) at the top. It should not show dirt and should be easily machine washable/dryable.
I have a fanny-pack for short trips (Magic Mountain, museums etc.) when
I don't want to lug my 7-pound purse around. Do I REALLY need two
pocket knives? I didn't notice a difference when I stopped carrying the little bottle of hand sanitizer.
If I were in the market for a new Android, I'd buy that one too!
I don't buy phones without both the card slot & handy jack though.
A better way to buy the U.S. model of the A54 5G is to buy it from Total Wireless for $237.99 with promo code SAVE2023, see <https://www.totalbyverizon.com/smartphones/samsung-galaxy-a54-5g>. 60
days after activation ($30 per month for two months) they are required
to unlock it and you can use it where-ever you want. Technically they
are required to unlock it 60 days after activation, whether or not you
pay for the second month, but I would not risk that.
Be aware that the Amazon A54 5G for $314.95 will not work on AT&T or
Verizon, it's not the U.S. model. T-Mobile will activate it. The
description even states this "Unlocked Worldwide Dual Sim (Only T-Mobile/Mint/Metro USA Market)." This is despite the fact that it would actually work fine on AT&T and Verizon!
Only a few mid-range to high-end phones still have both a headphone jack
and a MicroSD card slot. Sony's flagship phones still have both but are $1000.
The low-end Samsung A03 model sold in the U.S. has a MicroSD card slot,
a headphone jack, and NFC. It is not 5G. The A14 5G is $79.99 from Total Wireless (no promo code allowed. It has both a headphone jack and a
MicroSD card slot.
On 6/27/2023 10:19 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
<snip>
Motorcyclists have always waved at each other. Walkers in the suburbs,
at least those not recognizably homeless, are so infrequent that we at
least nod to one another as we pass. Sometimes we exchange greetings.
Slightly higher frequency if one is walking a dog.
LOL, I know the names of the dogs in my neighborhood, but not the people
they own.
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 09:39:12 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
On 6/27/2023 8:43 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
<snip>
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
That is not the U.S. model for $314.95. It might work on T-Mobile, but
AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to activate it.
Since I use Mint, which uses T-Mobile, it should be fine for me.
Or are there any other disadvantages to its not being the US model?
The description even discloses this "Unlocked Worldwide Dual Sim (Only >>T-Mobile/Mint/Metro USA Market)." In the U.S., T-Mobile has serious >>coverage issues, you only want to use T-Mobile if you rarely venture >>outside of urban areas.
OK, but I've been using Mint (T-Mobile) for years, and I never ran
into a place where it didn't work. Before I used Mint, I used T-Mobile itself. It's fine for me.
Mint is great, as far as I'm concerned. It works reliably, and costs
me only $15 a month.
On 2023-06-27 17:01, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Tobiah <toby+esnews@tobiah.org> wrote:
...
IMO, wireless charging isn't a big deal. If you dislike connecting/ disconnecting the charge cable, then just get a magnetic cable and it
will be nearly as easy as putting the phone on a wireless charging
stand.
Caveat: the magnetic connection is just two wires, thus the charger goes
at the lowest speed.
On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 22:37:35 -0700, The Real Bev
<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
I always carry my phone in a side pocket. No problems.
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 09:39:12 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
On 6/27/2023 8:43 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
<snip>
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
That is not the U.S. model for $314.95. It might work on T-Mobile, but
AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to activate it.
Since I use Mint, which uses T-Mobile, it should be fine for me.
Or are there any other disadvantages to its not being the US model?
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 11:37:42 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
On 6/27/2023 11:10 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
<snip>
Probably single-SIM, unlike the European (et al) dual-SIM model.
(Well, my European A51 is dual-SIM, so I assume the European successors
are also dual-SIM.) Dual-SIM is a big plus for me. Used my Australian
SIM in the US to WhatsApp back home to/from NL! :-)
The U.S. carriers hate dual SIM
All of them? Why do they hate it?
On 6/27/2023 12:10 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 09:39:12 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
On 6/27/2023 8:43 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
<snip>
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
That is not the U.S. model for $314.95. It might work on T-Mobile, but
AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to activate it.
Since I use Mint, which uses T-Mobile, it should be fine for me.
Or are there any other disadvantages to its not being the US model?
Yes. the non-U.S. model supports Band 71, which is vitally important for T-Mobile. Nor does it support 5G mmWave. Th3 5G bands are also different.
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/27/2023 8:43 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
<snip>
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
That is not the U.S. model for $314.95. It might work on T-Mobile, but
AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to activate it.
The description even discloses this "Unlocked Worldwide Dual Sim (Only
T-Mobile/Mint/Metro USA Market)." In the U.S., T-Mobile has serious
coverage issues, you only want to use T-Mobile if you rarely venture
outside of urban areas.
Boy, oh boy! This silly US business, when will it ever stop!? :-(
In The Real World (tm) all that matters is if the phone has the right technology (2G/3G/4G/5G) and the right bands for those technology for
the providers you want/need to use and it will work, no-one in their
right mind is pulling stunts like "are unlikely to activate it"!
Now with Band 71 (600 MHz) T-Mobile can expand coverage with fewer
towers but they still are a very distant second i
On 6/27/2023 11:20 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/27/2023 8:43 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
<snip>
I just checked on Amazon.com. It's $314.95. If I were in the market
for a new phone, I'd consider that one.
That is not the U.S. model for $314.95. It might work on T-Mobile, but
AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to activate it.
The description even discloses this "Unlocked Worldwide Dual Sim (Only
T-Mobile/Mint/Metro USA Market)." In the U.S., T-Mobile has serious
coverage issues, you only want to use T-Mobile if you rarely venture
outside of urban areas.
Boy, oh boy! This silly US business, when will it ever stop!? :-(
In The Real World (tm) all that matters is if the phone has the right
technology (2G/3G/4G/5G) and the right bands for those technology for
the providers you want/need to use and it will work, no-one in their
right mind is pulling stunts like "are unlikely to activate it"!
The top two U.S. carriers evolved from GTE Mobilnet (morphed into
Verizon) and the Bell Operating Companies (morphed into AT&T). They put
up lots of towers before restrictions were imposed and also had the
valuable low-band (850Mhz). The latecomers, Sprint and Voicestream
(which morphed into T-Mobile) were stuck with 1900 MHz which required a
lot more towers to achieve coverage.
Now with Band 71 (600 MHz) T-Mobile can expand coverage with fewer
towers but they still are a very distant second in terms of geographic coverage in the U.S.. You even have one whole state with zero T-Mobile
native coverage, and other states with very little. If you're on
T-Mobile proper then domestic roaming helps somewhat, but on T-Mobile
MVNOs you don't get that domestic roaming. But even in my area of the
San Francisco Bay Area there are enormous differences in coverage, i.e. <https://imgur.com/OgL844m>.
<https://www.telecompetitor.com/verizon-wireless-dominates-j-d-power-mobile-performance-ratings/>
Also see the document "Coverage Differences Between AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon" at <tinyurl.com/ATVCoverageComparisons> or <docs.google.com/document/d/1JLtqrZTpy33AxsVSJlUjSsoZHSZxSDO8l1B3fIytHlw>.
"T-Mobile lacks coverage within certain rural pockets of the country-and unfortunately, the incorporation of Sprint's network won't help matters. Sprint's 4G coverage was even poorer than T-Mobile's, so it will take significant infrastructure upgrades before rural residents will see improvements in T-Mobile service. If you live in the mountains or pretty
much anywhere in the rural Midwest and West Coast, you'll be better
served by a different carrier."
Probably single-SIM, unlike the European (et al) dual-SIM model.
(Well, my European A51 is dual-SIM, so I assume the European successors >>>> are also dual-SIM.) Dual-SIM is a big plus for me. Used my Australian
SIM in the US to WhatsApp back home to/from NL! :-)
The U.S. carriers hate dual SIM
All of them? Why do they hate it?
They want you to use international roaming at high cost, not stick in a second SIM card.
You seem like you probably like to do crossword puzzles and rubic's cubes
and you probably also like to play chess with all the phone companies.
Ken Blake wrote:
It might work on T-Mobile, but
AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to activate it.
Boy, oh boy! This silly US business, when will it ever stop!? :-(
In The Real World (tm) all that matters is if the phone has the right technology (2G/3G/4G/5G) and the right bands for those technology for
the providers you want/need to use and it will work, no-one in their
right mind is pulling stunts like "are unlikely to activate it"!
All you have to do is look at the carrier's coverage maps to understand
the coverage differences.
Pay
attention to all the experts, not fanbois with an agenda.
It might work on T-Mobile, but
AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to activate it.
Boy, oh boy! This silly US business, when will it ever stop!? :-(
In The Real World (tm) all that matters is if the phone has the right technology (2G/3G/4G/5G) and the right bands for those technology for
the providers you want/need to use and it will work, no-one in their
right mind is pulling stunts like "are unlikely to activate it"!
I must admit, I thought the bad old days of CDMA providers vs GSM
providers was over in the USA ...
On 2023-06-27 19:14, The Real Bev wrote:
On 6/27/23 2:28 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2023-06-27 07:37, The Real Bev wrote:
On 6/26/23 9:32 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
The only thing I've ever dropped in a toilet (besides the stuff that >>>>>> you're supposed to drop in there) is a hairbrush. No problem.
Guys don't carry purses. Their phones are in their pockets.
They need to learn about purses, then. We can't carry our phones in
our pockets because they're neither wide nor long enough and you
can't sit if you put something besides paper in one.
Pockets
can easily get overturned when dropping your pants to sit on a toilet, >>>>> or flipped when pulling up your pants.
For a while I thought that man-purses would catch on, but apparently
not.
I use a shoulder bag.
I once lost my TomTom in a supermarket, because it was to warm to wear a >>> jacket with big enough pockets, so I put the device in the basket and
forgot to pick it up when emptying the basket for payment. A minute
later I remembered, but it was too late. Gone.
I lost a really good nylon mesh permanent shopping bag that way. I
still miss it.
No more.
I bought a shoulder bag.
Is that a man purse? It's amazing the amount of things I can put inside, >>> so it is impossible I now go back to pockets only.
Men's liberation! Now you can join the search (mine has lasted over 60
years) for the perfect purse. It should be lightweight but sturdy, have
an adjustable-length shoulder strap, be big enough to hold my laptop,
have a light-colored interior to make it easier to find stuff, a number
(but not too large a number) of internal dividers or pockets, and a
zipper (NOT a flap) at the top. It should not show dirt and should be
easily machine washable/dryable.
Oh, my laptop is way bigger than my bag; for that I use a backpack
instead.
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 21:22:01 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-27 16:49, Ken Blake wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 22:37:35 -0700, The Real Bev
<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
I always carry my phone in a side pocket. No problems.
Fluff gets in the usb connection.
I've never had such a problem.
On 6/27/2023 12:40 PM, Charles Jack Jones wrote:
You seem like you probably like to do crossword puzzles and rubic's cubes
and you probably also like to play chess with all the phone companies.
Nope, had four lines on the same carrier for seven years (a Verizon MVNO
now owned by Verizon). Prior to that I was on an AT&T-owned carrier and >tried T-Mobile for a few months but the coverage in the western U.S. was >just so poor that we had to change.
Coverage is important to us because we take a lot of road trips to less >populated areas where T-Mobile does not cover, either natively or with >roaming.
You _really_ want to avoid the T-Mobile MVNOs like Mint Mobile
if rural coverage is important because they don't offer domestic roaming >like T-Mobile proper.
T-Mobile proper offers limited roaming in the
U.S., but often you just get no coverage at all unless there is a
non-AT&T, non-Verizon roaming partner.
All you have to do is look at the carrier's coverage maps to understand
the coverage differences.
<https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/Guides/t-mobile-coverage-map> ><https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/Guides/verizon-coverage-map> ><https://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/Guides/att-coverage-map>
Here's the three of them together: <https://i.imgur.com/UNhZSyc.png>
The bottom line is that if you don't leave the dense eastern seabpard
then you'll be fine with T-Mobile. But in the west, beware. Pay
attention to all the experts, not fanbois with an agenda. See ><https://www.jdpower.com/sites/default/files/file/2023-01/2023004%20U.S.%20Wireless%20Network%20Quality%20Vol%201.pdf>.
On 2023-06-27 16:49, Ken Blake wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 22:37:35 -0700, The Real Bev
<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
I always carry my phone in a side pocket. No problems.
Fluff gets in the usb connection.
Ken Blake wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 21:22:01 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-27 16:49, Ken Blake wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 22:37:35 -0700, The Real Bev
<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
I always carry my phone in a side pocket. No problems.
Fluff gets in the usb connection.
I've never had such a problem.
I found a piece of peanut in my phone's ear-phone socket. The phone lives
in my shirt pocket
and the peanut piece had made its way in there
unannounced. Deft work with a pin restored the status quo.
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
It might work on T-Mobile, but AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to
activate it.
Boy, oh boy! This silly US business, when will it ever stop!? :-(
In The Real World (tm) all that matters is if the phone has the right
technology (2G/3G/4G/5G) and the right bands for those technology for
the providers you want/need to use and it will work, no-one in their
right mind is pulling stunts like "are unlikely to activate it"!
I must admit, I thought the bad old days of CDMA providers vs GSM
providers was over in the USA ...
I must admit, I thought the bad old days of CDMA providers vs GSM
providers was over in the USA ...
they are.
usa carriers will activate any phone that's compatible with their
network, i.e., not locked to a different network and not blacklisted.
the only exception is verizon, who won't activate a non-verizon device
if it has previously been activated on a different carrier. they'll
only activate it if it's new. however, that only applies to activation.
an existing active verizon sim can be swapped to any compatible device
and it will work. verizon has been sued over this too, but apparently
they still do it. they also carrier lock devices in direct violation of
fcc regulations, after having paid off the fcc chairman (who used to
work at verizon) to let them get away with it.
On 6/27/2023 8:01 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
<snip>
IMO, wireless charging isn't a big deal. If you dislike connecting/
disconnecting the charge cable, then just get a magnetic cable and it
will be nearly as easy as putting the phone on a wireless charging
stand.
Advantages of Wireless Charging
👍 Lower Standby Power than Wired Chargers When Charger is Plugged In
but Not Charging
👍 Less wear and tear on charging cables and phone connector
👍 Convenience
👍 Escape from Cable Hell
👍 Fewer Deep Discharge Cycles
👍 Better for the Environment
👍 Better for Your Budget
👍 Security
👍 Less Distracted Driving
👍 Charge Your Phone While Using the USB or Lightning Port for Other Purposes
👍 No “Liquid in the Lightning Port” message when there is no liquid in the Lightning Port
IMO, wireless charging isn't a big deal. If you dislike connecting/ disconnecting the charge cable, then just get a magnetic cable and it
will be nearly as easy as putting the phone on a wireless charging
stand.
Advantages of Wireless Charging
? Lower Standby Power than Wired Chargers When Charger is Plugged In
but Not Charging
? Less wear and tear on charging cables and phone connector
? Convenience
? Escape from Cable Hell
? Fewer Deep Discharge Cycles
? Better for the Environment
? Better for Your Budget
? Security
? Less Distracted Driving
? Charge Your Phone While Using the USB or Lightning Port for Other
Purposes
? No Liquid in the Lightning Port message when there is no liquid in
the Lightning Port
IMO, wireless charging isn't a big deal. If you dislike connecting/ disconnecting the charge cable, then just get a magnetic cable and it
will be nearly as easy as putting the phone on a wireless charging
stand.
Ok, except the environment part: the losses are somewhat worse.
It depends.
The losses when charging are greater, an extra 1.3-1.6 KWH
per year (20-50 per year).
However the bigger environmental issue is
that wireless charging eliminates the problem of phone failure due to charging point failure.
Not such a big problem with USB-C, but a big
problem with Lightning
On 2023-06-28 19:20, sms wrote:
On 6/27/2023 8:01 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
<snip>
IMO, wireless charging isn't a big deal. If you dislike connecting/ >>> disconnecting the charge cable, then just get a magnetic cable and it
will be nearly as easy as putting the phone on a wireless charging
stand.
Advantages of Wireless Charging
👍 Lower Standby Power than Wired Chargers When Charger is Plugged In
but Not Charging
👍 Less wear and tear on charging cables and phone connector
👍 Convenience
👍 Escape from Cable Hell
👍 Fewer Deep Discharge Cycles
👍 Better for the Environment
👍 Better for Your Budget
👍 Security
👍 Less Distracted Driving
👍 Charge Your Phone While Using the USB or Lightning Port for Other
Purposes
👍 No “Liquid in the Lightning Port” message when there is no liquid >> in the Lightning Port
Ok, except the environment part: the losses are somewhat worse.
It might work on T-Mobile, but AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to
activate it.
Boy, oh boy! This silly US business, when will it ever stop!? :-(
In The Real World (tm) all that matters is if the phone has the right
technology (2G/3G/4G/5G) and the right bands for those technology for
the providers you want/need to use and it will work, no-one in their
right mind is pulling stunts like "are unlikely to activate it"!
I must admit, I thought the bad old days of CDMA providers vs GSM
providers was over in the USA ...
I would guess that there are several reasons why the U.S. carriers do
what they do:
1. They want customers to buy the phones from them instead of from the manufacturer because, in some cases, it locks the customer into their
network until the phone is paid off (if the customer opts for financing
along with the monthly bill credits that financing qualifies them for).
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the
necessary bands for optimal performance.
3. They don't want to provide customer support for no-name devices.
Anyone who plays the MVNO games deserves all the complexities they
get.
They offer discounted phones all the time but you're still limited in
the crappy phones they provide, ...
Given that, the best bet, by far, in the USA, it to buy any phone
unlocked. Then go to any one of the big three (avoid those crazy
MVNOs) for service.
By the way, regarding tech support, is your experience that contracting
with a Big3 carrier gives you far superior support? Not my experience
at all. So, you're not getting everything for which you are paying
more.
On 6/27/2023 8:01 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
<snip>
IMO, wireless charging isn't a big deal. If you dislike connecting/
disconnecting the charge cable, then just get a magnetic cable and it
will be nearly as easy as putting the phone on a wireless charging
stand.
Advantages of Wireless Charging
Lower Standby Power than Wired Chargers When Charger is Plugged In
but Not Charging
Less wear and tear on charging cables and phone connector
Convenience
Escape from Cable Hell
Fewer Deep Discharge Cycles
Better for the Environment
Better for Your Budget
Security
Less Distracted Driving
Charge Your Phone While Using the USB or Lightning Port for Other Purposes
No “Liquid in the Lightning Port” message when there is no liquid in
the Lightning Port
I needed to call my carrier to get the APN data needed to configure the phone. That is configuration data for *THEIR* service. Nothing to do
with supporting the phone itself. All to do with getting my phone to
work with THEIR service.
I also needed to contact the carrier on how to disable their voicemail service. Yep, I did NOT want voicemail on that line. I couldn't do it walking through their voice prompts on calling them. I had to talk to someone there to get the feature disabled (because I couldn't do it
online, either). Nothing to do with the phone. All to do with carrier.
And that was working with an MVNO.
Glad you never needed help from your carrier. Don't project your
experience onto everyone else.
On 28.6.2023 23:27, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
By the way, regarding tech support, is your experience that contracting
with a Big3 carrier gives you far superior support? Not my experience
at all. So, you're not getting everything for which you are paying
more.
Nobody needs support from their carrier.
If they screw up the phone, the carrier isn't going to fix it anyway.
Plus, all they need to do is reset it to factory defaults & start fresh.
If people need their carrier to fix their phone, then they have bigger
issues since a phone is not a complicated thing when it can be reset.
On 29.6.2023 07:34, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
I needed to call my carrier to get the APN data needed to configure the
phone. That is configuration data for *THEIR* service. Nothing to do
with supporting the phone itself. All to do with getting my phone to
work with THEIR service.
Think about it. If the carrier needed every mom and pop to explicitly set
the APN data, they'd go out of business in terms of unnecessary support.
They can set all that remotely over the air you know.
I also needed to contact the carrier on how to disable their voicemail
service. Yep, I did NOT want voicemail on that line. I couldn't do it
walking through their voice prompts on calling them. I had to talk to
someone there to get the feature disabled (because I couldn't do it
online, either). Nothing to do with the phone. All to do with carrier.
That's different. And again, it's a sign that your carrier can't supply a voice mail app that has basic switches like turning off the voicemail.
And that was working with an MVNO.
Did you ever notice that ALL the people complaining about their service and the complexities and the pitfalls - are ALWAYS using a shitty MVNO plan?
Glad you never needed help from your carrier. Don't project your
experience onto everyone else.
If you're contracting with an MVNO, you deserve the shitty experiences you have. But people who are on the big three almost never have those problems.
If you're going to use an MVNO, then your problems are self inflicted.
Don't phones that have wireless charging (induction) have both means of charging: USB and wireless? The phones I've been looking at have both.
You can't get fast charging with wireless.
How can a less efficient charger (wireless) be better for my budget?
Security? Please explain just what you meant to convey with that unsubstantiated statement. How is a phone sitting atop a wireless
charger (with its power cord) more secure than a phone connected via USB
to a charger?
Tamborino <tamborinonospam@gomail.com.ua> wrote:
Anyone who plays the MVNO games deserves all the complexities they
get.
Along with far cheaper pricing. So, you can either mandate better
support along with more features, like a web site to manage your account instead of through voice prompts on a call, or you can go with lesser support, less features, and less cost.
Tamborino <tamborinonospam@gomail.com.ua> wrote:
On 28.6.2023 23:27, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
By the way, regarding tech support, is your experience that contracting
with a Big3 carrier gives you far superior support? Not my experience
at all. So, you're not getting everything for which you are paying
more.
Nobody needs support from their carrier.
If they screw up the phone, the carrier isn't going to fix it anyway.
Plus, all they need to do is reset it to factory defaults & start fresh.
If people need their carrier to fix their phone, then they have bigger
issues since a phone is not a complicated thing when it can be reset.
I needed to call my carrier to get the APN data needed to configure the phone. That is configuration data for *THEIR* service. Nothing to do
with supporting the phone itself. All to do with getting my phone to
work with THEIR service.
I also needed to contact the carrier on how to disable their voicemail service. Yep, I did NOT want voicemail on that line. I couldn't do it walking through their voice prompts on calling them. I had to talk to someone there to get the feature disabled (because I couldn't do it
online, either). Nothing to do with the phone. All to do with carrier.
And that was working with an MVNO.
Glad you never needed help from your carrier. Don't project your
experience onto everyone else.
On 29.6.2023 07:34, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
I needed to call my carrier to get the APN data needed to configure the
phone. That is configuration data for *THEIR* service. Nothing to do
with supporting the phone itself. All to do with getting my phone to
work with THEIR service.
Think about it. If the carrier needed every mom and pop to explicitly set
the APN data, they'd go out of business in terms of unnecessary support.
They can set all that remotely over the air you know.
On 6/28/2023 4:30 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
It might work on T-Mobile, but AT&T and Verizon are unlikely to
activate it.
Boy, oh boy! This silly US business, when will it ever stop!? :-(
In The Real World (tm) all that matters is if the phone has the right
technology (2G/3G/4G/5G) and the right bands for those technology for
the providers you want/need to use and it will work, no-one in their
right mind is pulling stunts like "are unlikely to activate it"!
I must admit, I thought the bad old days of CDMA providers vs GSM
providers was over in the USA ...
I would guess that there are several reasons why the U.S. carriers do
what they do:
1. They want customers to buy the phones from them instead of from the manufacturer because, in some cases, it locks the customer into their
network until the phone is paid off (if the customer opts for financing
along with the monthly bill credits that financing qualifies them for).
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the
necessary bands for optimal performance.
3. They don't want to provide customer support for no-name devices.
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/28/2023 4:30 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the
necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their
network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my wooden shoes.
On 2023-06-29 14:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/28/2023 4:30 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
...
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the
necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their
network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my
wooden shoes.
You have one of those?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_albarcas
On 6/27/2023 8:01 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
<snip>
IMO, wireless charging isn't a big deal. If you dislike connecting/ disconnecting the charge cable, then just get a magnetic cable and it
will be nearly as easy as putting the phone on a wireless charging
stand.
Advantages of Wireless Charging
? Lower Standby Power than Wired Chargers When Charger is Plugged In
but Not Charging
? Less wear and tear on charging cables and phone connector
? Convenience
? Escape from Cable Hell
? Fewer Deep Discharge Cycles
? Better for the Environment
? Better for Your Budget
? Security
? Less Distracted Driving
? Charge Your Phone While Using the USB or Lightning Port for Other
Purposes
? No ?Liquid in the Lightning Port? message when there is no liquid in
the Lightning Port
? Less wear and tear on charging cables and phone connector
? Convenience
On 2023-06-29 14:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/28/2023 4:30 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
...
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the
necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their
network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my wooden shoes.
You have one of those?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_albarcas
It doesn't matter what they 'want'. This is the century of unlocked phones. They should join it and if they don't, their customers should
- as I mentioned before - complain loudly and publicly
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the
necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their
network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my wooden shoes.
3. They don't want to provide customer support for no-name devices.
We're not talking about no-name devices and of course support - if
such an animal even exists - for devices which they don't carry, would
be best-effort only. That's quite normal and (hopefully) expected.
Bottom line: They should join The Real World (TM).
On 6/29/2023 5:02 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
<snip>
It doesn't matter what they 'want'. This is the century of unlocked phones. They should join it and if they don't, their customers should
- as I mentioned before - complain loudly and publicly
Their customers are free to buy unlocked phones, at least models with
the U.S. bands, from Apple, Samsung, Motorola, etc.. But the customers
that stick with a postpaid carrier, and are paying for very expensive
plans, like the high monthly bill credits. Bringing your own unlocked
phone will greatly increase your monthly cost. For example, for an
iPhone 14 Pro Max, bringing your own device, and foregoing the monthly
bill credits, will increase your cost by $30-45 per month. The phone manufacturers like this system as well because without it they know that people would not replace their phones as often.
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the
necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their
network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my wooden shoes.
Yes, that's exactly what they will do. It's especially a PITA for
foreign visitors to the U.S. bringing a device that is not white-listed.
3. They don't want to provide customer support for no-name devices.
We're not talking about no-name devices and of course support - if
such an animal even exists - for devices which they don't carry, would
be best-effort only. That's quite normal and (hopefully) expected.
Have you ever looked at Aliexpress and seen the huge number of devices
being sold, many of which lack most of the LTE bands used in the U.S.?
Bottom line: They should join The Real World (TM).
They will never do this, unless forced to by legislation, because it
would negatively affect their revenue.
On 6/29/2023 7:26 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
See "Pros and Cons of Wireless Phone Charging" <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wnJX50hca_KCQHg-D7TzDxKZg_5kf4fXEB_blwXoOE4>
Bottom line: ?Anyone still using wired charging is standing in the way
of human progress.?
See "Pros and Cons of Wireless Phone Charging"
<https://docs.googl
Bottom line: Anyone still using wired charging is standing in the way
of human progress.
In article <u7k6kn$26dmm$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
See "Pros and Cons of Wireless Phone Charging"
<https://docs.googl
see 'more of the same easily debunked rubbish'.
Bottom line: Anyone still using wired charging is standing in the way
of human progress.
And as I've said before, wireless charging wouldn't work for me.
I know too many people whose Lightning port on their iPhone has failed.
USB-C is better because it's the cable side, not the phone side that is
more likely to fail.
On the iPhone Usenet and Reddit groups there are often questions about
how to deal with a flaky Lightning port.
My son had that issue with his
iPhone X and ended up trading it in rather than spending $100+ to get it fixed,
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-29 14:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/28/2023 4:30 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
...
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the
necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their
network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my
wooden shoes.
You have one of those?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_albarcas
Well, not those fancy ones, but the Dutch ones: klompen. We need them
when we need to wade through the water to put our finger in the hole in
the dike!
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klomp>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Brinker,_or_The_Silver_Skates#Popular_culture:_the_legend_of_the_boy_and_the_dike>
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 14:36:40 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-29 14:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/28/2023 4:30 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
...
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the
necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their
network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my
wooden shoes.
You have one of those?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_albarcas
It looks like it would be very hard to walk in just one of them.
On 2023-06-29 16:10, Ken Blake wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 14:36:40 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-29 14:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/28/2023 4:30 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
...
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the
necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their
network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my >>>> wooden shoes.
You have one of those?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_albarcas
It looks like it would be very hard to walk in just one of them.
They are apparently wonderful in the mud :-)
On 6/30/2023 6:55 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
<snip>
And as I've said before, wireless charging wouldn't work for me.
With MagSafe (or equivalent) wireless charging works fine when holding
the phone while charging.
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 12:28:29 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-29 16:10, Ken Blake wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 14:36:40 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-29 14:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/28/2023 4:30 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
...
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the
necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their >>>>> network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my >>>>> wooden shoes.
You have one of those?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_albarcas
It looks like it would be very hard to walk in just one of them.
They are apparently wonderful in the mud :-)
If you are wearing just one?
On 2023-07-02 01:13, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 12:28:29 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-29 16:10, Ken Blake wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 14:36:40 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-29 14:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/28/2023 4:30 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
...
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the >>>>>>> necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their >>>>>> network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my >>>>>> wooden shoes.
You have one of those?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_albarcas
It looks like it would be very hard to walk in just one of them.
They are apparently wonderful in the mud :-)
If you are wearing just one?
One pair?
That's different. And again, it's a sign that your carrier can't supply a
voice mail app that has basic switches like turning off the voicemail.
I use an MVNO. I got assigned to AT&T as my carrier. Well, that's one
of the Big3 you want to tout for what we all should be using.
And that was working with an MVNO.
Did you ever notice that ALL the people complaining about their service and >> the complexities and the pitfalls - are ALWAYS using a shitty MVNO plan?
I'm currently using an MVNO. I've also had AT&T and Verizon. Sorry to
burst your bubble, but my MVNO has been more helpful than the Big3.
Glad you never needed help from your carrier. Don't project your
experience onto everyone else.
If you're contracting with an MVNO, you deserve the shitty experiences you >> have. But people who are on the big three almost never have those problems. >>
If you're going to use an MVNO, then your problems are self inflicted.
Ah, I see you're a fanboy for the Big3, so anything else just must be
shitty. Uh huh, sure.
Think about it. If the carrier needed every mom and pop to explicitly set
the APN data, they'd go out of business in terms of unnecessary support.
They can set all that remotely over the air you know.
Except when it fails.
I needed to call my carrier to get the APN data needed to configure the
phone. That is configuration data for *THEIR* service. Nothing to do
with supporting the phone itself. All to do with getting my phone to
work with THEIR service.
Yeah, I needed to look that up on one phone I had but for most phones
the SIM card will automatically set the APN and then they lock you out
from changing it.
Along with far cheaper pricing. So, you can either mandate better
support along with more features, like a web site to manage your account
instead of through voice prompts on a call, or you can go with lesser
support, less features, and less cost.
There's also a difference between carrier-owned providers and MVNOs,
both postpaid and prepaid.
You wouldn't want to be on an MVNO that uses T-Mobile if you do much traveling outside of urban areas because those MVNOs don't include any off-network roaming and T-Mobile's native network is very small.
But
T-Mobile's own prepaid does include some limited off-network roaming
that at least covers some rural areas, though many areas that are
covered only by AT&T and Verizon don't have roaming from T-Mobile.
In Europe they argued the same bollocks for justifying the outrageous roaming charges between countries (and similarly for the different call charges for landline versus mobile). In the end, rates just became the
same for everybody, some paid a bit more, some paid a bit/lot less.
(Yes, I had both advantages and disadvantages. I got over it.)
It doesn't matter what they 'want'. This is the century of unlocked
phones. They should join it and if they don't, their customers should
- as I mentioned before - complain loudly and publicly
Their customers are free to buy unlocked phones, at least models with
the U.S. bands, from Apple, Samsung, Motorola, etc..
But the customers
that stick with a postpaid carrier, and are paying for very expensive
plans, like the high monthly bill credits.
Bringing your own unlocked
phone will greatly increase your monthly cost.
For example, for an
iPhone 14 Pro Max, bringing your own device, and foregoing the monthly
bill credits, will increase your cost by $30-45 per month.
The phone
manufacturers like this system as well because without it they know that people would not replace their phones as often.
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the
necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their
network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my
wooden shoes.
Yes, that's exactly what they will do. It's especially a PITA for
foreign visitors to the U.S. bringing a device that is not white-listed.
3. They don't want to provide customer support for no-name devices.
We're not talking about no-name devices and of course support - if
such an animal even exists - for devices which they don't carry, would
be best-effort only. That's quite normal and (hopefully) expected.
Have you ever looked at Aliexpress and seen the huge number of devices
being sold, many of which lack most of the LTE bands used in the U.S.?
Bottom line: They should join The Real World (TM).
They will never do this, unless forced to by legislation, because it
would negatively affect their revenue.
With MagSafe (or equivalent) wireless charging works fine when holding
the phone while charging.
Thanks for the info. I had never heard of MagSafe before. But Googling
it, I see that it's just for iPhones, so it would be useless for me.
Charging overnight nowadays is like filling up your gas tank every night.
It would accomplish nothing useful by hooking to a charger every night.
It only take an hour or two to fully charge a typical Android phone today.
since most people charge overnight, the
speed doesn't actually matter.
On 29.6.2023 13:40, "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
Think about it. If the carrier needed every mom and pop to explicitly set >>> the APN data, they'd go out of business in terms of unnecessary support. >>>
They can set all that remotely over the air you know.
Except when it fails.
They have your IMEI. They have your location. They know the cell tower.
If they can't update your phone then they don't deserve to be in business.
Remember that all the people complaining about their service are on MVNOs.
The sole purpose of the MVNO is to cut costs anywhere they can cut them.
If people on MVNOs complain about service - the problem is self inflicted.
On Sun, 2 Jul 2023 12:18:27 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-07-02 01:13, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 12:28:29 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-29 16:10, Ken Blake wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 14:36:40 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-29 14:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/28/2023 4:30 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
...
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the >>>>>>>> necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their >>>>>>> network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my >>>>>>> wooden shoes.
You have one of those?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_albarcas
It looks like it would be very hard to walk in just one of them.
They are apparently wonderful in the mud :-)
If you are wearing just one?
One pair?
Yes, that would have fine. But the sentence without "pair" reads
strangely, and that was my attempt at a small joke.
On 2023-07-02 16:53, Ken Blake wrote:
On Sun, 2 Jul 2023 12:18:27 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-07-02 01:13, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 12:28:29 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-29 16:10, Ken Blake wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 14:36:40 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-29 14:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/28/2023 4:30 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
...
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the >>>>>>>>> necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their >>>>>>>> network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my
wooden shoes.
You have one of those?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_albarcas
It looks like it would be very hard to walk in just one of them.
They are apparently wonderful in the mud :-)
If you are wearing just one?
One pair?
Yes, that would have fine. But the sentence without "pair" reads
strangely, and that was my attempt at a small joke.
English is not my first language.
On 29.6.2023 01:56, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
That's different. And again, it's a sign that your carrier can't supply a >>> voice mail app that has basic switches like turning off the voicemail.
I use an MVNO. I got assigned to AT&T as my carrier. Well, that's one
of the Big3 you want to tout for what we all should be using.
Does your support that you complained about come from the MVNO or AT&T?
If it's coming from the MVNO, then your problems are self inflicted.
And that was working with an MVNO.
Did you ever notice that ALL the people complaining about their service and >>> the complexities and the pitfalls - are ALWAYS using a shitty MVNO plan?
I'm currently using an MVNO. I've also had AT&T and Verizon. Sorry to
burst your bubble, but my MVNO has been more helpful than the Big3.
Then why are you complaining about your support when nobody who is on T-Mobile or AT&T complains about the support (admittedly Verizon stinks).
Glad you never needed help from your carrier. Don't project your
experience onto everyone else.
If you're contracting with an MVNO, you deserve the shitty experiences you >>> have. But people who are on the big three almost never have those problems. >>>
If you're going to use an MVNO, then your problems are self inflicted.
Ah, I see you're a fanboy for the Big3, so anything else just must be
shitty. Uh huh, sure.
Alls I'm saying is that if you are using an MVNO whose sole reason for existing is to cut costs from what the big 3 charge, then if you're also complaining about the shitty support, then your issues are self inflicted.
On 29.6.2023 13:40, "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
Think about it. If the carrier needed every mom and pop to explicitly set >>> the APN data, they'd go out of business in terms of unnecessary support. >>>
They can set all that remotely over the air you know.
Except when it fails.
They have your IMEI. They have your location. They know the cell tower.
If they can't update your phone then they don't deserve to be in business.
Remember that all the people complaining about their service are on
MVNOs.
The sole purpose of the MVNO is to cut costs anywhere they can cut
them. If people on MVNOs complain about service - the problem is self inflicted.
sms:
VanguardLH wrote: (added attribution line)
I needed to call my carrier to get the APN data needed to configure
the phone. That is configuration data for *THEIR* service.
Nothing to do with supporting the phone itself. All to do with
getting my phone to work with THEIR service.
Yeah, I needed to look that up on one phone I had but for most
phones the SIM card will automatically set the APN and then they
lock you out from changing it.
You must have a decidedly unfriendly carrier if they lock you out
that way.
Where would I get the information necessary to set all those options?
On Sun, 2 Jul 2023 21:38:31 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-07-02 16:53, Ken Blake wrote:
On Sun, 2 Jul 2023 12:18:27 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-07-02 01:13, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 12:28:29 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-29 16:10, Ken Blake wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 14:36:40 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-06-29 14:02, Frank Slootweg wrote:
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 6/28/2023 4:30 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:
...
2. They want to ensure that the phones on their network have the >>>>>>>>>> necessary bands for optimal performance.
They have no control over the phones which are roaming on their
network. What are they going to do, refuse service? I'm trembling in my
wooden shoes.
You have one of those?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_albarcas
It looks like it would be very hard to walk in just one of them.
They are apparently wonderful in the mud :-)
If you are wearing just one?
One pair?
Yes, that would have fine. But the sentence without "pair" reads
strangely, and that was my attempt at a small joke.
English is not my first language.
I know, but it's much better than any other language that I can speak
a little of (I'm best at Italian, but my Italian is nowhere near as
good as your English). I didn't want to give you a hard time; it was
just a *little* joke,
Am 29.06.2023 um 08:07:32 Uhr schrieb sms:
I needed to call my carrier to get the APN data needed to configure the
phone. That is configuration data for *THEIR* service. Nothing to do >>> with supporting the phone itself. All to do with getting my phone to
work with THEIR service.
Yeah, I needed to look that up on one phone I had but for most phones
the SIM card will automatically set the APN and then they lock you out
from changing it.
You must have a decidedly unfriendly carrier if they lock you out that way.
I had the carrier's store set up my phone when I got it new from Amazon.
Cost me twenty bucks (so next time I'm doing it over the phone instead).
But I just looked on my Android 12 Galaxy in "Settings" > "Connections"
"Mobile networks" > "Access Point Names" and has one selected already.
It's the only pre-selected item but there's an "Add" button and a "Reset
to default" option (which I don't want to mess with for the obvious
reasons).
By to test your statement that they "lock you out", when I hit the "Add" button, up comes an "Edit access point" screen with so many editable
options that I wouldn't know what to do with most of them in the list.
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 10:13:09 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
On 6/30/2023 6:55 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
<snip>
And as I've said before, wireless charging wouldn't work for me.
With MagSafe (or equivalent) wireless charging works fine when holding
the phone while charging.
Thanks for the info. I had never heard of MagSafe before. But Googling
it, I see that it's just for iPhones, so it would be useless for me.
If the service costs more and if they then give you monthly credits, then
the arithmetic has to add up to make that "subsidized" phone worth it.
The APN (Access Point Name) is how you define the network path for all cellular connectivity. *IF* the cellular carrier supports automatic APN setup then, yep, you don't have to do it manually. Sorry, but your experience is not globally experienced by every consumer of every
cellular carrier.
Maybe you and Tamborino buy locked phones. Those would already be
preset for the APN data programmed into them (and which you cannot
change) to enforce you to use the cellular carrier to which the phone is locked.
1) a lot of people balk at paying $900 or more, outright, for a
phone.
On 7/3/2023 10:13 AM, sms wrote:
1) a lot of people balk at paying $900 or more, outright, for a
phone.
When I bought my S10+ from the carrier I had a choice of paying in full
up front or making 24 NO-INTEREST payments. Not much of a decision there
for me. Course that wouldn't work for those who switch carriers often...
On 7/1/2023 4:15 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 10:13:09 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
On 6/30/2023 6:55 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
<snip>
And as I've said before, wireless charging wouldn't work for me.
With MagSafe (or equivalent) wireless charging works fine when holding
the phone while charging.
Thanks for the info. I had never heard of MagSafe before. But Googling
it, I see that it's just for iPhones, so it would be useless for me.
It's available for any phone with wireless charging.
I use it on my Google Pixel with this magnetic ring ><https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09MDY421H>. There are less expensive magnets >that will support the weight of MagSafe type charger but this one
supports the weight a a heavy phone, a Google Pixel 7 Pro. So I can
place it on my MagSafe car mount. No cables or clips. For my iPhone 11, >which is not MagSafe compatible, I have a case that adds MagSafe >functionality like <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BGBYZF42>.
On 7/3/2023 9:39 AM, sms wrote:
I use it on my Google Pixel with this magnetic ring
<https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09MDY421H>. There are less expensive
magnets that will support the weight of MagSafe type charger but this
one supports the weight a a heavy phone, a Google Pixel 7 Pro. So I
can place it on my MagSafe car mount. No cables or clips. For my
iPhone 11, which is not MagSafe compatible, I have a case that adds
MagSafe functionality like <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BGBYZF42>.
Just bought a new car. It came with a built-in wireless phone charger.
What will they think of next...
VanguardLH wrote:
The APN (Access Point Name) is how you define the network path for all
cellular connectivity. *IF* the cellular carrier supports automatic APN
setup then, yep, you don't have to do it manually. Sorry, but your
experience is not globally experienced by every consumer of every
cellular carrier.
Some carriers prevent manual APN changes or additions.
On 7/3/2023 10:38 AM, AJL wrote:
Just bought a new car. It came with a built-in wireless phone
charger. What will they think of next...
Does it also have Apple Car Play and Android Auto?
Less need for a magnetic/Qi phone mount that lets you see the phone
if that's the case.
On 7/2/2023 5:40 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
<snip>
Maybe you and Tamborino buy locked phones. Those would already be
preset for the APN data programmed into them (and which you cannot
change) to enforce you to use the cellular carrier to which the phone is
locked.
In the U.S. it's often the carrier that sets the APN, based on the SIM
card, whether the phone is locked or not.
On unlocked phones you can put in any SIM you want and the APN will
change (or can be changed manually in some cases). But in the U.S. you
also have carriers not allowing certain phones to be activated, based on
the IMEI, for various reasons, some legitimate, but many bogus. For
example, Verizon has decided that a phone that they sell via their
Tracfone brands cannot be used on their Visible brand, even when the
phone is unlocked and even though the phone's hardware is identical.
They do this because Tracfone sells the phones at much lower cost than Visible charges for the same phone.
How would they prevent users from modifying APN settings on an unlocked phone? If the phone is locked on the APN settings, the phone is locked,
not unlocked. Are there such things are "partially unlocked" phones?
Thanks for the info. I had never heard of MagSafe before. But Googling
it, I see that it's just for iPhones, so it would be useless for me.
It's available for any phone with wireless charging.
On 7/3/2023 12:41 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
<snip>
How would they prevent users from modifying APN settings on an unlocked
phone? If the phone is locked on the APN settings, the phone is locked,
not unlocked. Are there such things are "partially unlocked" phones?
The SIM card is able to set the APN and disable the ability to change
it. And no, you can't just add an APN with the SIM card out, or a
different SIM card installed, and then but the other SIM card back in.
My unlocked iPhone 11 is on Total Wireless, a Verizon-owned prepaid
service. There is no way to even see the APN, let alone change it, with
the Total Wireless SIM installed. The same situation exists with Android devices and Verizon's prepaid brands. They do NOT want you putting in a different APN.
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
On 7/3/2023 12:41 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
<snip>
How would they prevent users from modifying APN settings on an unlocked
phone? If the phone is locked on the APN settings, the phone is locked, >>> not unlocked. Are there such things are "partially unlocked" phones?
The SIM card is able to set the APN and disable the ability to change
it. And no, you can't just add an APN with the SIM card out, or a
different SIM card installed, and then but the other SIM card back in.
My unlocked iPhone 11 is on Total Wireless, a Verizon-owned prepaid
service. There is no way to even see the APN, let alone change it, with
the Total Wireless SIM installed. The same situation exists with Android
devices and Verizon's prepaid brands. They do NOT want you putting in a
different APN.
So, the unlocked phone could get locked by the SIM card, but you can
still use different SIM cards in the unlocked phone. Guess you have to
be careful what SIM card they stick you with, but then you probably
don't care. If the unlocked phone and their SIM gets you accessing
their cellular network, you're done.
If the SIM card is supposed to carry the APN data that always gets
programmed into the phone, and can even mandate the phone not allow you
to change APN settings, why do all the main carriers and phone makers
provide pages on how to manually enter the APN data?
IMO, wireless charging isn't a big deal. If you dislike connecting/ disconnecting the charge cable, then just get a magnetic cable and it
will be nearly as easy as putting the phone on a wireless charging
stand.
However there are some stores that sell fake unlocked iPhones, called
"Flex Lock" the phone is locked to the network of the first SIM that is installed (AT&T, T-Mobile, or Verizon). Best Buy is famous for this.
However Best Buy now also sells truly unlocked iPhones as well whereas
before this if you want a truly unlocked iPhone you had to buy it from
Apple.
The reason for "Flex Lock" is because Best Buy gets a kickback from the carrier that enables them to discount the Flex Lock phones.
[VanguardLH] If the SIM card is supposed to carry the APN data that
always gets programmed into the phone, and can even mandate the
phone not allow you to change APN settings, why do all the main
carriers and phone makers provide pages on how to manually enter the
APN data?
Because not all carriers and MVNOs provide SIM cards that set and lock
the APN.
At&T would have been better? Dunno, but they did not sell their prepaid
SIMs over Amazon in Europe, in advance.
Flex policy moves the locking to the reseller who tries to bundle the
phone with a particular carrier. Where the phone gets locked has moved,
not that the phone is ever unlocked in a usable state. It's a
/reseller/ policy.
You must have a decidedly unfriendly carrier if they lock you out
that way.
Maybe you and Tamborino buy locked phones. Those would already be
preset for the APN data programmed into them (and which you cannot
change) to enforce you to use the cellular carrier to which the phone is locked.
I haven't bought a locked phone in a very long time. I don't have an
old locked phone gathering dust in a drawer to check if the APN data was pre-configured and barred from user modification.
Where would I get the information necessary to set all those options?
There are online articles on what APN data to use which which carrier. Assuming your phone actually lets you edit the APN settings instead of
just view them, some such online articles are:
(*) I think these are the defaults. It's been years since I had to
manually enter the APN data on my UNLOCKED phone, and defaults might
differ based on which brand and model of smartphone you have.
By to test your statement that they "lock you out", when I hit the "Add"
button, up comes an "Edit access point" screen with so many editable
options that I wouldn't know what to do with most of them in the list.
Yes, many U.S. carriers and MVNOs disable the "Add" functionality in the
APN settings. They don't want you to be able to change your APN. Even if
your phone is unlocked it doesn't matter.
Verizon does another thing with their Visible prepaid service, which is
the best choice for true unlimited data, with unlimited hotspsot, in the
U.S. ($25-35 per month). They prevent unlocked phones from their other prepaid brands, the brands they acquired with Tracfone, from being used
on Visible. This is because they sell the phones for Tracfone at very
low prices while the same phones they sell through Visible are much more expensive. By setting the CSC differently, and blocking ranges of IMEIs,
they prevent people from buying the less expensive phones. This doesn't
work on iPhones but it does work on Samsung and Motorola phones.
When I bought my S10+ from the carrier I had a choice of paying in
full up front or making 24 NO-INTEREST payments. Not much of a
decision there for me.
There actually is one advantage in not taking advantage of the 0%
interest financing. Many U.S. credit cards provide an extended
warranty on items purchased outright. Used to be an additional two
years with the Costco Citibank Visa, but now most cards are limited
to one additional year.
Interesting point. I'll try to remember that for next time. I made my
phone's payments (and carrier bill) with my cash back credit card so
that at least helped a little...
Looks like the MVNO didn't give me one of those destructive SIM cards,
or my unlocked phone didn't give a gnat's fart about any SIM trying to
lock up my phone's APN settings. I hadn't heard of "flex" unlocked
phones, and anyone selling me one of those would find themself in concilliation court trying to define "unlocked" as being less than
unlocked. However, I do read instructions and manuals, and if they
warned that first-use would lock the unlocked phone then I'd immediately return that crap.
Can't see how these would be usable as data cables, just as power
cables. USB has 4 signals: +5 VDC, ground, and a pair for differential
data signaling (D- and D+).
The problem with having pins contact a foil is the tiny contact surface
With an unlocked phone, I have to buy a SIM that is authorized to access
a carrier's cellular network, so the SIM card can determine which
carrier I can use with which unlocked phone. However, when I've needed
to change carriers (with the same MVNO), I didn't need a new SIM card,
but had to change the writable APN settings in the Android settings.
phones from accessing a carrier's network. "We don't want your kindWhere it's really annoying is when a visitor to the U.S. wants to sign
here". Okay, being dramatic. The intent of the EIR is to track down,
secure lost, or stolen phones.
There are plenty of online articles on how to change the IMEI number in
your phone without having to root it, like:
https://drfone.wondershare.com/sim-unlock/change-imei-android.html
To me, the example of Verizon blocking phones that can be sold cheaper,
is illegal and cause for a class action lawsuit. There's the intent of
IMEI, and there's the misuse of it.
You can't get fast charging with wireless.
Tamborino <tamborinonospam@gomail.com.ua> wrote:
Given that, the best bet, by far, in the USA, it to buy any phone
unlocked. Then go to any one of the big three (avoid those crazy
MVNOs) for service.
Again: Pay more, or pay less. Consumers are generally price driven
Low contact surface area means higher resistance. The cable may be
great for USB3 rating and high-rate charging, and even add shielding,
but the pin heads contacting foil pads ruins the design.
Could you start your car if the power cables used just a couple nail
tips to touch the battery posts?
Maybe you and Tamborino buy locked phones. Those would already be
preset for the APN data programmed into them (and which you cannot
change) to enforce you to use the cellular carrier to which the phone is locked.
I haven't bought a locked phone in a very long time. I don't have an
old locked phone gathering dust in a drawer to check if the APN data was pre-configured and barred from user modification.
Technically, Verizon is required to unlock all phones, paid off or not,
sixty days after they are activated. But Verizon would argue that
banning certain unlocked phones from their network, even though they are compatible with their network, is not covered under the FCC mandate.
What's needed is a law that prohibits carriers from activating unlocked phones that are compatible with their network, especially when they sell
the identical phone.
If you're [AJL] making all your decisions on factors unrelated to the
phone and the service...
For example, you can't complain that you can't leave a carrier
because of the implied contract when you got a "free" phone (on
two-year credits).
I'm not. I've been with the same carrier for over 30 years now. And in+1.
all that time I've never had to call in for a service problem. So why
change?
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
IMO, wireless charging isn't a big deal. If you dislike connecting/ disconnecting the charge cable, then just get a magnetic cable and it
will be nearly as easy as putting the phone on a wireless charging
stand.
Have you tried the magnetic cables? They don't work (well, perform
extremely poorly) because of extreme little contact area.
On 7/3/2023 11:15 AM, sms wrote:
On 7/3/2023 10:38 AM, AJL wrote:
Just bought a new car. It came with a built-in wireless phone
charger. What will they think of next...
Does it also have Apple Car Play and Android Auto?
Yes, both.
Less need for a magnetic/Qi phone mount that lets you see the phone
if that's the case.
It also came with 3 years of OnStar. So I can just push a button and
instruct a human what I need or where I want to go and it appears on my screen. I also get an email every month showing car stats including the
tire pressures. Big difference from my 49 Chevy days...
Course these gadgets are definitely not for the I wanna keep my info off
the grid paranoids... 8-O
OTOH, I've seen the magnetic charging cable of Apple 'laptops' work
quite well. (No, I don't know the name of that connection, nor a
specific model name/number. (I probably still have the corpse (don't
ask) of such a laptop in our storage, but I can't be bothered to dig it
up.))
AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
It [my new car] came with 3 years of OnStar. So I can just push a
button and instruct a human what I need or where I want to go and
it appears on my screen.
I don't know if it was OnStar, but it doesn't matter for my
anecdote:
In 2008 we flew from The Netherlands into San Fransico for a round
trip in California. We arrived late, picked up our rental car (big
fuss, but I disgress) and drove towards our (close by) hotel. I had
checked the route on Google Maps and stopped on the side of the road
to check my notes (no smartphone yet, no GPS in the car). I tried to
switch on the interior light and then a nice lady said "Can I help
you?". *What*!? Where the heck was she coming from!? Of course it
was OnStar or something like that. I said we were fine, thanked the
lady and went on our merry way. Ever since it's a nice anecdote for
parties, etc..
If you're not bored to death yet, you can now click Next.
Maybe you and Tamborino buy locked phones. Those would already be
preset for the APN data programmed into them (and which you cannot
change) to enforce you to use the cellular carrier to which the phone is locked.
On 5 Jul 2023, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote in comp.mobile.android:
Flex policy moves the locking to the reseller who tries to bundle the
phone with a particular carrier. Where the phone gets locked has moved,
not that the phone is ever unlocked in a usable state. It's a
/reseller/ policy.
The problem you're running into is trying to make sense out of the logic of
a person whose only goal is to cheat the carriers to get the least
expensive possible price for the crappiest service & crummiest phone.
Then... this person complains like a cat dunked in a bathtub that his cheap crappy service and cheap crappy sim card are cheap and crappy service.
Nobody has the cheap crappy service he has unless they too constantly dig deeper and deeper into the refuse pile of cheap MVNOs to get crappy
service.
I have nothing against cheap crappy service because the virtue is that it's cheap.
But you can't then COMPLAIN like a child with a poopy diaper when you do.
VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
IMO, wireless charging isn't a big deal. If you dislike connecting/
disconnecting the charge cable, then just get a magnetic cable and it
will be nearly as easy as putting the phone on a wireless charging
stand.
Have you tried the magnetic cables? They don't work (well, perform
extremely poorly) because of extreme little contact area.
[Bad experience with a certain magnetic cable product deleted.]
No, I have not tried (USB) magnetic cables. I'm quite sure the ones
I've seen do *not* use foil on one side (but solid metal). So I think you/'we' should not paint all magnetic cables with the same brush.
Any other people with positive/negative experience with magnetic
charging cables for smartphones?
I've had plenty of chances to change my mind on using an MVNO, and
switch to a major cellular provider, but my experience has me
reenlisting with the MVNO. I don't buy phones through my MVNO, so I've
not run across what sms notes are the major carriers blocking cheaper
phones sold by the MVNO than the big carrier trying to sell the same
phone. I remember many years ago (about 19 years) was the last time I
bought a flip phone from my MVNO, because it came with triple minutes:
the number of minutes I purchased from the MVNO got tripled.
I like getting rollover minutes, so my purchased quota remains usable.
I don't want to buy a pie to store in the freezer only to discover just
a couple days later my monthly quota of pies simply expired, and the pie disappeared from my freezer.
On 6/28/2023 8:40 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
<snip>
You can't get fast charging with wireless.
That depends on the phone.
The iPhone 14 charges wirelessly at 15W. Some Chinese brands charge at
much higher, up to 80 watts, though the Chinese government said that
they will limit wireless charging to 50W.
While I see Apple touting the wireless charging rate, I'm curious what
is the efficiency. How power is consumed by the charging base rather
than how much power is transfered to the phone?
The wireless power transfer is claimed to be 15W. The wall adapter to
which it plugs into is rated for 20W output. That's 60% efficiency.
The wall adapter also has its own less-than-100% efficiency rating, but
it's likely not much different than wall adapters for wired charging.
I'm not really touting the wireless chargers as a bane to energy
management. I state that wired charging is more efficient, and faster,
and the counter arguments are to ignore efficiency, and 20 minutes
longer is okay since they charge when they're sleeping (versus wanting a fully charged phone after work before going out for entertainment).
Since we're on Apple stuff, the MagSafe wireless charger takes an hour
to charge an iPhone from 0% to 50% capacity. That is double the time
with a USB-C to Lightning cable with a 20W USB-C power adapter. Gets
worse when charging from 50% to 100%.
Also, MagSafe just added magnets
to ensure correct alignment, but still using Qi charging technology.
There's nothing really magic about MagSafe.
Oh, you might not be getting Apple's claimed 15W of transferred power
using their MagSafe wireless charging base.
Supposedly you get 15W with
an iPhone 12+, but 12W with the iPhone 12 mini,
and only 7.5W with the
iPhone 8 to 11.
I'm not really touting the wireless chargers as a bane to energy
management. I state that wired charging is more efficient, and faster,
and the counter arguments are to ignore efficiency, and 20 minutes
longer is okay since they charge when they're sleeping (versus wanting a fully charged phone after work before going out for entertainment).
Since we're on Apple stuff, the MagSafe wireless charger takes an hour
to charge an iPhone from 0% to 50% capacity. That is double the time
with a USB-C to Lightning cable with a 20W USB-C power adapter. Gets
worse when charging from 50% to 100%. Also, MagSafe just added magnets
to ensure correct alignment, but still using Qi charging technology.
There's nothing really magic about MagSafe.
Oh, you might not be getting Apple's claimed 15W of transferred power
using their MagSafe wireless charging base. Supposedly you get 15W with
an iPhone 12+, but 12W with the iPhone 12 mini, and only 7.5W with the
iPhone 8 to 11. For iPhone 12, the 15W rate is triggering when the wall adapter is pulling more than 9V @ 2.56A. Rate lowers if temperatures go
up. The drop in power transfer is to combat overheating, so that 15W wireless base may only be charging at the 7.5W rate. The safety drop
can occur just a few minutes after starting the MagSafe charging cycle.
Part of the thermally based reduction in charging rate is the iPhone preventing battery damage from too fast a charging rate.
For now, I'll stick with the far more efficient and far faster charging
cycle of wired chargers. I might look into wireless charging for my
next phone, but it won't be for fast charging. It'll be where I leave
my phone to charge when I go to bed.
I did a bunch of testing of wired versus wireless charging (but not high-wattage wireless charging) and found that wireless charging took
24-30% more electricity.
Since we're on Apple stuff, the MagSafe wireless charger takes an hour
to charge an iPhone from 0% to 50% capacity. That is double the time
with a USB-C to Lightning cable with a 20W USB-C power adapter. Gets
worse when charging from 50% to 100%.
you obviously have never used it (not that anyone suspected otherwise).
the reality is it's much faster than 'double the time' and it also
doesn't 'get worse' from 50% to 100%.
as with any lithium ion battery, the charge rate will slow down as it
gets close to fully charged, usually around 80-90%, depending on
device. otherwise, the battery can go boom and customers really don't
like when that happens.
I think that the original poster will need to go up to $500 to get all
the features that he wants, since the lower-end Android phones don't
have wireless charging. The Motorola Edge 2022 is under $500 at Best Buy.
Meanwhile, Android batteries nowadays are five, six and seven amp hours.
No iPhone battery is anywhere near those sizes - even brand new ones.
That means that iPhones are ALWAYS CONSTANTLY IN NEED OF A CHARGER!
The poor iPhone owners have to crawl around at night to charge them up.
I did a bunch of testing of wired versus wireless charging (but not
high-wattage wireless charging) and found that wireless charging took
24-30% more electricity.
it's actually worse than that, and the losses contribute to more heat,
which reduces the overall lifespan of the battery.
If you're [AJL] making all your decisions on factors unrelated to the
phone and the service...
I'm not. I've been with the same carrier for over 30 years now. And in
all that time I've never had to call in for a service problem. So why
change?
For example, you can't complain that you can't leave a carrier
because of the implied contract when you got a "free" phone (on
two-year credits).
Since I plan to stay with the carrier for the duration, implied
contracts never enter into my new phone decision (about every 4 years).
And it's folks like me paying the outrageous price of $35/line/mo that
make it possible for the carriers to cheap out their services to the
MVNOs. You all are welcome... ;)
Technically, Verizon is required to unlock all phones, paid off or not,
sixty days after they are activated. But Verizon would argue that
banning certain unlocked phones from their network, even though they are
compatible with their network, is not covered under the FCC mandate.
the fcc mandate forbids verizon from locking any phone in exchange for
the lte bands they use. the problem is they paid off ajit pi, at the
time the chairman of the fcc, to not enforce it.
What's needed is a law that prohibits carriers from activating unlocked
phones that are compatible with their network, especially when they sell
the identical phone.
what's needed is a law that prohibits carriers (or anyone, for that
matter) from bribing the regulatory agencies to look the other way.
Meanwhile, Android batteries nowadays are five, six and seven amp hours.
No iPhone battery is anywhere near those sizes - even brand new ones.
amp hour rating isn't what matters
Despite nospam's claim that Apple has a special battery chemistry that
isn't subject to any laws of physics,
the iPhone batteries will always die
sooner than the five, six and seven amp hour batteries typical of Android.
Personally, I would not buy a new phone that cost more than $400 without wireless charging, it's just such a compelling feature for multiple reasons.
the iPhone batteries will always die
sooner than the five, six and seven amp hour batteries typical of Android.
trolling.
From other reports, the claim is MagSafe wireless chargers are 75% efficient. That means 25% of the input power to the charger is wasted.
Of course, even the wired chargers are not 100% efficient, but
conversion from wall power to 5VDC is very efficient. Users pooh-pooh
the higher power consumption of wireless chargers, because they don't
care about the environmental impact, and they don't care about total
power consumption by those 225 million of iPhones sold in 2022, and to increase in the future, the wasted power by all those wireless chargers
could power New York City for 2 month, or $172 million USD per year.
This reminds me of the arguments I see against reverse-osmosis water filtration. R-O does indeed generate waste water but the absolute
quantity, compared to the daily use of a household or business, is
negligible in the scheme of things, a few gallons per day for a household.
You have to take a systems approach to measuring efficiency because
there are multiple points where efficiency is lost.
That 25-35% sounds like a huge amount of wasted energy but the reality
You also have to look at
the fact that you're not going to have to do early replacement of the
phone due to failure of the charging port,
It's the guy you were conversing with who seems to constantly chase
the lowest cost reseller phone and the lowest cost MVNO reseller.
It wasn't you who complained about the "contract" not letting him out.
It was the guy you were speaking with.
What the person you were conversing with was doing was ONLY looking at the low cost & then complaining about everything else that enabled that price.
Everyone else just buys their own phone so even dropping the contract after one year nets him a half-price phone that he can keep using for years more.
He's not looking at any of that.
He's trying to get the best price (which is ok).
But then he complains about everything else that enabled that best price. It's not sensible.
That 25-35% sounds like a huge amount of wasted energy but the reality
is that in absolute terms it's a tiny amount.
You also have to look at the fact that you're not going to have to do
early replacement of the phone due to failure of the charging port,
and the energy used in manufacturing the phone dwarfs the tiny
additional amount of energy necessary for wireless versus wired
charging.
It's the guy you were conversing with who seems to constantly chase
the lowest cost reseller phone and the lowest cost MVNO reseller.
Your argument is to pay more to use the same carrier.
Many folks go that route.
They want the comfort in paying more thinking they get more.
I've never found much need for technical support, so I don't see
the need to pay more for something nebulous.
Better support is what the
big guys use to sucker in the buyers, like retailers wanting to sell you extended warranty contracts.
It wasn't you who complained about the "contract" not letting him out.
It was the guy you were speaking with.
Never had any irritation from my MVNO to discontinue subscribing to
their service. In fact, there's no contract at all. Nothing to lock
you into their service.
What the person you were conversing with was doing was ONLY looking at the >> low cost & then complaining about everything else that enabled that price.
Since this sub-topic has gotten deep with several tentacles
(subthreads), how about identifyin who is that person.
Everyone else just buys their own phone so even dropping the contract after >> one year nets him a half-price phone that he can keep using for years more. >>
He's not looking at any of that.
He's trying to get the best price (which is ok).
But then he complains about everything else that enabled that best price.
It's not sensible.
Seems a parallel argument is to buy a car, or lease it. I tried
leasing. Didn't like it. It wasn't cheaper. Went back to buying the
car (cash, not a loan).
Actually a worse statistic is how long phone users keep their phones. I
keep mine until it is no longer usable, and that's due to apps that
won't support old versions of the OS, or the carriers changing their services. However, the average ownership of a smartphone is only 2.5
years which is why most users never encounter the waning capacity of batteries for phones with non-serviceable batteries (the user is not to replace the battery, and doing so violates the warranty). And it's
getting worse. Ownership for the latest generation devices is down to
15-18 months.
Those that keep their phones for longer than the expected
longevity projected by phone makers are those that end up asking how to replace a normally non-replaceable battery.
On 3.7.2023 07:38, "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
At&T would have been better? Dunno, but they did not sell their prepaid
SIMs over Amazon in Europe, in advance.
The sole purpose of the MVNO is to cut costs anywhere they can cut them.
In the USA, all three major carriers are about the same (despite one person on this group who is not on any of them and never was and never will be)
who says otherwise (as he calls his service "Verizon" but it's an MVNO).
For those who decide to go the way of MVNO - the problem is self inflicted.
What enticing new technology compels people to want a new phone? Not
much.
If you already have 5G (and you probably do), then there's nothing
else.
Luckily on Android they don't pull the battery registration tricks
Apple does,
and the Android batteries are generally around ten to twenty bucks.
I don't see any reason people wouldn't keep Androids five or more
years.
Actually a worse statistic is how long phone users keep their phones. I
keep mine until it is no longer usable, and that's due to apps that
won't support old versions of the OS, or the carriers changing their
services. However, the average ownership of a smartphone is only 2.5
years which is why most users never encounter the waning capacity of
batteries for phones with non-serviceable batteries (the user is not to
replace the battery, and doing so violates the warranty). And it's
getting worse. Ownership for the latest generation devices is down to
15-18 months.
Do you have a source for that? That doesn't gel with the longer term trends and the fact manufacturers are supporting phones for longer and longer.
Those that keep their phones for longer than the expected
longevity projected by phone makers are those that end up asking how to
replace a normally non-replaceable battery.
Non *user* replaceable battery. Currently batteries are replaceable, just
not routinely by users.
If someone never leaves an urban area then
T-Mobile is okay, but you NEVER want to take a road trip that goes
through rural areas.
There's an excellent Google Doc, "Coverage Differences Between
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
That 25-35% sounds like a huge amount of wasted energy but the reality
is that in absolute terms it's a tiny amount.
Until you aggregate that power loss across 225 million iPhones, and then
add all other brands of wireless charging phones.
On 2023-07-04 17:57, Tamborino wrote:
On 3.7.2023 07:38, "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
At&T would have been better? Dunno, but they did not sell their prepaid
SIMs over Amazon in Europe, in advance.
The sole purpose of the MVNO is to cut costs anywhere they can cut them.
In the USA, all three major carriers are about the same (despite one
person
on this group who is not on any of them and never was and never will be)
who says otherwise (as he calls his service "Verizon" but it's an MVNO).
For those who decide to go the way of MVNO - the problem is self
inflicted.
You are not reading.
Who cares if the 3 are better, if they don't sell their pre paid cards
to me?
If you already have 5G (and you probably do), then there's nothing
else.
My current needs are completely met with 4G. What more will 5G get me?
It's kinda like my cable situation. They will be tearing up my
neighborhood (and my yard) sometime this month to put in fiber. My
current setup works fine. No hiccups at all. Can't stop progress I guess...
Luckily on Android they don't pull the battery registration tricks
Apple does,
Must of changed. I replaced the wife's last iPhone's battery after it
blew up like a balloon cracking open the case. I still have it as a
backup phone and the battery's still working fine (crossing fingers)
and the Android batteries are generally around ten to twenty bucks.
IIRC the new iPhone battery cost me $30US. And it came with all the tools.
I don't see any reason people wouldn't keep Androids five or more
years.
Yup. My Galaxy S10+ will be 4 years old in a few months. It still works
just fine (original battery included) so probably won't replace it for
awhile yet...
On 7/6/2023 8:42 AM, Peter wrote:
What enticing new technology compels people to want a new phone? Not
much.
If you already have 5G (and you probably do), then there's nothing
else.
My current needs are completely met with 4G. What more will 5G get me?
AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
My current needs are completely met with 4G. What more will 5G get
me?
I think you'll get different answers to that depending on a host of
factors such as "which particular 5G" and "which particular carrier's
5G", etc.
If 5G isn't compelling enough (and I agree with you that it might not
be), then what else is "compelling enough" to make you want to buy a
new phone?
It's kinda like my cable situation. They will be tearing up my
neighborhood (and my yard) sometime this month to put in fiber. My
current setup works fine. No hiccups at all. Can't stop progress I
guess...
Sometimes the reason they put in the "newer technology" is so that
"they" can sell you more services (like TV or HBO or phone lines,
etc.).
It may be that you get nothing out of fiber. They do. They can sell
you more stuff (that you don't want but others might).
I replaced the wife's last iPhone's battery after it blew up like a
balloon cracking open the case.
People who bend over and accept that crap deserve everything they
get. Thank God Android doesn't pull most of that crap that Apple
pulls on folks.
I am scratching my head to find something (anything) that "kills" an
Android phone that came with a decent capacity (> 5amp hours)
battery. Mostly it's the charge cycles which kill a battery which the
larger Android batteries reduce in half so the battery lasts twice as
long as a result.
On 2023-07-04 17:57, Tamborino wrote:
On 3.7.2023 07:38, "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
At&T would have been better? Dunno, but they did not sell their prepaid
SIMs over Amazon in Europe, in advance.
The sole purpose of the MVNO is to cut costs anywhere they can cut them.
In the USA, all three major carriers are about the same (despite one
person
on this group who is not on any of them and never was and never will be)
who says otherwise (as he calls his service "Verizon" but it's an MVNO).
For those who decide to go the way of MVNO - the problem is self
inflicted.
You are not reading.
Who cares if the 3 are better, if they don't sell their pre paid cards
to me?
Luckily on Android they don't pull the battery registration tricks
Apple does,
Must of changed. I replaced the wife's last iPhone's battery after it
blew up like a balloon cracking open the case. I still have it as a
backup phone and the battery's still working fine (crossing fingers)
Maybe you've never read the news as it has been well publicized for years. https://www.inc.com/jason-aten/heres-real-reason-apple-doesnt-want-you-to-replace-battery-in-your-iphone-on-your-own.html
Apple's strategy has always been to make it as hard as possible to replace the battery & screen in the iPhone, just as Apple's strategy has always
been to slowly decontent the iPhone to restrict your available choices. https://www.ifixit.com/News/32343/apple-is-locking-batteries-to-iphones-now
Apple's strategy has always also been to put the smallest capacity battery
in the iPhone so that the charge cycles overwhelm the battery chemistry.
As was well publicized because it cost Apple about a billion dollars in lawsuits, Apple went a little too far years ago in lowering battery life.
Nowadays Apple is smarter in that they put the smallest capacity battery
and they force the most nightly recharges so that the battery dies sooner.
People who bend over and accept that crap deserve everything they get.
Thank God Android doesn't pull most of that crap that Apple pulls on folks.
and the Android batteries are generally around ten to twenty bucks.
IIRC the new iPhone battery cost me $30US. And it came with all the tools.
This is the latest up-to-date iFixit iPhone battery replacement I found. https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iPhone+14+Pro+Max+Battery+Replacement/153006
Unfortunately they make it hard to find out the total cost of the tools required and the battery itself so I needed to look elsewhere for that. https://9to5mac.com/2022/09/12/iphone-14-battery-repair-cost/
But the battery replacement at Apple is $100 plus sales tax and shipping. https://swappa.com/blog/iphone-battery-replacement-cost/
I don't see any reason people wouldn't keep Androids five or more
years.
Yup. My Galaxy S10+ will be 4 years old in a few months. It still works
just fine (original battery included) so probably won't replace it for
awhile yet...
I am scratching my head to find something (anything) that "kills" an
Android phone that came with a decent capacity (> 5amp hours) battery.
Mostly it's the charge cycles which kill a battery which the larger Android batteries reduce in half so the battery lasts twice as long as a result.
The puny iPhone batteries show this effect sooner as a direct result. https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iPhone+14+Pro+Max+Battery+Replacement/153006 "iPhone batteries are rated to hold 80% of their capacity for up to 500 charge cycles, which lasts roughly 18-24 months for most users. After that, your iPhone may need to be charged far more frequently, and iOS may warn
you that performance is affected (in other words, your phone will run slower)."
Luckily, for Android, you will never spend $100 to replace a battery.
A replacement 4-1/2AmpHour Galaxy S10+ battery, with tools, is only $20. https://www.amazon.com/Upgraded-MAXBEAR-Li-Polymer-Replacement-EB-BG975ABU/dp/B083J76Y98
Another impelling factor is when phone makers cease pushing OS updates
to their phones. Once a phone maker discontinues a model, it doesn't
get OS updates anymore, and users trained on the new-is-better sales
mantra get antsy to replace their phones.
VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
Actually a worse statistic is how long phone users keep their phones. I
... the average ownership of a smartphone is only 2.5 years ...
Do you have a source for that? That doesn't gel with the longer term trends and the fact manufacturers are supporting phones for longer and longer.
Those that keep their phones for longer than the expected
longevity projected by phone makers are those that end up asking how to
replace a normally non-replaceable battery.
Non *user* replaceable battery. Currently batteries are replaceable, just
not routinely by users.
My current needs are completely met with 4G. What more will 5G get
me?
I think you'll get different answers to that depending on a host of
factors such as "which particular 5G" and "which particular carrier's
5G", etc.
And how you use your phone (YMMV)...
If 5G isn't compelling enough (and I agree with you that it might not
be), then what else is "compelling enough" to make you want to buy a
new phone?
Sometimes 'want' is enough. Like buying a new car... ;)
It's kinda like my cable situation. They will be tearing up my
neighborhood (and my yard) sometime this month to put in fiber. My
current setup works fine. No hiccups at all. Can't stop progress I
guess...
Sometimes the reason they put in the "newer technology" is so that
"they" can sell you more services (like TV or HBO or phone lines,
etc.).
My old technology cable has all that already...
In my case the new fiber installation is for a different company than
I'm using. So the new competition is good for (maybe) lower prices?
It may be that you get nothing out of fiber. They do. They can sell
you more stuff (that you don't want but others might).
Wasn't it Bill Gates that said nobody will ever need to go faster than
64K? Maybe when the progress gets here I'll see what I'm missing.
I replaced the wife's last iPhone's battery after it blew up like a
balloon cracking open the case.
I might add that the iPhone still worked normally even with the battery
blown up like a balloon. It took 3 or 4 days for the new battery to get
here so in the meantime I kept the phone on a cookie sheet in case of
fire. We still CAREFULLY used it.
People who bend over and accept that crap deserve everything they
get. Thank God Android doesn't pull most of that crap that Apple
pulls on folks.
I've never had a problem with Apple stuff. The wife has an iPhone, iPad,
and watch (iWatch?). They work seamlessly together for her. Good thing
cause other than replacing batteries I know little on how to work them.
I am scratching my head to find something (anything) that "kills" an
Android phone that came with a decent capacity (> 5amp hours)
battery. Mostly it's the charge cycles which kill a battery which the
larger Android batteries reduce in half so the battery lasts twice as
long as a result.
I generally use 20% or less a day on average and charge overnight.
Hasn't seemed to hurt my battery as far (knocks on wood twice)...
On 7/5/2023 8:56 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
That 25-35% sounds like a huge amount of wasted energy but the reality
is that in absolute terms it's a tiny amount.
Until you aggregate that power loss across 225 million iPhones, and then
add all other brands of wireless charging phones.
And even then it is minuscule.
4.21E-09 percent extra electricity worldwide (extrapolating onto 6.38
billion mobile devices).
Far more electricity is wasted in prematurely replacing devices that are discarded because the charging port has broken.
I'm not sure anyone is collecting statistics on the number of cell
phones whose USB port gets broken, so you're just guessing.
In the U.S. the three carriers are not nearly the same in terms of
coverage as their maps clearly show. I have been on all three carriers
in the past, both postpaid and prepaid, as well as on MVNOs of all three carriers on other devices. The differences are stark. Especially awful
are T-Mobile MVNOs which combine T-Mobile's poor native coverage along
with no off-network roaming. If someone never leaves an urban area then T-Mobile is okay, but you NEVER want to take a road trip that goes
through rural areas.
There's an excellent Google Doc, "Coverage Differences Between AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon" at <tinyurl.com/ATVCoverageComparisons> or <docs.google.com/document/d/1JLtqrZTpy33AxsVSJlUjSsoZHSZxSDO8l1B3fIytHlw> that goes into detail on this issue.
apple generally has the longest support, as much as 10 years for
security updates and typically 6 years for os updates.
In my city, only Verizon has been installing mmWave and they're
doing it to be able to sell "wireless broadband" to compete with
Xfinity and AT&T wired service.
I'm not sure anyone is collecting statistics on the number of cell
phones whose USB port gets broken, so you're just guessing.
Well you can be sure that one company is collecting that data (for
Lightning ports)!
It's the third most common iPhone failure, after glass (front & back) replacement and battery replacement,
While these connectors are designed for tens of thousands of mating
cycles, that's under normal use. But damaged or loose connectors are a
common problem because of abuse. For USB-C it's usually the connector on
the cable that fails, for Lighting it's usually the connector in the
phone that fails, and you can see why this is the case.
There's an excellent Google Doc, "Coverage Differences Between AT&T,
T-Mobile, and Verizon" at <tinyurl.com/ATVCoverageComparisons> or
<docs.google.com/document/d/1JLtqrZTpy33AxsVSJlUjSsoZHSZxSDO8l1B3fIytHlw>
that goes into detail on this issue.
Nice read.
On 7/6/2023 10:46 AM, sms wrote:
In my city, only Verizon has been installing mmWave and they're
doing it to be able to sell "wireless broadband" to compete with
Xfinity and AT&T wired service.
Verizon is pushing 5G wireless broadband here too. Some folks using it
have reported on my local community egroup that they are happy with it.
And SO FAR nobody has complained...
On 7/6/2023 3:03 PM, AJL wrote:
Verizon is pushing 5G wireless broadband here. Some folks using it
have reported on my local community egroup that they are happy
with it. And SO FAR nobody has complained...
In my city, a lot of people have complained about the 5G mmWave
cells on streetlight poles.
I have 600Mb/s Xfinity service for $35 per month (and that includes a
line of 1GB/month Xfinity mobile that I don't use but had to take in
some bizarre promotion). Verizon's mmWave service is slower and more expensive.
The 'ditch your cable' 5G Home Verizon ads I've seen here say they start
at $25/mo. I've not checked the details.
*In the western U.S. in general, AT&T and Verizon are the preferred
carriers: "Looking at the country as a whole, Verizon and AT&T have the
most coverage,
On 7/6/2023 4:41 PM, AJL wrote:
The 'ditch your cable' 5G Home Verizon ads I've seen here say they
start at $25/mo. I've not checked the details.
That $25 is if you have Verizon postpaid mobile service at a certain
level.
Xfinity and AT&T offer higher speeds than Verizon,
VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote
There's an excellent Google Doc, "Coverage Differences Between AT&T,
T-Mobile, and Verizon" at <tinyurl.com/ATVCoverageComparisons> or
<docs.google.com/document/d/1JLtqrZTpy33AxsVSJlUjSsoZHSZxSDO8l1B3fIytHlw> >>> that goes into detail on this issue.
Nice read.
He works for Verizon, by the way.
On 7/6/2023 4:02 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2023-07-04 17:57, Tamborino wrote:
On 3.7.2023 07:38, "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
At&T would have been better? Dunno, but they did not sell their prepaid >>>> SIMs over Amazon in Europe, in advance.
The sole purpose of the MVNO is to cut costs anywhere they can cut them. >>>
In the USA, all three major carriers are about the same (despite one
person
on this group who is not on any of them and never was and never will be) >>> who says otherwise (as he calls his service "Verizon" but it's an MVNO). >>>
For those who decide to go the way of MVNO - the problem is self
inflicted.
You are not reading.
Who cares if the 3 are better, if they don't sell their pre paid cards
to me?
Actually, I tend to agree about most MVNOs these days. It's usually
better to use one of the carrier-owned prepaid services for multiple
reasons. One big one is off-network roaming, which is useful on all
three U.S. carriers but is vitally important on T-Mobile which has a
small geographic footprint.
One nice thing about Verizon's Visible prepaid service is that it's true unlimited data, it includes the same off-network roaming as Verizon
postpaid, it includes unlimited hotspot (5Mb/s), and the Visible+ plan includes Canada and Mexico roaming. MVNOs can't offer true unlimited
data because they pay the carrier for every TB of data that its
subscribers use. Also, the $35 Visible Plus plan is QCI8 which is rare
for prepaid (though a U.S. Mobile plan and Consumer Cellular also offer QCI8). Visible also supports Apple Watches with LTE, which no MVNOs
support.
What you usually lose with MVNOs, and carrier prepaid services, is international roaming capability (other than Canada and Mexico on
Visible+). But the realty is that this forces you to use a prepaid
foreign SIM which is much less expensive than international roaming
which can cost $5 per day for a small amount of high speed data and $10
per day for a moderate amount of high speed data.
Not sure what you mean about the big 3 not selling their prepaid cards
to you. As long as you have a phone on their white list, or that passes
their IMEI check, you're fine.
There's an excellent Google Doc, "Coverage Differences Between AT&T,
T-Mobile, and Verizon" at <tinyurl.com/ATVCoverageComparisons> or
<docs.google.com/document/d/1JLtqrZTpy33AxsVSJlUjSsoZHSZxSDO8l1B3fIytHlw> >>> that goes into detail on this issue.
Nice read.
He works for Verizon, by the way.
Who is "he"? No author is attributed to the article.
Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote
There's an excellent Google Doc, "Coverage Differences Between AT&T,
T-Mobile, and Verizon" at <tinyurl.com/ATVCoverageComparisons> or
<docs.google.com/document/d/1JLtqrZTpy33AxsVSJlUjSsoZHSZxSDO8l1B3fIytHlw> >>>> that goes into detail on this issue.
Nice read.
He works for Verizon, by the way.
Who is "he"? No author is attributed to the article.
See above. I am in Spain, I intend to travel to Canada, and I need a SIM
card sold in Europe by Amazon prior to departure.
*In the western U.S. in general, AT&T and Verizon are the preferred
carriers: "Looking at the country as a whole, Verizon and AT&T have the
most coverage,
not true.
in the most recent survey from opensignal, t-mobile is well ahead of
both at&t and verizon, with verizon in *last* place.
<https://9to5mac.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2023/07/opensignal-cover age-5g_availability-5g.png>
There's an excellent Google Doc, "Coverage Differences Between AT&T, >>>>> T-Mobile, and Verizon" at <tinyurl.com/ATVCoverageComparisons> or
<docs.google.com/document/d/1JLtqrZTpy33AxsVSJlUjSsoZHSZxSDO8l1B3fIytHlw> >>>>> that goes into detail on this issue.
Nice read.
He works for Verizon, by the way.
Who is "he"? No author is attributed to the article.
sms, who likes to link to his articles as 'proof' without disclosing
that he wrote them.
But all of that is moot. It doesn't matter who is better for my use[...]
case, but who sells a fully prepaid SIM card to me, in Europe (Spain)
before departure. I can only buy a card that is sold, actually by Amazon.
In fact, all the SIMS I found are "bad", in which they have limited data
cap for use in Canada. 5 gigs, I think.
See above. I am in Spain, I intend to travel to Canada, and I need a SIM
card sold in Europe by Amazon prior to departure.
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
[...]
But all of that is moot. It doesn't matter who is better for my use[...]
case, but who sells a fully prepaid SIM card to me, in Europe (Spain)
before departure. I can only buy a card that is sold, actually by Amazon.
In fact, all the SIMS I found are "bad", in which they have limited data
cap for use in Canada. 5 gigs, I think.
See above. I am in Spain, I intend to travel to Canada, and I need a SIM
card sold in Europe by Amazon prior to departure.
It indeed seems that you have to purchase the SIM (in Spain) from
Amazon and that the amount of data is rather limited (5GB) and the price
is rather steep, some EUR 42 for 5GB (in Canada).
This article implies that you can get a little more data (8GB) and a
bit lower cost ($7/GB) from 'Telus' either through Amazon or from Telus direct, but the Amazon link doesn't seem to give the correct result and
I doubt that Telus itself will ship to Spain.
Anyway, here's the article/link:
'Canada SIM Cards: Everything You Need To Know' <https://abrokenbackpack.com/canada-sim-cards/#How_To_Buy_A_Canada_Prepaid_SIM_Card_Online>
(see the 'How To Buy A Canada Prepaid SIM Card Online' section)
A long shot:
You could try if you can buy a Telstra (main Australian telco) prepaid
SIM card from Spain (of course from some other webshop than from Telstra itself) and have it shipped to Spain.
If so, their International roaming packs cover Canada and their rates
are much lower, 4GB for AU$ 25 (about EUR 15), but only 14 days expiry.
You can activate the International roaming pack when you arrive in
Canada (or before, but that starts the expiry clock). I've used this on
my last (May) trip in the US (from NL).
If you're able to get the SIM, install their 'My Telstra' app on your phone.
AFAIK, you should be able to activate the SIM from Spain, because it's done online and I don't think they check IP addresses. IIRC (long, long
time ago), you need to provide passport details.
HTH.
On 7/7/2023 4:15 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
<snip>
See above. I am in Spain, I intend to travel to Canada, and I need a
SIM card sold in Europe by Amazon prior to departure.
Canada is a big issue because all the carriers engage in gentle
collusion to keep prices high. Even when you arrive you'll have an issue buying a prepaid SIM card with a lot of data.
A few prepaid providers in the U.S. provide roaming in Canada, but with limited data.
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually a worse statistic is how long phone users keep their phones. I >>> keep mine until it is no longer usable, and that's due to apps that
won't support old versions of the OS, or the carriers changing their
services. However, the average ownership of a smartphone is only 2.5
years which is why most users never encounter the waning capacity of
batteries for phones with non-serviceable batteries (the user is not to
replace the battery, and doing so violates the warranty). And it's
getting worse. Ownership for the latest generation devices is down to
15-18 months.
Do you have a source for that? That doesn't gel with the longer term trends >> and the fact manufacturers are supporting phones for longer and longer.
I would stand with you on this also in that you have to look at what kills
a smartphone nowadays & what compelling new technology entices people.
What kills a smartphone?
Not much.
You drop it. Or, eventually, the battery dies.
What enticing new technology compels people to want a new phone?
Not much.
If you already have 5G (and you probably do), then there's nothing else.
And name brands are providing full hofix patches for about five years
(for those who care) although most Android owners aren't all that worried.
Those that keep their phones for longer than the expected
longevity projected by phone makers are those that end up asking how to
replace a normally non-replaceable battery.
Non *user* replaceable battery. Currently batteries are replaceable, just
not routinely by users.
Luckily on Android they don't pull the battery registration tricks Apple does, and the Android batteries are generally around ten to twenty bucks.
Most people still don't replace their own batteries though, so the cost
will be not less than double that, and maybe even three times more.
I don't see any reason people wouldn't keep Androids five or more years.
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
Actually a worse statistic is how long phone users keep their phones. I >>> ... the average ownership of a smartphone is only 2.5 years ...
However, the average ownership of a smartphone is only 2.5 years which
is why most users never encounter the waning capacity of batteries for
phones with non-serviceable batteries (the user is not to replace the
battery, and doing so violates the warranty). And it's getting worse.
Ownership for the latest generation devices is down to 15-18 months.
Do you have a source for that? That doesn't gel with the longer term trends >> and the fact manufacturers are supporting phones for longer and longer.
Those that keep their phones for longer than the expected
longevity projected by phone makers are those that end up asking how to
replace a normally non-replaceable battery.
Non *user* replaceable battery. Currently batteries are replaceable, just
not routinely by users.
Just do an online search on "cell phone ownership lifespan". I did save "average".
https://www.bankmycell.com/blog/average-lifespan-of-smartphone
https://www.statista.com/statistics/619788/average-smartphone-life/
https://everphone.com/en/blog/smartphone-lifespan/
Lots of online statistics if you just look yourself.
On 7/6/2023 8:42 AM, Peter wrote:
What enticing new technology compels people to want a new phone? Not
much.
If you already have 5G (and you probably do), then there's nothing
else.
My current needs are completely met with 4G. What more will 5G get me?
It's kinda like my cable situation. They will be tearing up my
neighborhood (and my yard) sometime this month to put in fiber. My
current setup works fine. No hiccups at all. Can't stop progress I guess...
VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
Actually a worse statistic is how long phone users keep their phones. I >>>> ... the average ownership of a smartphone is only 2.5 years ...
That's naughty. You've edited what a replied to. Let's correct it shall we.
https://www.bankmycell.com/blog/average-lifespan-of-smartphone
Has almost the exact same wording as you above ...
"Average lifespan of a smartphone: A smartphone has an average life span of 2.58 years. According to reports, iPhones last 4-10 years, ...
Interestingly it has a table with trends over time which seemingly shows a slow reduction in lifespan with a massive caveat that data from 2021
onwards is a forecast. Why when it's published in 2023?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/619788/average-smartphone-life/
Paywalled so can't see the whole thing,
"In the United States, the average expected life span (replacement cycle length) of consumer and enterprise smartphones was similar in 2022, with smartphones in the consumer segment having a life span of around 2.65
years."
So again, doesn't support your claim.
Worse this is US only where the rest of the world is likely to keep
their phone for longer given contracts are less common than the US.
https://everphone.com/en/blog/smartphone-lifespan/
Again very similar wording to you, but completely unsubstantiated.
goes on to say:
"Here is a breakdown of the average mobile life according to the different brands:
iPhone – four to eight years
Samsung – three to six years
Huawei – two to four years
Xiaomi – two to four years
Oppo – two to three years
"
So is contradicting itself. None is less than 2 years so where on Earth
does 15-18 months come from?
Lots of online statistics if you just look yourself.
And none with data supports your claim.
It's kinda like my cable situation. They will be tearing up my
neighborhood (and my yard) sometime this month to put in fiber. My
current setup works fine. No hiccups at all. Can't stop progress I guess...
Agree. Honestly don't see the point of pushing fibre on those who already have fast internet. The difference between 40Mbps and 200Mbps is
meaningless for domestic use.
I read a curious claim the other day: that 5G phones use more battery, depending on the processor used. Apparently, it comes from the phone
being constantly switching between 4G and 5G because implementation of
the network is incomplete.
On 7/6/2023 8:42 AM, Peter wrote:
What enticing new technology compels people to want a new phone? Not
much.
If you already have 5G (and you probably do), then there's nothing
else.
My current needs are completely met with 4G. What more will 5G get me?
In article <u8b5s5$1mel5$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
It's kinda like my cable situation. They will be tearing up myAgree. Honestly don't see the point of pushing fibre on those who already
neighborhood (and my yard) sometime this month to put in fiber. My
current setup works fine. No hiccups at all. Can't stop progress I guess... >>
have fast internet. The difference between 40Mbps and 200Mbps is
meaningless for domestic use.
that depends on how many people are using it and what they do.
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
Actually a worse statistic is how long phone users keep their phones. I >>>>> ... the average ownership of a smartphone is only 2.5 years ...
That's naughty. You've edited what a replied to. Let's correct it shall we.
Learn to trim in Usenet. All of what I said is not required to provide context for your simple inquiry.
https://www.bankmycell.com/blog/average-lifespan-of-smartphone
Has almost the exact same wording as you above ...
Well, I'm not a research company gathering the statistics. You asked
for quote. I gave you just one of the online articles which I read.
"Average lifespan of a smartphone: A smartphone has an average life span of >> 2.58 years. According to reports, iPhones last 4-10 years, ...
You asked for citation on the *ownership* of phones. Not the same as
the *lifespan* of phones themselves.
Interestingly it has a table with trends over time which seemingly shows a >> slow reduction in lifespan with a massive caveat that data from 2021
onwards is a forecast. Why when it's published in 2023?
Because analysis is always on old data, not on yet-to-be-collected data.
If you want to find articles that do not project, and only shown
currently collected data, again, do your own online research. Do you
really think in 3 years that the average ownership has changed so dramatically that now it is far above the 3-year duration?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/619788/average-smartphone-life/
Paywalled so can't see the whole thing,
It wasn't on my first visit. On susequent visits, yep, blocked and
requires login. I don't have an account there. Not a paywall, but a registrationwall -- on occasion.
but top line result is:
"In the United States, the average expected life span (replacement cycle
length) of consumer and enterprise smartphones was similar in 2022, with
smartphones in the consumer segment having a life span of around 2.65
years."
So again, doesn't support your claim.
Geez, I said "average". I don't give a gnat's fart about miniscule differences of a month or two.
Worse this is US only where the rest of the world is likely to keep
their phone for longer given contracts are less common than the US.
https://everphone.com/en/blog/smartphone-lifespan/
Again very similar wording to you, but completely unsubstantiated.
Okay, YOUR TURN. Substantiate your claims with citations.
Then
goes on to say:
"Here is a breakdown of the average mobile life according to the different >> brands:
iPhone – four to eight years
Samsung – three to six years
Huawei – two to four years
Xiaomi – two to four years
Oppo – two to three years
"
So is contradicting itself. None is less than 2 years so where on Earth
does 15-18 months come from?
You really cannot differentiate between length of *OWNERSHIP* and the *LIFESPAN* of the phone?
I can own a car for 4 years, but the car continues to function longer.
Lots of online statistics if you just look yourself.
And none with data supports your claim.
Yeah, everyone sees how you cannot understand the difference between ownership and lifespan.
I was happy with my Cox 30 Mbps cable. It ran everything I needed just
fine. Then they involuntarily raised me to 150 Mbps (no extra charge).
And no noticeable difference. Just checked on fast.com and it says I'm getting 290 Mbps right now. Tell me again why I need fiber/5G... :-/
On 7/6/2023 9:10 PM, AJL wrote:
I was happy with my Cox 30 Mbps cable. It ran everything I needed
just fine. Then they involuntarily raised me to 150 Mbps (no extra
charge). And no noticeable difference. Just checked on fast.com
and it says I'm getting 290 Mbps right now. Tell me again why I
need fiber/5G... :-/
You don't. But you'll likely end up with a fiber backbone no matter
what you are paying for.
Verizon mmWave is on a streetlight pole down the street.
It's kinda like my cable situation. They will be tearing up my
neighborhood (and my yard) sometime this month to put in fiber. My
current setup works fine. No hiccups at all. Can't stop progress I
guess...
Agree. Honestly don't see the point of pushing fibre on those who already >> have fast internet. The difference between 40Mbps and 200Mbps is
meaningless for domestic use.
that depends on how many people are using it and what they do.
Of course. Like I say in a domestic household it makes no measurable difference IME. People who have problems are better off fixing wifi issues rather than their broadband.
5g can be disabled to extend
battery life.
Apple wants the iPhone magical 500 charge cycles to happen in 500 days.
Meanwhile, most Androids of the same price take 1,000 days to get to that magical 500 charge cycle point.
With phones, users are
discarding them, or trading them, or cashing in on them before the
device breaks. Unlike appliances or other property, phones are seen a consumable products: in general, users expect to replace them despite
they are fully functional.
In article <u8c7k4$1qch3$2@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
It's kinda like my cable situation. They will be tearing up my
neighborhood (and my yard) sometime this month to put in fiber. My
current setup works fine. No hiccups at all. Can't stop progress I
guess...
Agree. Honestly don't see the point of pushing fibre on those who already >>>> have fast internet. The difference between 40Mbps and 200Mbps is
meaningless for domestic use.
that depends on how many people are using it and what they do.
Of course. Like I say in a domestic household it makes no measurable
difference IME. People who have problems are better off fixing wifi issues >> rather than their broadband.
that depends on the size of the household. for 1-2 people, where
typical use is email, browsing, etc., i agree.
on the other hand, for a larger household, where some people are
gaming, while others are streaming video (especially if multiple videos
are streamed by multiple people, etc., then higher bandwidth is very
helpful.
and then there are content creators, who need *upstream* bandwidth to
upload their videos.
unfortunately, cable internet is generally
asymmetrical, with fast download but very limited upstream bandwidth,
making it a very bad choice, whereas fibre is the same in both
directions.
(You'll now be really pissed in that I trimmed everything of the parent article to which I replied. Quoting is not mandatory. It's a guide to provide context.)
https://www.bankmycell.com/blog/average-lifespan-of-smartphone
"Average Lifespan of Smartphones (Replacement Cycle Length) in the US"
Some authors have a problem differentiating between ownership longevity
and device lifespan. Notice in the above they qualified what they meant
by "lifespan" to be "replacement cycle length" which is just a different
way to say "ownership length".
https://www.statista.com/statistics/619788/average-smartphone-life/
"Average lifespan (replacement cycle length) of smartphones in the
United States from 2013 to 2027"
Again, they qualify what they mean by "lifespan" at to be "replacement
cycle length". Considering the similarity in article titles, perhaps
the first article used data from Statistica. After all, their first
article is a blog gathering data from elsewhere, not a research company accumulating the actual statistics.
I included the Everphone article despite it did not directly address
your inquiry. It was merely to show that phone owners are getting rid
of their phones before the phones are unusable. I use my TV until it
breaks. I use my washing machine until it breaks, and isn't viable to
repair it. I keep my tools until they break. With phones, users are discarding them, or trading them, or cashing in on them before the
device breaks. Unlike appliances or other property, phones are seen a consumable products: in general, users expect to replace them despite
they are fully functional.
In article <u8c7k4$1qch3$2@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
It's kinda like my cable situation. They will be tearing up my
neighborhood (and my yard) sometime this month to put in fiber. My
current setup works fine. No hiccups at all. Can't stop progress I
guess...
Agree. Honestly don't see the point of pushing fibre on those who already >>>> have fast internet. The difference between 40Mbps and 200Mbps is
meaningless for domestic use.
that depends on how many people are using it and what they do.
Of course. Like I say in a domestic household it makes no measurable
difference IME. People who have problems are better off fixing wifi issues >> rather than their broadband.
that depends on the size of the household. for 1-2 people, where
typical use is email, browsing, etc., i agree.
on the other hand, for a larger household, where some people are
gaming, while others are streaming video (especially if multiple videos
are streamed by multiple people, etc., then higher bandwidth is very
helpful.
and then there are content creators, who need *upstream* bandwidth to
upload their videos. unfortunately, cable internet is generally
asymmetrical, with fast download but very limited upstream bandwidth,
making it a very bad choice, whereas fibre is the same in both
directions.
Of course. Like I say in a domestic household it makes no measurable
difference IME. People who have problems are better off fixing wifi issues >> rather than their broadband.
that depends on the size of the household. for 1-2 people, where
typical use is email, browsing, etc., i agree.
on the other hand, for a larger household, where some people are
gaming, while others are streaming video (especially if multiple videos
are streamed by multiple people, etc., then higher bandwidth is very helpful.
Disagree. At the height of the pandemic there were four off at home, three WFH - two ethernet, one wifi - and evenings there was plenty streaming
going on. Including some 4K.
Not a single issue with bandwidth at 40/10. I really struggle to see the point of >300Mbps
Am now at 50/20 because it was a very cheap upgrade and the upload speed difference is important.
and then there are content creators, who need *upstream* bandwidth to upload their videos.
That's far from typical.
Unlike appliances or other property, phones are seen a
consumable products: in general, users expect to replace them despite
they are fully functional.
For instance, my Telco phased out 3G around here, so I had to phase out
a phone that was fully functional, meaning it worked the same as new,
but which did not do 4G (it failed to connect on 4G although it claimed
to have 4G). I managed to get the replacement for free, anyway, and
claims to do 5G.
I included the Everphone article despite it did not directly address
your inquiry. It was merely to show that phone owners are getting rid
of their phones before the phones are unusable. I use my TV until it
breaks. I use my washing machine until it breaks, and isn't viable to
repair it. I keep my tools until they break. With phones, users are discarding them, or trading them, or cashing in on them before the
device breaks. Unlike appliances or other property, phones are seen a consumable products: in general, users expect to replace them despite
they are fully functional.
Meanwhile, most Androids of the same price take 1,000 days to get to that
magical 500 charge cycle point.
there is no 'magical 500 charge cycle point', whatever that is supposed
to mean.
Apple is really good at this! Even when the technology is ready, Apple
tends to carefully meter out the inclusion of new features in order to
create continuous demand for upgrades.
On 7/9/2023 4:46 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
<snip>
For instance, my Telco phased out 3G around here, so I had to phase
out a phone that was fully functional, meaning it worked the same as
new, but which did not do 4G (it failed to connect on 4G although it
claimed to have 4G). I managed to get the replacement for free,
anyway, and claims to do 5G.
In the U.S., T-Mobile, who was late with LTE, simply rebranded their 3G network as 4G, claiming that the 4G designation is based on data speed,
not on the underlying technology and that they had increased the data
speed on their W-CDMA (HSDPA) network enough that it qualified as 4G.
This alone would not have been so bad but they were selling phones with
"4G" on the packaging that were not LTE capable. <https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/at-t-chides-t-mobile-for-misleading-4g-marketing-hspa>.
A few years later, AT&T rolled out fake 5G called 5GE <https://www.androidauthority.com/t-mobile-att-fake-5g-logo-941023/> and
was selling phones that lacked 5G claiming that they were 5G because of higher LTE data speeds.
You also had T-Mobile making a huge deal about how they had the most 5G
in the U.S. which was true at the time, but what they didn't say was
that their low-band 5G was about the same speed as AT&T and Verizon 4G
LTE, and the their own 4G LTE was slower. <https://www.lightreading.com/mobile/5g/rootmetrics-verizons-4g-is-faster-than-t-mobiles-5g/d/d-id/757111>.
T-Mobile also accurately claimed that their network had the highest percentage of 5G but they didn't explain that their network is much
smaller so achieving a higher percentage of 5G did not really mean much
for the end-user (especially because their 5G speed was not very high). Consumers need to read between the lines. "The most 5G" but the least geographic coverage may not be a good thing!
Verizon looked at these fake 4G and fake 5G battles between AT&T and
T-Mobile with some amusement since what really mattered to them was
retaining high-value corporate and government accounts that cared more
about coverage and quality than small differences in data speed.
AT&T and Verizon have been much faster in deploying 5G mmWave which
makes little difference for phone users, but it has enabled them to brag about having faster data rates as well as allowing them to break into
the wireless broadband market though with not much success so far.
Interesting times :-)
In article <u8e85t$24ieo$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
Of course. Like I say in a domestic household it makes no measurable
difference IME. People who have problems are better off fixing wifi issues >>>> rather than their broadband.
that depends on the size of the household. for 1-2 people, where
typical use is email, browsing, etc., i agree.
on the other hand, for a larger household, where some people are
gaming, while others are streaming video (especially if multiple videos
are streamed by multiple people, etc., then higher bandwidth is very
helpful.
Disagree. At the height of the pandemic there were four off at home, three >> WFH - two ethernet, one wifi - and evenings there was plenty streaming
going on. Including some 4K.
Not a single issue with bandwidth at 40/10. I really struggle to see the
point of >300Mbps
so because you need it, nobody else does either.
Am now at 50/20 because it was a very cheap upgrade and the upload speed
difference is important.
that upgrade was cheap because they know that people are doing more
bandwidth intensive tasks, plus it's no longer cost-effective to offer anything slower.
and then there are content creators, who need *upstream* bandwidth to
upload their videos.
That's far from typical.
but you just said the upload speed was important.
anyway, it's far more common than you think. a *lot* of people generate content.
Disagree. At the height of the pandemic there were four off at home, three >> WFH - two ethernet, one wifi - and evenings there was plenty streaming
going on. Including some 4K.
Not a single issue with bandwidth at 40/10. I really struggle to see the >> point of >300Mbps
so because you need it, nobody else does either.
Nice try. That's not what I said.
and then there are content creators, who need *upstream* bandwidth to
upload their videos.
That's far from typical.
but you just said the upload speed was important.
Yes but not necessarily for content creation.
anyway, it's far more common than you think. a *lot* of people generate content.
Yet the majority of domestic connections are content with asymmetric bandwidth.
I was happy with my Cox 30 Mbps cable. It ran everything I needed just
fine.
On 7/6/2023 9:10 PM, AJL wrote:
I was happy with my Cox 30 Mbps cable. It ran everything I needed
just fine.
During the height of the pandemic, when you could have multiple
family members using the network for school and work, with Zoom,
Microsoft Teams, or Google Meet, there was definitely an upside to
the higher speed, not because of the download speed but because of
the higher upload speed that you got with the higher levels of
service.
For download-only, 30Mb/s was certainly fast enough for a few
streams of HD video.
In article <u8fb06$28n7s$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
Disagree. At the height of the pandemic there were four off at home, three >>>> WFH - two ethernet, one wifi - and evenings there was plenty streaming >>>> going on. Including some 4K.
Not a single issue with bandwidth at 40/10. I really struggle to see the >>>> point of >300Mbps
so because you need it, nobody else does either.
Nice try. That's not what I said.
you keep citing your household as a metric.
isps offer what people want to buy. there's obviously a demand for
faster speeds,
plus it's no longer cost effective to offer slower
speeds anymore.
and then there are content creators, who need *upstream* bandwidth to >>>>> upload their videos.
That's far from typical.
but you just said the upload speed was important.
Yes but not necessarily for content creation.
true. upload speed is important for many things, however, content
creation is the most obvious one.
anyway, it's far more common than you think. a *lot* of people generate
content.
Yet the majority of domestic connections are content with asymmetric
bandwidth.
yep. most people download a *lot* more than they upload.
however, some people want faster upload speeds, as you confirmed.
On 7/9/2023 4:14 PM, sms wrote:
On 7/6/2023 9:10 PM, AJL wrote:
I was happy with my Cox 30 Mbps cable. It ran everything I needed
just fine.
During the height of the pandemic, when you could have multiple
family members using the network for school and work, with Zoom,
Microsoft Teams, or Google Meet, there was definitely an upside to
the higher speed, not because of the download speed but because of
the higher upload speed that you got with the higher levels of
service.
I didn't say 30Mbps was good for everybody. Just for me. But the ISPs
here have a horsepower race going and I think lots of folks get sucked
in and pay for more than they need.
For download-only, 30Mb/s was certainly fast enough for a few
streams of HD video.
Even less for me since I have a separate cable box with a couple hundred channels that don't come out of my ISP streaming budget...
more and more people are no longer willing to pay for cable TV
service and get only broadband internet.
Paying for one or two streaming services is a lot cheaper
If you have Amazon Prime anyway, then they have a large selection of
included movies.
Personally, I also have a place that I can walk to in five minutes
with a huge selection of DVDs and Blu-Ray discs that they lend out
for free (the public library).
The fees just for broadcast TV are incredibly high considering that
a great many people paying that fee just to get broadcast channels
could put up an antenna for a one-time cost that would be recovered
in a matter of months, plus get higher-quality (if that mattered to
them).
On 7/10/2023 4:21 AM, sms wrote:
more and more people are no longer willing to pay for cable TV
service and get only broadband internet.
True.
Paying for one or two streaming services is a lot cheaper
Depends on what you want. Some folks (from what I read) actually pay
more for several streaming services than cable.
If you have Amazon Prime anyway, then they have a large selection of
included movies.
I have Prime. AND (gasp) Netflix...
Personally, I also have a place that I can walk to in five minutes
with a huge selection of DVDs and Blu-Ray discs that they lend out
for free (the public library).
I'm fortunate that I don't have to skimp in my later life. YMMV.
I can get around 60 channels on a pair of rabbit ears. Just not the
one's the wife likes to watch (like Naked and Afraid) but don't tell her
I told you or I'll be in deep doo doo... 8-O
On 7/10/2023 6:48 AM, AJL wrote:
On 7/10/2023 4:21 AM, sms wrote:
more and more people are no longer willing to pay for cable TV
service and get only broadband internet.
True.
Paying for one or two streaming services is a lot cheaper
Depends on what you want. Some folks (from what I read) actually pay
more for several streaming services than cable.
If you have Amazon Prime anyway, then they have a large selection of
included movies.
I have Prime. AND (gasp) Netflix...
Personally, I also have a place that I can walk to in five minutes
with a huge selection of DVDs and Blu-Ray discs that they lend out
for free (the public library).
I'm fortunate that I don't have to skimp in my later life. YMMV.
LOL, I don't see it as skimping. Having a huge collection of movies to
watch, far more than available streaming
, in exchange for a yearly
parcel tax assessment to pay for the library, is worthwhile.
I also
helped push through an $8 million library expansion when I was on my
city's city council.
I can get around 60 channels on a pair of rabbit ears. Just not the
one's the wife likes to watch (like Naked and Afraid) but don't tell her
I told you or I'll be in deep doo doo... 8-O
I get about 200 channels, with about 1/4 in English.
but you just said the upload speed was important.
Yes but not necessarily for content creation.
true. upload speed is important for many things, however, content
creation is the most obvious one.
Hardly. Teams calls, cloud syncing, file sharing which is being by 10s of millions of people WFH.
Waste of taxes. Libraries are so old fashioned with most everything
available online these days...
On 7/9/2023 1:28 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
<snip>
Interesting times :-)
I find the ad wars are amusing because it's so easy to pick the ads
apart. Also there also lawsuits over the ads, or complaints to the
government or Better Business Bureau about misleading advertising.
AT&T was furious that Verizon had an app with a map that compared
Verizon 3G coverage to AT&T 3G coverage because Verizon was far ahead.
AT&T complained that the map in the ad didn't show that AT&T had 2G
coverage in the areas where they lacked 3G coverage. Of course Verizon
never claimed that AT&T didn't have 2G coverage in those areas <https://www.engadget.com/2009-11-03-atandt-sues-verizon-over-theres-a-map-for-that-ads.html>.
Then there was the AT&T nee Cingular ad campaign claiming "fewest
dropped calls" that they dropped after the company that performed the
study for them publicly stated that the claim was not accurate. <https://www.wired.com/2007/08/att-ditches-few/>.
In article <u8g9in$2fe0q$1@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com>
wrote:
but you just said the upload speed was important.
Yes but not necessarily for content creation.
true. upload speed is important for many things, however, content
creation is the most obvious one.
Hardly. Teams calls, cloud syncing, file sharing which is being by 10s of
millions of people WFH.
teams calls needs low latency more than it does upstream bandwidth.
cloud syncing and file sharing runs in the background. it's not a big
deal if it takes a little longer since nobody knows when it starts and
stops.
To have different upload and download speed on fibre is ridiculous:
there is no technical reason whatsoever that justifies it.
In fact, the
provider has to invest in hardware and software (and admin work) to
impose the limitation.
Waste of taxes. Libraries are so old fashioned with most everything
available online these days...
On 7/10/2023 3:55 PM, AJL wrote:
Waste of taxes. Libraries are so old fashioned with most everything
available online these days...
You must not be aware of school age children existing since in my town,
when the high school lets out, the kids stream to the library en masse.
They have their own section, complete with non-messy snacks. Yes. Snacks. >There is a sign saying no adults are allowed after 2pm on school days.
They even have their own (female, very friendly, unarmed) police officer.
I asked her once, why she is "guarding the teens in the library", and she >said it's a plan to make the kids feel safe - even as it's already one of
the richest safest most well-educated gentrified towns in the nation.
They turned the old library into a used bookstore run by volunteers.
The other issue with "fewest dropped calls" is that it assumes that it
was possible to place a call in the first place. You can drop a lower percentage of calls when you can't place or receive a call to begin with.
On 7/10/2023 3:55 PM, AJL wrote:
Waste of taxes. Libraries are so old fashioned with most everything
available online these days...
You must not be aware of school age children existing since in my town,
when the high school lets out, the kids stream to the library en masse.
They have their own section, complete with non-messy snacks. Yes. Snacks. There is a sign saying no adults are allowed after 2pm on school days.
To have different upload and download speed on fibre is ridiculous:
there is no technical reason whatsoever that justifies it. In fact, the provider has to invest in hardware and software (and admin work) to
impose the limitation.
They do it for commercial reasons, meaning, lack of competition, and
charging more for a symmetric connection. It is somewhat dishonest.
There are reasons why users may want better upload speeds. Sharing
content is the obvious one, but not necessarily for publication. Just uploading your photos for someone else to see, for instance, or
uploading your backup to some cloud service. And eventually they will
charge for this, so it has a business advantage.
I can imagine that AT&T attaches a lot of importance to those stats.
They have been seeing it for decades :-)
On 7/10/2023 8:55 AM, AJL wrote:
Waste of taxes. Libraries are so old fashioned with most everything
available online these days...
OMG, never say that in my City. The library is extremely popular, not so
much for books,
but for the other services that they provide that are
not available online.
There's a line outside when it opens in the morning. The meeting spaces,
the teen rooms, and the children's section are all popular.
The foreign
language books, newspapers and magazines are also popular. There are >thousands of videos in multiple languages.
It's open seven days a week,
for long hours.
Why waste tax money on a cop if the library's safe?
They turned the old library into a used bookstore run by volunteers.
Good idea if no taxpayer funds used...
That works for you, but more and more people are no longer willing to
pay for cable TV service and get only broadband internet. Paying for one
or two streaming services is a lot cheaper, especially with all the
hidden fees that cable companies have been adding. If you have Amazon
Prime anyway, then they have a large selection of included movies. Personally, I also have a place that I can walk to in five minutes with
a huge selection of DVDs and Blu-Ray discs that they lend out for free
(the public library).
On 7/10/23 7:57 AM, sms wrote:
On 7/10/2023 6:48 AM, AJL wrote:
On 7/10/2023 4:21 AM, sms wrote:
more and more people are no longer willing to pay for cable TV
service and get only broadband internet.
True.
Paying for one or two streaming services is a lot cheaper
Depends on what you want. Some folks (from what I read) actually pay
more for several streaming services than cable.
If you have Amazon Prime anyway, then they have a large selection of
included movies.
I have Prime. AND (gasp) Netflix...
Personally, I also have a place that I can walk to in five minutes
with a huge selection of DVDs and Blu-Ray discs that they lend out
for free (the public library).
I'm fortunate that I don't have to skimp in my later life. YMMV.
LOL, I don't see it as skimping. Having a huge collection of movies to >>watch, far more than available streaming
Doubt that. I have many 1000s available on Netflix alone. And I don't
pollute driving to the library...
, in exchange for a yearly
parcel tax assessment to pay for the library, is worthwhile.
I also
helped push through an $8 million library expansion when I was on my
city's city council.
Waste of taxes. Libraries are so old fashioned with most everything
available online these days...
On 7/10/2023 6:48 AM, AJL wrote:
On 7/10/2023 4:21 AM, sms wrote:
Personally, I also have a place that I can walk to in five minutes
with a huge selection of DVDs and Blu-Ray discs that they lend out
for free (the public library).
I'm fortunate that I don't have to skimp in my later life. YMMV.
LOL, I don't see it as skimping.
Having a huge collection of movies to
watch, far more than available streaming, in exchange for a yearly
parcel tax assessment to pay for the library, is worthwhile. I also
helped push through an $8 million library expansion when I was on my
city's city council.
I can get around 60 channels on a pair of rabbit ears. Just not the
one's the wife likes to watch (like Naked and Afraid) but don't tell her
I told you or I'll be in deep doo doo... 8-O
I get about 200 channels, with about 1/4 in English.
On 7/10/2023 10:36 AM, AJL wrote:
Why waste tax money on a cop if the library's safe?
It discourages problem individuals from entering and being disruptive.
On 7/10/2023 8:55 AM, AJL wrote:
Waste of taxes. Libraries are so old fashioned with most everything
available online these days...
OMG, never say that in my City. The library is extremely popular, not so
much for books, but for the other services that they provide that are
not available online.
There's a line outside when it opens in the morning. The meeting spaces,
the teen rooms, and the children's section are all popular. The foreign language books, newspapers and magazines are also popular. There are thousands of videos in multiple languages. It's open seven days a week,
for long hours.
On 7/10/23 9:45 AM, sms wrote:
On 7/10/2023 8:55 AM, AJL wrote:
Waste of taxes. Libraries are so old fashioned with most everything
available online these days...
OMG, never say that in my City. The library is extremely popular, not so >>much for books,
When I say library I mean the book kind.
but for the other services that they provide that are
not available online.
There's a line outside when it opens in the morning. The meeting spaces, >>the teen rooms, and the children's section are all popular.
My city has such a place but sans books.
The foreign
language books, newspapers and magazines are also popular. There are >>thousands of videos in multiple languages.
Most all are likely available online. Just not free at taxpayer expense
It's open seven days a week,
for long hours.
Yep. I've heard of CAs legendary taxes... ;)
On 7/10/2023 10:36 AM, AJL wrote:
<snip>
They turned the old library into a used bookstore run by volunteers.
Good idea if no taxpayer funds used...
Taxpayer funds are used for lots of things that not every taxpayer uses.
We no longer use the playgrounds
we don't use the senior center,
we
don't use the city-owned golf course.
We don't use the public schools
anymore.
And some of the people that use those things don't use the library.
They're the custodians of civilization. Lots of things we should give
up before the libraries.
Yep. I've heard of CAs legendary taxes... ;)
On 7/10/23 10:21 AM, AJL wrote:
On 7/10/23 9:45 AM, sms wrote:
On 7/10/2023 8:55 AM, AJL wrote:
Waste of taxes. Libraries are so old fashioned with most everything
available online these days...
OMG, never say that in my City. The library is extremely popular, not so >>>much for books,
When I say library I mean the book kind.
but for the other services that they provide that are
not available online.
There's a line outside when it opens in the morning. The meeting spaces, >>>the teen rooms, and the children's section are all popular.
My city has such a place but sans books.
The foreign
language books, newspapers and magazines are also popular. There are >>>thousands of videos in multiple languages.
Most all are likely available online. Just not free at taxpayer expense
It's open seven days a week,
for long hours.
Yep. I've heard of CAs legendary taxes... ;)
One of the few things worth spending tax money on. Most are garbage
created by venal shitheads victimizing ignorant voters.
On 7/10/23 8:55 AM, AJL wrote:
Waste of taxes. Libraries are so old fashioned with most everything
available online these days...
Sorry, that's absolutely wrong. There may be a lot of stuff available
on line, but I don't trust the custodians to NOT pull the plug.
We need
both.
Whatever happened to google's highly-virtuous plan to digitize the
world's books?
I think the publishers banded together and screamed
COPYRIGHT VIOLATION, but I haven't heard anything about it for years.
On 7/10/2023 10:00 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
<snip>
I can imagine that AT&T attaches a lot of importance to those stats.
They have been seeing it for decades :-)
The other issue with "fewest dropped calls" is that it assumes that it
was possible to place a call in the first place. You can drop a lower percentage of calls when you can't place or receive a call to begin with.
Yep. I've heard of CAs legendary taxes... ;)
The California total tax burden is 8.89%. Texas is 8.01%. That extra
0.88% is well worth it. The California taxes are also much less
regressive. Texas has no State income tax but its property and other
taxes are higher.
..... Apparently more and more YOUNG people are
using subtitles for their own language because modern sound design is
much worse than it used to be. Look at old movies -- you could always understand the dialog. Not any more.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 01:39:44 |
| Calls: | 6,666 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 12,212 |
| Messages: | 5,335,487 |
